Re: A Russian view of the war (April 6)

[Jim Farmelant <farmelantj@xxxxxxxx>]

On Sun, 6 Apr 2003 12:20:50 -0400 "Ed C." <bronterre@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
writes:


>
> I'm sure this question has been asked before, but is there
> any way we can get at least an inkling of another source to
> verify this material?

Given that this is war, I think that all news sources,
and all reports and analyses of the war, must
be treated as suspect.  This particular source is
supposed to represent the views of Russian
military intelligence, which obviously has no great
interest in glorifying the US military.

Stan, early on raised concern on their reporting
much greater numbers of US and UK casualties
than are being reported by the Pentagon and
the mainstream media.  Stan's argument being
that it is too difficult to coverup battlefield deaths
for very long, and that such attempts at covering
up casualties would cause soldiers to lose
confidence in their superiors and do great damage
to morale.

On the other hand many of the assessments
of the strategies and tactics being used by
the two sides in this war, seem quite shrewd.
And much of their reporting on what is happening
on the ground in Iraq, seems to carry more
credibility than much of what we are seeing
in the mainstream media.

>In some ways it simply 'rings true' because
> it isn't the rosy scenarios of the U$ War Dept. & its PR firm
> known as "the media," while it also isn't the hyperbole of
> the Ba'athist Information minister about how Iraqi forces
> have cleared out the enemy from the airport and have recaptured
> it, etc etc.  The reports on Al-Jazeera are not specific about
> the above assault by Iraqi forces but simply suggest that
> there is more resistance than is reported by 'coalition' forces.
>
> In solidarity,
> Ed C.
>
>
>
>


________________________________________________________________
Sign Up for Juno Platinum Internet Access Today
Only $9.95 per month!
Visit www.juno.com