War and Mass Media

Africa
Central Africa

“I feel so bad about the things that I did. It disturbs me so much that I inflicted death on other people. When I go home I must do some traditional rites because I have killed. I must perform these rites and cleanse myself. I still dream about the boy from my village that I killed. I see him in my dreams, and he is talking to me, saying I killed him for nothing, and I am crying.” A 16-year-old girl after demobilization from an armed group (Source: U.S. State Dept. TIP Report 2005)

Democratic Republic of the Congo“When they came to my village, they asked my older brother whether he was ready to join the militia. He was just 17 and he said no; they shot him in the head. Then they asked me if I was ready to sign, so what could I do - I didn’t want to die.” A former child soldier taken when he was 13. (BBC report.)
“They gave me a uniform and told me that now I was in the army. They even gave me a new name: ‘Pisco’ They said that they would come back and kill my parents if I didn’t do as they said.” Report of interview with a 17 year old former child soldier in 2006

“Being new, I couldn’t perform the very difficult exercises properly and so I was beaten every morning. Two of my friends in the camp died because of the beatings. The soldiers buried them in the latrines. I am still thinking of them”. Former child soldier interviewed in 2002.

Sudan“I joined the SPLA when I was 13. I am from Bahr Al Ghazal . They demobilized me in 2001 and took me to Rumbek, but I was given no demobilization documents. Now, I am stuck here because my family was killed in a government attack and because the SPLA would re-recruit me. At times I wonder why I am not going back to SPLA, half of my friends have and they seem to be better off than me.” Boy interviewed by Coalition staff, southern Sudan, February 2004.

Uganda“Early on when my brothers and I were captured, the LRA [Lord’s Resistance Army] explained to us that all five brothers couldn´t serve in the LRA because we would not perform well. So they tied up my two younger brothers and invited us to watch. Then they beat them with sticks until two of them died. They told us it would give us strength to fight. My youngest brother was nine years old.” Former child soldier, aged 13.

Zimbabwe“There was no one in charge of the dormitories and on a nightly basis we were raped. The men and youths would come into our dormitory in the dark, and they would just rape us - you would just have a man on top of you, and you could not even see who it was. If we cried afterwards, we were beaten with hosepipes. We were so scared that we did not report the rapes The youngest girl in our group was aged 11 and she was raped repeatedly in the base.” 19-year-old girl describing her experience in the National Youth Service Training Program

http://www.child-soldiers.org/childsoldiers/voices-of-young-soldiers

Filed under: JMC 494 | No Comments »

So, I had no idea that anyone, anywhere can edit anything on wikipedia. Perhaps this is the reason why a majority of my professors do not consider wikipedia as a credible source. Oddly enough I have found tons of useful information on wikipedia because it is the fastest, most efficient resource to pull up quick facts and receive information that will be helpful. Anything that I have typed in a google search I am almost guaranteed that wikipedia will have the information on that subject matter.

The real question is whether or not it is a good idea to allow anyone this privilege of editing? What about controversial issues where there are multiple perspectives and multiple correct answers. But then again it would be quite difficult to censor the abilities of who can edit and who can not. I tried to do the sandbox edit tutorial and it was an interesting experience. By and large, I would probably not tinker with the information on the web unless I am an expert in the field and I know the information is inaccurate.

Filed under: JMC 494 | No Comments »

Filed under: JMC 494 | No Comments »

Bush Vetoes Bill to Ban Waterboarding

“The best source of information about terrorist attacks is the terrorists themselves.”

The ongoing debate of whether or not the use of torture is an imperative method of fighting the war on terrorism continues. This struggle to prohibit ‘inhumane’ methods of torture and advocating harsh methods still remains at the head of controversy.

President Bush authorized a veto on a bill that would have outlawed waterboarding and other harsh methods of torture. bush emphasized that one of the most valuable tools in the war on terror is the use of tough interrogation methods.

Is this no longer a fight between party lines of the Democrats and Republicans? Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive GOP presidential candidate and a former prisoner of war in Vietnam, voted against the bill. McCain has led past efforts to ban cruel treatment of prisoners. But he said at the time of the vote that, although he believes waterboarding was illegal under U.S. law, he did not want to hinder U.S. intelligence officers with restrictions designed for the military (Waterboarding, 12).

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-veto9mar09,0,4477504.story

Filed under: War in Iraq | No Comments »

Pentagon Cites Tapes Showing Interrogations

Once again the government, military officials and CIA are under fire for their interrogation efforts towards prisoners of war and terrorist suspects. Below is an article highlighting the investigation the CIA is undergoing for destroying interrogation tapes.

The Defense Department is conducting an extensive review of interrogation videotapes at military facilities from Iraq to Guantanamo Bay. Over 50 tapes have been identified, including one that showed what a military spokesperson described as “forcible gagging” a terrorist suspect.

The review began in January after the CIA admitted to destroying videotapes of harsh interrogations conducted by CIA officers that is now the subject of criminal and Congressional investigations.

Only a small fraction of tens of thousands of interrogations worldwide have been recorded since 2001.

Is torture ever an acceptable? If so, where does one draw the line? What if torture is the only method in order to retrieve information that benefits our national security? Is torturing a small group of people in order to save the lives of thousands well worth the risk? What if the the person being tortured is innocent?

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/13/washington/13intel.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

Filed under: War in Iraq | No Comments »

This mash-up displays all the U.S. cities that have voted resolutions to bring the troops home and out of Iraq. I must say it is certainly not as exciting as the Global Terrorism and Suspicious Events Mash-Up however it is interesting to see the polarity between existing political mashups. My previous blog post focused on the threat of terrorism and recorded acts of terrorism in any given place at any given time. It instilled an eerie sense of suspicion and fear to anyone who doesn’t feel that the world is threatened by terrorist activities. Conversely, this Bring Soldiers Home mash-up is a clear anti-war message that highlights all of the United States cities that have voted to bring the US troops back home and favoring the notion of a complete withdrawal from Iraq.

According, to public opinion polls from the USAToday nearly 6 out of 10 Americans say the United States should withdrawal some or all of it’s troops from Iraq. If this is the public opinion then why does this mashup not represent 60% of the nations cities voting for complete withdrawal in Iraq? If people truly want change then the current state of this mashup should consist of much more blue flags then what exists on the map right now.

Filed under: JMC 494 | No Comments »

Recently, I have discovered this astonishing new online technology of a Mash-Up. For a class assignment, we were instructed to investigate two websites that contain thousands of online mash-ups. These two websites are called Programmable Web and Mashable. Incredible websites that connect you with thousands of online news mash-ups from celebrity gossip to the war on terrorism. I would recommend surfing these websites when you have the chance. I found three news mash-ups that really intrigued me and have a direct correlation towards the War in Iraq. Below are a few examples of mash-ups that I found incredibly interesting.

A Global Display of Terrorism and Other Suspicious Events

Global Display of Terrorism is an incredible tool that tracks current terrorist threats and incidents around the world. This mashup displays a map of the entire world and flags down certain states, countries and cities that have current terrorist threats or suspicious activities that relate to terrorism. The mashup is updated every 310 seconds. From the Taliban blowing up a bridge in Afghanistan, to gunmen killing 20 villagers in Darfur, to white powder being found in a package at the United Kingdom, to a bullet found in a seat of a California aircraft causing massive delays in the San Jose airport. This mashup is incredible. It has a constant scroll of terrorist updates from false alarms to causality counts. There is even a search tool where you are able to look up past or current events by providing information like type of event (arson, assassination, food/product tampering, chemical attack), date/time, city and country. The mashup will perform the search and provide all the information and certain weblinks that will provide the user with more information on the event. There is a specific map for the United States Amber Alerts and even an “Illegal Alien Activity Tracking System.” And coming soon there will be a mashup tracking USA School Incidents and World Wide Bird Flu/Outbreak map.

Filed under: JMC 494 | 1 Comment »

    Online news has certainly made a large impact on the journalism and media I follow. I rarely ever read the Arizona Republic anymore because I know I can access every article on azcentral.com. I enjoy online media because it makes things more accessible and I am able to browse through multiple pages of information by simply clicking on links. In relation to my blog, I receive most of the news coverage on the war and politics from CNN.com. However, I should realize that I am receiving a biased news story since CNN is known for leaning towards the left. Despite, the biased news I always read CNN first. I find that CNN.com is the most convenient, user friendly and organized website to retrieve news on what is happening today. In comparison to FOX, NYT and USA Today; CNN.com is the most compatible towards my media expectations.

The World Wide Web has made an outstanding impact on journalism and the people’s way of retrieving news. However, with the open accessibility and the ability for anyone at any given moment to publish something online; ethical journalism becomes questionable. I use search engines such as Google.com or Yahoo.com everyday as a tool for research. However, I always get trapped into clicking on what I think is a scholarly, valid resource and it ends up being a blog from a 5^th grade teachers classroom in Missouri. That is the trouble with the Internet. There is so much information but you are never certain of the credibility of the authors and where it comes from. Online media has revolutionized the field of journalism and if we can instill the same ethical principles of journalism that we do in print in online media than I think print media will become obsolete in the near future.

Filed under: JMC 494 | 1 Comment »

Another film that has captured my attention on the Vietnam War was Platoon. This movie unlike We Were Soldiers is a very dark depiction of war and the realities of the soldiers fighting in battle. I have decided to compare both movies and how different Hollywood has depicted the Vietnam War in each film. It is an interesting contrast to see such a brutal comparison from Platoon to We Were Soldiers. Platoon contains some incredibly graphic images and storylines whereas We Were Soldiers is more Hollywoodesque. Perhaps the timing. Platoon came out shortly after the war had ended and We Were Soldiers is a relatively new motion picture. Below is a brief synopsis of Platoon and my personal interpretation and comparison of two movies both dealing with the same war but Hollywood had different messages they wanted to portray to the public.

Platoon (1986), is a motion picture that follows an infantry platoon during Vietnam in 1968-1969 and is seen through the eyes of a naïve soldier (Charlie Sheen) Private Chris Taylor, as he goes on patrols, digs foxholes and attempts to survive the war. This film focuses on the characterization of each soldier and for once humanizes the soldiers as flawed beings who carry bitter attitudes towards the war and their fellow soldiers. Platoon, provides an anti-war attitude by preying on each soldiers downfalls. The soldiers smoke dope, rape a peasant girl, burn villages and kill innocent civilians and even each other. This film is the dark, gothic and realistic portrayal of the actual horrors of the lives of the soldiers. The recurring theme in this film was how rage overwhelms humanity. The soldiers were insensitive about death, destruction and brutality and their ugly attitude consumed any sort of patriotism. This was a film that showed the soldiers verses themselves rather than against the enemy.

The main difference between We Were Soldiers and Platoon is the dramatic change of attitude that occurred just three years into the war. In We Were Soldiers, brotherhood and a sense of family was felt amongst the soldiers whereas the soldiers in Platoon are filled with racial tension, drug use and a sense of personal rage against one another. Despite their fear, the soldiers in We Were Soldiers were rather optimistic and patriotic and they carried a sense of pride and loyalty for their country. On the other hand, the soldiers in Platoon were in the war not because they volunteered but were forced by the institution of the draft.

The battle scenes in Platoon were much less expansive than those of We Were Soldiers because it focused more on that character than anything. However, the Vietcong in Platoon is portrayed as more of an evil, suspenseful enemy that appears in the jungle out of nowhere. Yet in We Were Soldiers, the Vietcong were humanized and portrayed as yet another victim of warfare just fighting for their country and suffering the repercussions of war just like America did. The reviews for both movies were similar but to pick a favorite out of the two one must either believe that war makes men into heroes or monsters.

Filed under: Vietnam War | No Comments »

My interest in the Vietnam War is one of the main reasons I created this blog. This War changed American history and has made one of the largest impacts on American foreign policy today. Vietnam War provoked massive political protest and spurred a movement of radical opposition amongst American society. Not only did it change the social behaviors of the public but the Vietnam War also revealed American weakness, failure and vulnerability. The casualties, protest, devastation, low morale amongst soldiers humanized war and destroyed the romanticized perception of wartime glory. Reading about the war is one thing but watching Hollywood reenact actual battle scenes from Vietnam brings a chilling reality to what the war was like.

We Were Soldiers (2002), based on the book by Lieutenant Colonel Hal Moore (Mel Gibson) and former UPI correspondent Joe Galloway (Barry Pepper), is a motion picture based on the first major combat against the North Vietnamese in 1965. Moore starts the movie developing the first air cavalry who used helicopters to transport soldiers quickly to the battlefields. The first part of the film introduced the development of this new kind of warfare and details the tight bonds the unit develops during training. The story is being told through the eyes of UPI correspondent Joe Galloway, who joined Moore’s battalion the first night of the battle in an attempt to write a story about the war. We Were Soldiers (photos) focuses on the home lives of the soldiers, touching on the heartbreaks of torn families who have lost their loved ones during the battle.

The soldiers in 1965 had a sense of comradeship and peer loyalty to one another. Colonel Hal Moore was insistent that the soldiers become a family, looking out for each other, regardless of race, religion and socio-economic class. Aside from Colonel Hal Moore, the film doesn’t focus on individual character development; it concentrates more on the battle itself and the emotional devastation of the families back home receiving the news of the death of their husbands through telegrams. Vietnam veterans consider We Were Soldiers to be the most accurate portrayal of “how war really was.” The ultimate goal of the film was to show the sacrifice all the soldiers and families face when entering war. It also showed the horrors of Vietnam and how every attack was a sudden ambush which made it difficult to become acclimated to especially on enemy grounds.

Filed under: Vietnam War | No Comments »