Why are americans in the dark about this?
 

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0906-07.htm

I heard about this and had to search about 20 different ways to find it anywhere..its news in other parts of the world but they are keeping it from all american media apparently

I've noticed that too. But then I figured our media isn't playing it out because this sort of thing happens daily, but usually not this big. If that is actually the case, then I'm sure the other countries are using it to start more of their "anti-American propaganda" or whatever.

Bah, can't talk tonight...

Its obvious they are taking out western air bases so that Iraq cant send missiles into Israel when US strikes

Is that some sort of warm-up bombing? Sounds like war to me.

If you really want to keep up on world events, you need to visit non-US news sources.

Sounds great to me...great to hear we are doing something to get Saddams attention. Pretty tough to gas airplanes.

Would be nice if we could just shoot him between the eyes and get this nonsense over.

That story is two weeks old.

What makes you think we didn't see it?

first i heard of it was today...just shows you how much control the gov has over the media
"The first casualty of war is truth"

old news for sure.....

and usually i agree that to get the best news u need a non american source but in this case that air attack was on cnn weeks ago

I must be missing something. What's the "big news"?

Well you see, it's because it would be unpatriotic to report world news to us americans. we're behind a red white and blue curtain these days....:helpme

Hmmm odd wot? That article didn't mention who it was that counted 100 fighters or any other means of proving the numbers. I highly doubt that some corporal ran out and told some media people. lol )

I *really* would like to see the person that could SEE fighters at that altitude let alone count them racing at anywhere from 600-2000 mph) Let alone they can and do shoot alot of that ordance from up to 150+ miles from the targets) Guess since you'd have to be IN Iraq to SEE them...

Everyone yammers about this news or that news being better etc. It ALL comes down to and this is something from an old time reporter...

You write the story and the editor rewrites it to show that slant of the owners of the (media) owner. He said it in a more eloquent way but you get the idea. It doesn't matter what country they are in or from.

If the govt of one nation or another doesn't want something out there, then generally it doesn't get there.

That story was reported on every major news network I watch. I don't know where you come up with the idea that it went unreported??

Sorry Misty, but it WAS reported here as others have pointed out. I personally read about it multiple times. If you don't like it here behind the "red white and blue curtain", you might want to move up north (just a joke in case you're overly sensitive).

Cassie

this has been all over the news in the US and unless you were living under a rock, you would have to know about it.

even the defense secretary was getting grilled about it in numerous interviews and press briefings

anyone that thinks this is some kind of secret has been under a rock.

Its quite simple:

fact 1: the US and Britain enforce two "No-Fly Zones" over north and Southern Iraq

fact 2: this is sanctioned and mandated by the UN

fact 3: for more than a decade, Hussein has been shooting at them in CLEAR violoation of the very UN resolutions he said he would fully comply to unconditionally.

fact 4: the US and Britiain made a very major policy change both in the flight patterns over these zones and their responses to threats.

fact 5: Saddam Hussein sent a letter to be read at the UN saying that he was ready to "unconditionally" agree to the UN resolutions that were part of both his surrender to the UN and cease fire ending the gulf war

at the same time, he completely stepped up attacking patrol flights (literally in the same day and at the same time his speech was being read)

the question is not "why did they take our so many surface to air missile sites" or fly 100 missions in one day.

the question is "why werent they all taken out within ten minutes after they shot at the first coalition plane" a decade ago.

though i respect the tremendous Anti-War sentiment echoed throughout the world, i would like to point out that it is EXACTLY that behavior and attitude that is exploited by people like Saddam Hussein as he does things like

invade his neighbors
fire missiles at 4 neighbors
use biological weapons against his own people (killing a village of 5000)
spit in the face of the world with impunity as he continues to violate the terms of his surrender

ignorance does not cause war. a lack of blind compassion does not cause war.

HOWEVER, it precisely both those things that cause the conditions for people like Saddam Hussein to exist.

i say "give bombs a chance"
:thumbsup

I don't believe it.

100 aircraft, that is a lot of planes in a modern context. 2-3 stealth bombers did the same job in the Kuwait conflict. Send in those beauties invisible and take out there eyes and ears, then send in 3-5 bombers at a time. I think that was the stratgey.

Plus "Iraq had made 130 attempts to shoot down coalition aircraft this year". They would not have a military installation left if they had done that. Let's not forget Bush is the one looking for an excuse, there's are 130 of them to start something or at least bomb every place that attempted to shoot down one of our planes.

Nothing about it on the Telegraph website or BBC anyone got anything more factual than commondreams.org ??

this is not accurate. who says that surface to air missile systems are not MOBILE, cannot be purchased, cannot be replenished? they can only destroy fixed buildings with any knowledge that building is destroyed. otherwise a surface to air system is mounted on a vehicle.

a surface to air weapons system is not a "military installation"