Several recent articles and letters in your paper have been about media bias. I, too, am concerned that too many questions are deliberately left unanswered by the media, like “Why do we feel obliged to help rebels maintain control over Syrian oil fields stolen from the Syrians by rebels (once called ISIS) and drop bombs killing 100 Syrian troops who killed no one?" The media, if it were doing its job, would question the wisdom of our continued participation in a war that has already caused too much suffering.
Another question American media personnel leave unanswered came up in a recent news release: “Israel Bombs Syria.” Again, “Why does the media feel obliged to present the Israeli aggression as being Iran’s fault?" Odd, when Iran dropped no bombs on Israel. The media, if it were doing its job, would reveal that Israelis have no right to support rebels in the Syrian Civil War by pretending that they are merely defending the right to exist as a model democracy. If Israel were a model democracy, it would not promote civil unrest in other countries, rather it would grant all Palestinians full civil rights, thereby resolving the unrest in its own country.
Another unanswered question: "Why does the media spend so much time investigating flawed individuals while supporting flawed policies that spend too much money on war machines and spend too little money on the peaceful resolution of crises?"
Dean Grenz
Boulder
Post a comment as
Report
Watch this discussion.
(3) comments
Having read Mr. Grenz's letters over the years, I've found them grounded in antisemitism. They are based on incorrect assumptions about the Middle East and display a lack of intellect. Having lost ancestors to the Holocaust, I find them offensive, though I am relieved that virtually no one takes his remarks seriously.
IMHO, we Americans have a responsibility to intervene when it is abundantly clear that a country is run by a despot who is committing genocide. Should we ignore the gassing of children? I can understand different viewpoints on this question, and this not the place for an debate on American imperialism. Every recent president agreed that Mr. Assad should be removed for reasons unrelated to "oil." The same analogy would have precluded the US from going to war with Germany, and I suspect that Mr. Grenz would share that view for no other reason than the fact that Hitler was exterminating Jews (let alone myriad other groups. (I'll spare my fellow posters a factual history of the tragic Israel-Palestinian conflict, except to say that it will not be resolved by Jared Kushner.) Thanks for your time.
I've been wondering the same thing about the US role in Syria. ISIS is wiped out there. Yet the US military says that we are staying in Syria, a country that has never harmed the US. Syria says openly that US troops are not welcome there. Now, just a couple of days ago, US airstrikes killed many Syrian troops (and Russians) in what we called a "defensive" strike against those troops who were trying to take control of an oil and gas field. That is a SYRIAN oil field. It's their country. We are not at war with the Syrian government. If Trump wants to go to war with Syria, come out and say it. Let Congress debate it. While he was campaigning, Mr. Trump talked about what a waste of blood and money these middle east wars have been. So, what gives?
Oil and money.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.