June 6, 1944

Back when you could call a ‘crusade’ a ‘crusade’.

I wonder what this headline would say today?

UPDATE: Whoa! Somehow scored an Instalanche off of this post. Thanks to Mr. Reynolds for the link, and welcome to all of you Instapundit readers.

Several commenters (and readers via email) have criticized the comparison of D-Day to the invasion of Iraq. I wasn’t comparing the two, though, except to wonder how the media’s coverage of the major military operation of this generation would compare to the media’s coverage of the major military operation of that generation.

(That doesn’t mean that I don’t find some of the snarkier fake headlines quite humorous, though…)

What I’m referring to has been called the “No Right Answer” game. The rules of the game are simple: Anything the military does or says is wrong.

Fun for the whole family.

The game gets kicked up a notch when you can criticize the President of the United States at the same time. Double points if it’s a Republican. Triple word score if he’s from Texas.

Comparing headlines from June 6th, 1944 to those in 1991 or 2003 can be an interesting exercise, but I’d suggest that the media (big and small) today is as different as it was in 1991 as the 1991 media was from the 1944 media. And it’s the coverage during and after the campaign, not just the headlines on day one, that matter.

I don’t expect that we’d have seen stories about Mein Kampf mishandling, for instance. (Never mind that we didn’t issue Mein Kampf to Nazi prisoners.) Media criticism, especially when deserved and constructive, is a critical component of freedom. But lately we’re seeing much that isn’t at all constructive and often not deserved at all, let alone worthy of around-the-clock updates. Too much of what we see lately is simply unpatriotic in my book, and that we wouldn’t have seen in 1944. Not in the headlines, at any rate.

Speaking of 1944, I’ve also wondered why one man’s Battle of the Bulge is another man’s Tet Offensive. I believe that Legacy Media covers the military in two different manners: 1) The search for the next Pentagon Papers, and 2) The search for the next Tet Offensive.

That’s too bad. This is a large war with many fronts, and Iraq is simply one campaign in what’s going to be a long, hard struggle.

Comments

  1. Headline- ‘Allied military leaders send troops into teeth of meat grinder without proper protection’. Page 1 story- ‘Sherman tanks are ‘death traps’, says anonymous DoD source.’ Page 2 story- ‘Allies clueless on how to advance through bocage’ Page 3 story- ‘Japan attacks us, so we invade France?’ Page 4 story- ‘Roosevelt lied to American people about threat of Japanese living in America.’ Page 54- ‘US troops fight with extreme bravery and intestinal fortitude on Omaha beach despite poor planning and leadership’.

  2. 80% of the casualties the wehrmacht took were taken on the EASTERN front. 20% were taken against the western allies. The western allies waited until the red army had begun the decimation of the german army before their attack. Any talk of the heroics of D-day have to be discussed in this light. Get a grip, we cowardly waited for the Russians to beat back the Germans before we seriously entered the fray. I’m as patriotic as anyone, but LEARN YOUR HISTORY.

  3. Oh, and by the way, it’s a matter of historical record that the US government knew before hand about the imminent attack on pearl harbor, due to having decrypted the japanese diplomatic code. So ya’ll can shut the fuck up about how horrible that was and how evil the japanese were. Yeah, it’s bad that it happened, but you’ve got to question the motives of people who let it happened then talked about how that day will ‘live in infamy.’ You are a bunch of mindless sheep.

  4. The Jew, ‘The western allies waited until the red army had begun the decimation of the german army before their attack. Any talk of the heroics of D-day have to be discussed in this light.’ Perhaps YOU need a little history lesson: The western Allies did not suddenly begin their war on the Western Front in June 1944. In October of 1942, they began their smart, methodical campaign by dealing with Rommel’s Afrika Corps in North Africa, then moved into Sicily, then took care of Italy. All the while, eliminating Hitler’s forces and pushing him back toward Germany. The US and Britain did all of this while also fighting a 2-front war against the Japanese in the vast reaches of the Pacific, slogging it out from island to island in some of the bloodiest fighting of the war. Stalin was content to let them do it, while throwing his own forces against the Germans in mass waves. The large body count of dead Russians was mainly due to this. Not until Japan was on the brink of defeat, after the first atomic bomb was dropped on Hiroshima, did Stalin move against the Japanese in Manchuria. Perhaps your opinion of the western allies should be revised in light of THESE facts.

  5. Oh, and by the way, it’s a matter of historical record that the US government knew before hand about the imminent attack on pearl harbor, due to having decrypted the japanese diplomatic code. So ya’ll can shut the fuck up about how horrible that was and how evil the japanese were. Yeah, it’s bad that it happened, but you’ve got to question the motives of people who let it happened then talked about how that day will ‘live in infamy.’ You are a bunch of mindless sheep.’ You truly don’t have a clue. That an attack was imminment was known. The one thing that wasn’t was WHERE! If you actually believe what you wrote I assume you subscribe to the equally ridiculous ‘fact’ that Bush knew about the 9/11 attacks in advance and let them happen. Moonbat!

  6. RE: postings by The Jew; I think you need to learn REAL history and not how it is taught by leftist history professors. Yes, Russia did fight a bloody war. But, as already stated, only on ONE front while the Western Allies fought on several fronts. Also Stalin and Hitler had little regard for human life while the Western Allies did not just throw soldiers away! As to why Roosevelt did not do more in the Pacific? Well, he had to deal with his own version of the ‘No Blood for Oil’ idiots too – the Isolationists. And since you seem to be fond of stating that something is ‘historical record’ I dare you to prove it! And don’t just say someone told you or that you read it somewhere! Show everyone what the proof is! As already stated – moonbat!