David Strike wrote:

> Then
> there's the report that the advance towards Baghdad had been halted for "4 -
> 6 days" because of the need to re-supply and because the 'point' had run
> ahead of the necessary supply lines?  (Mind you!  That could have been a
> piece of mis-information deliberately put out in an attempt to encourage the
> Iraqi defenders of Baghdad to do a 'Harold of Hastings" and attack and enemy
> who were deliberately trying to lure them out of their stronghold in order
> to engage them in combat! ) :-)

And therein lies one of the problems of ANY news reporting during wartime.  "The
first casualty of any war is Truth."  I forget who said it, and I'm too tired to
look it up tonight!  But I don't believe most of what is reported as 'fact' by
any government entity, and only part of what is reported as 'fact' by
journalists -- and that depends upon WHICH journalist!

Dave safe,
-Dave


--
*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *
Dave DeBarger
[log in to unmask]

"Attitude is everything.  Pick a good one!"
*  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *  *