>>We dont steal a real soldier's identity and forge language in a tape to home and then publicize a fictitious death
>
>I guess mostly because the press is looking so closely at "your" side, so the risk/benefit balance is different nowadays from US perspective. If I remember correctly there was a real soldiers dead body used to plant false info in WW2 at least about D-Day? All sides used false radio messages and so on.
>
>I think *every* competent commanding officer would use such means to minimize the risks for his soldiers. As long as you view propaganda as a "war effort", how do you scale "low" ? As long as more will is sucked from half-believers than ire is raised in non-believers it can be viewed as effective.
>
>"Dumb" may be better category, because a hoax using a living soldier is certain to get out/is already *proven* to be at least partially false.
>
>I'ld try to plant such a story about a guy really KIA - much harder to defuse for the US, but it only stirs the media a couple of times - it might be suspicious if every tenth KIA had such a message found, especially in view of the latest standing order not to record such messages.
>
>Why burn a tactic with an example so easily falsified ?
>
>my 0.02 EUR
>
>thomas

Thomas;

When Poland Invaded Germany on August 31, 1939, this was cause for Germany to defend itself and attack Poland.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gleiwitz_incident

Propaganda can be used effectively.

Many books I have read indicate that Polish prisoners were dressed in German uniforms and shot near the German/Polish border to justify a defensive action against the Polish.

Dr. Goebbels was well suited as propaganda minister as he was credentialed as a PhD.

Our lives are constantly filled with propaganda. It is unfortunate when such events lead to war for whatever reason.

From another Thomas :)