Images of US soldiers killed in Iraq -- what the U.S. didn't want you to see [Archive] - THE WRITERS FORUM

Smart

04-23-2004, 06:34 AM

^yeah, maybe you're not aware of the implicit contract involved with becoming a soldier... Admittedly I've seen more 'dead soldiers' involved in the struggle on these streets here IN America but... fancy clothes and a foreign location doesn't make these deaths any more compelling or pointless...

In America those pictures are NEARLY weightless from a political standpoint. Most Americans understand the commitment/sacrifice of the soldier and consider battle scene images of the dead to be both tasteless and offensive. Every one of those kids has a family here, in America.

The display of those images serves as nothing but a detached disrespect for the Soldier's surviving family members. Those aren't 'compelling' images of war. Those are clinically sterile pictures of dead bodies...

THIS is a 'compelling image of war"... notice the differences.

[img]http://www.epals.com/20thcentury/photos/1967vietnam1.jpg'>

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 06:43 AM

[img]http://www.drudgereport.com/z1.jpg'> [img]http://www.drudgereport.com/z4.jpg'>

[img]http://www.drudgereport.com/z5.jpg'>

While I understand your point, Smart, I still believe these are compelling as well. Much of its weight is derived from the fact that these are images that our government has banned (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34864-2004Apr22.html) from being shown in the press.

metallix

04-23-2004, 06:43 AM

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 06:49 AM

Russ Kick of The Memory Hole forced the release of about 350 photos via a Freedom of Information Act request (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34864-2004Apr22.html), and as a result the photos are now available on the web here (http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/dover/gallery.htm) (or on a mirror site here (http://warblogging.com/mirrors/www.thememoryhole.org/war/coffin_photos/dover/gallery.htm)).

metallix

04-23-2004, 06:51 AM

Originally posted by Poop Man Bob
[img]http://www.drudgereport.com/z1.jpg'> [img]http://www.drudgereport.com/z4.jpg'>

[img]http://www.drudgereport.com/z5.jpg'>

While I understand your point, Smart, I still believe these are compelling as well. Much of its weight is derived from the fact that these are images that our government has banned (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A34864-2004Apr22.html) from being shown in the press.

propaganda...

How can "our government ban..." anything? Have you ever read the constitution?

#1: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Furthermore Showing Pictures of Dead Soldiers is a very good way to show society what the real war looks like. People are not shown enough about the war. This is good way of getting people to see the real nature of war. Dead bodies..is the result of any war. War = Dead Bodies.
I don't see a reason people shouldn't be shown the real nature of war.

ClueTwo

04-23-2004, 06:54 AM

That's the nicest hearst I've ever seen...

Smart

04-23-2004, 06:56 AM

PMB... what I keep trying to say, and regarless of what that site (that I haven't visited) says...

These images aren't banned for political reasons... Any adult understands that every soldier lost in Iraq comes home in a box, draped in a flag. There isn't any confusion about that...

Now, essentially this is tasteless stuff... it's pictures of the transport of bodies...

If you did the same thing with the bodies of people killed in car wrecks or kids that overdose, the result would be the same censorship.

The word 'compelling' suggests an inherent NEED to be seen... this is not the case with these flicks... The numbers are reported nightly on the news, and as of a few days ago, more soldiers have died "after" the war than "during" the war... I don't need to see a casket to understand that sentence...

Even if... Actually, Especially if these are anonymous images of a cargo hold full of caskets. Each of those caskets is/was a real person... I don't mean a 'real person' in the abstract sense. I mean, it's Jermaine from down the block. Even though you can't see him inside the box, it's not very cool to use his lifeless body, in transport to it's final resting place, as fodder for some political argument.

What the 'opposition' is attempting to do with these pictures is dehumanize these people and turn their deaths into a vehicle for their political agenda. Who these people REALLY were doesn't matter... for all you know everyone of those soldiers could have been the most gung-ho kid in school before they shipped out to war...

You don't know because they don't want you to know. They want these bodies to exist as numbers only, they don't want them to have a background or family... They are waiting until after the grave to rob these soldiers of their personalities ONLY for political gain.

Worthless crap.

metallix

04-23-2004, 06:59 AM

yo mAN HOW DO You even know theres bodies inside those caskets? they could be empty.

Smart

04-23-2004, 07:00 AM

^Yo! word.

Smart

04-23-2004, 07:10 AM

Originally posted by metallix
propaganda...

How can "our government ban..." anything? Have you ever read the constitution?

er.. uh... this argument is idiotic on it's face...

There are all kinds of 'unprotected' speech... you can't yell "FIRE!" in a crowded theater (if there isn't one)... you can't slander or libel others, you can't incite a riot...

Even though the release of these photos was obtained under the guise of the Freedom of Info Act, it's really an invasion of privacy to display these images...

I understand why the Gov censored them, it was the wrong approach but it doesn't mean that these pictures "NEED to be seen"...

Have some fucking respect... just because we can't see the dead bodies doesn't mean they died in a vacuum. It doesn't stop us from disputing the neccessity of their deaths. It doesn't stop us from knowing the numbers of the dead or arguing the merits of the war...

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 07:11 AM

Originally posted by Smart
PMB... what I keep trying to say, and regarless of what that site (that I haven't visited) says...

These images aren't banned for political reasons... Any adult understands that every soldier lost in Iraq comes home in a box, draped in a flag. There isn't any confusion about that...

Understanding what occurs and having it placed on the frontpages of newspapers [which would otherwise occur] are two entirely different things. I fully believe these pictures are banned for political reasons. The powers were around [in some form] during Vietnam, and they understand that once public opinion shifts against a war, it's very difficult to keep at the war and win an upcoming election. It's the same reason that coffins are now called "transfer tubes." ('http://www.disinfopedia.org/wiki.phtml?title=Transfer_tubes')

Now, essentially this is tasteless stuff... it's pictures of the transport of bodies...

If you did the same thing with the bodies of people killed in car wrecks or kids that overdose, the result would be the same.

These pictures are more than dead bodies, and I'm sure you understand that. There is a stronger than usual emotional response to the coffin of a soldier who died serving his country. While bodies of those that died in a car accident may be disturbing, soldiers' bodies/coffins are two different things.

The word 'compelling' suggest an inherent NEED to be seen... this is not the case with these flicks... The numbers are reported nightly on the news.

Images carry much strong connotations/emotions.

As of a few days ago, more soldiers have died "after" the war than "during" the war... I don't need to see a casket to understand that sentence...

Even if, actually, especially if these are anaymous images of a cargo hold full of caskets. Each of those caskets is a real person... I don't mean a 'real person' in the abstract sense. I mean, it's Jermaine, from down the block. Even though you can't see him inside the box, it's not very cool to use his lifeless body, in transport to it's final resting place, as fodder for some political argument.

What the 'opposition' is attempting to do with these pictures is dehumanize these people and turn their deaths into a vehicle for their political agenda. Who these people REALLY were doesn't matter... for all you know everyone of those soldiers could have been the most gung-ho kid in school before they shipped out to war...

You don't know because they don't want you to know. They want these bodies to exist as numbers only, they don't want them to have a background or family... They are waiting until after the grave to rob these soldiers of their personalities ONLY for political gain.

Worthless crap.

Okay .. you lost me here. I presume you're railing against those who believe the pictures should be released in order to, as you suggest, further their political careers, but I'm not sure. Assuming that's true, wouldn't it serve their purpose much more effectively if people viewed them as actual humans/neighbors/sons, rather than simply numbers? One can assume that the public support of the war would drop significantly if everyone viewed the bodies as someone they knew vs. a random person who exists only on paper.

Or is my premise false, in that you are railing against those in power for not allowing the pictures to be seen [which wouldn't make sense given the tone of the rest of your post]?

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 07:17 AM

Let me clarify myself before there's any further confusion: I'm speaking about photographs of the coffins arriving at Dover - not about the dead bodies of the soldiers laying in the street.

metallix - uhm, yes, I have read the Constitution. Thanks for asking. I've also read a great deal of Supreme Court cases interpreting the First Amendment, which can lead me to safely say that the government can "ban" something. I can provide you with a summary of the current status of First Amendment law if you'd like - just click the email button and shoot me a note.

Smart

04-23-2004, 07:21 AM

Originally posted by Poop Man Bob
Assuming that's true, wouldn't it serve their purpose much more effectively if people viewed them as actual humans/neighbors/sons, rather than simply numbers?

Nope, that can ONLY be a second step... You don't want to just get any old picture of a dead kid and use that to support your goals... faceless kids do the legwork, begin the propaganda onslaught... Afterwards, 'you' would only pick those particular dead soldiers that died in the most seditious attack or were the most gung-ho... It would be a HUGE political blunder to use the image of a dead soldier (assuming you want to be re-elected) that turned out to oppose the war entirely and only joined up for the college benefits. Conversly (if you want to defeat the current regime) it would be foolish to use the image of a dyed in the wool patriot...

First and foremost these images are best used when they have no faces, when they are merely numbers. Everyone has the best chance to advance their belief or refute that of their opponent. Once you actually give these bodies names and personalities is when they really become strong political tools... but as I said, you gotta pick the right kid.

So, now let's consider the backlash of either party actually 'naming a body'... The proponents will do everything possible to exemplify this DEAD PERSON as a supporter of their cause; The oppponents will look for every chance to smear this DEAD PERSON to deny the political edge...

Can you see where this is a Lose/Lose proposition? Propaganda LOVES anonymity!

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 07:28 AM

If, as you suggest, those in power know that those who opposed the war could use pictures of coffins/faceless masses as political tools, and this leads those in power to ban publishing the pictures ... doesn't that lead to the conclusion that the pictures aren't being shown for political reasons [albeit preemptive political reasons, which this administration seems to be so fond of]? Which directly refutes what you said earlier.

I'm going to bed... but I'll respond more tomorrow.

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 07:29 AM

And, yes, I do see how propoganda loves anonymity. Good points.

... but upon thinking further, I think that more effective propoganda would have personalities and names attached, assuming those names have been investigated fully to ensure they represent [or can be shown to represent] the views of those using the propoganda. You stated something similar, I suppose.

Pfffffffffft

04-23-2004, 07:41 AM

Originally posted by fethasmcgraw
people die in wars

sad but true, people dont realize the grimness of war until it is right before their eyes:o

KaBar2

04-23-2004, 07:41 AM

They often send an honor guard to accompany the casket made up of a couple of men who knew the deceased, who accompany it to the family, and can usually provide an eyewitness account of the action in which the soldier was killed. Not always, of course. In a really big war, there are too many dead casualties to permit this sort of luxury. In WWII, for instance, most wartime casualties were buried in military cemetaries near the battlefield. The transport of remains was too difficult, took too long, and the remains were often decomposing by the time Graves Registration arrived to identify bodies, etc. The family usually received the deceased soldier's "personal effects," his (unsoiled) dress uniforms, military I.D., dog tags, letters from home, any medals he was awarded and so forth.

Transport of the dead is always accompanied by a lot of dignified ritual. Attention and care mirrors the deceased soldier's rank. Obviously every dead active-duty casualty receives the usual honors--a flag-draped coffin, an honor guard of soldiers, a graveside firing party to fire the 21-gun salute over the coffin, an officer to ceremoniously present the bereaved family member with the tri-folded American flag, a bugler to play "Taps." Officers receive a little more attention.

Smart

04-23-2004, 07:54 AM

Originally posted by Poop Man Bob
And, yes, I do see how propoganda loves anonymity. Good points.

Indeed, so you can perhaps see how both sides would rather that these remain nameless bodies because the carry more 'potential energy' that way...

Also... Yes, I DO think this administration tried to squelch the opposition (unduly due to general ignorance of how this argument works, as eplained by me previously). Yes, I DO think this is one of the myriad of issues that will come back and sink Bush's re-election campaign.

Yes, I ALWAYS thought Bush was an idiot. NO, I NEVER supported the war BUT...

As I tried to say 16 months ago when everyone was suddenly rallying in the streets againts the war... This war IS going to happen, Bush WILL fuck it up on all fronts and will NOT serve a second term. I also said BACK THEN that what we needed to concentrate on was an exit strategy, not an aversion strategy... now it's a year later and we're mired in the war, the power change is iminent and neither Seeking nor Are2, or even Browner has even broached the subject of a successful exit at this point (or any time previously)...

*Hey, I dunno if any of us actually argued these facts, well, I do know, we did, but I'm not calling you out, just using names to make a point. Maybe someone I forgot who is a better example though... OH... DUH... I meant Mapo!

Anyway, a bunch of kids around here have tried to mischaracterize my support for the soldiers as support for the administration. Some have even used that as an excuse to decide that I'm something (politically) that I'm not... but...

I said it then and I'll say it now, though it's only half as relevant...

This war WILL happen, and Bush WILL fuck it up. Your job is to spot his mistakes and never let anyone forget them.

^Which is why this thread would have been much better without the pictures... the issue is more compelling than the flicks, and that's just ANOTHER reason this cheapens the memories of those soldiers.

They are merely pawns in the game, in the global sense, nobody cares about pawns. Acting like we do is just patronizing the other pawns. In a famillial sense, we are all pawns, and those pawns are no better than yourself... and what power can you flex on Capitol Hill?

Now imagine how much you could influence if you were dead.

So, I agree, these pictures should NEVER have been censored... but I also belive they should NEVER have been displayed.

From the political side, HELL YEAH, Bush IS AND WAS AND WILL ALWAYS BE SO SHOOK that he banned those flicks... That he joined a 'secret' Fraternity... That he is a fucking weasel assed self-centered dick nit.

Smart

04-23-2004, 08:43 AM

Originally posted by Poop Man Bob
I think that more effective propoganda would have personalities and names attached, assuming those names have been investigated fully to ensure they represent [or can be shown to represent] the views of those using the propoganda. You stated something similar, I suppose.

Exactly, but that takes time and money... and as much as it seems to flow like wine, money in Washington isn't THAT easy to come by... Both sides realize that it's just easier to leave the whole issue alone. This is where Bush, in his ignorant paranoia, fucked up with his censorship. He responded to an attack that historically doesn't exist, and dug himself a cozy little hole too...

Also, the best propaganda is current propaganda... 'hot button issues' and so forth...

It has always been easier/cheaper for opposing political sides to just forego the personalized agendas until they have proven by their own accord to be news worthy...

Consider the Brady bill mandating a wait period for the purchase of handguns... Named for the White House Press Secretary who was shot by Hinkley...

Although inspired by the Hinkley event and having already spent months making it's way through comittee to finally be introduced on the floor (still with some opponents mostly made up of Republicans in the pocket of the NRA)... The bill's passage had NOTHING to do with that assasination attempt though.

The main fodder in that issue was a case that happened locally... A fellow felt like he got dissed at a bar, got drunk, went across the street to a pawn shop and bought a pistol... Came back and vented his rage on the patrons... This led to a police stand off where, in an almost superhuman feat, the gunman weathered quite a few (14?) shots from the police issued 9mm 's over several hours until fuinally being "brought to justice" (Bush quote, heh) by an off duty cop and his personal .45

This all occurred while the bill was on the floor of Congress... as soon as the story broke the bill was passed with no opposition.

This is an example of a personal story (not the one you thought) that resulted in political change... BUT, the story told itself... no monies had to be expended to investigate, no commitees (secret or otherwise) had to be set up... It was just a magic event that they could glom onto... Dude just went all nuts and proved their point.

Now we have to wait 5 days and get a background check... (Turned out the guy was some multiple felony convict as well)

That's how they do it on the personal side, find a story that seems interesting, do a quick investigation (or in the Brady Bill case no investigation) and then bend the results of the outcome to most suit their agenda...

To be honest I was a bit surprised that nobody tried to champion the DC Snipers but, that story is SO polarized against them so... tough sell.

TheoHuxtable

04-23-2004, 10:26 AM

Originally posted by Smart
^yeah, maybe you're not aware of the implicit contract involved with becoming a soldier... Admittedly I've seen more 'dead soldiers' involved in the struggle on these streets here IN America but... fancy clothes and a foreign location doesn't make these deaths any more compelling or pointless...

Then if it isn't "compelling" and it's pointless and has no effect whatsoever like you claim, then why:

1. Would the US go to great lengths to make sure they're not aired in the living rooms of millions of Americans. They'd be a "non-issue" right? So why would they do this?

2. Why did images of dead American soldiers in Vietnam have a large effect to Americas opposition in the war?

The US government is simply learning from the past.

vinyl junkie

04-23-2004, 11:06 AM

i only read the first couple of posts in this thread, so this has probably already been said, but...

how often do you see a dead american soldier on the tv or in the newspaper? sure you see a couple of coffins every now and then, but that's it... not and not even talking about pictures, how often do you see these in the papers or on tv:
a bunch of mother fuckers that you don;t know died... they're a bunch of foreigners... there's a ton of em... on to other news...
but every time i watch the news, or read shit about it i see shit like this:
our beloved hometown boy died in that other country... this kid was on the football team before he graduated highschool six minutes ago... he drank heavily and and slipped a couple of girls roofies... let's remember this one brave individual as someone who stood up for his country...
i firmly believe that most americans are complete idiots... and they need to be sheltered from images that depict americans as "just another casualty in a stupid war", rather than claiming each one is a hero that we should all look up to...

a week or two ago an undercover cop was shot and killed in a neighborhood near mine... within hours cops were going door to door with guns drawn trying to find someone who matched the killer's description... within 24 hours they found the guy (and not even in the neighborhood... in fact, the dude lived and was found in a whole other county...)
this was in a neighborhood where people are killed on a nearly daily basis... and i don;t think any of those killings have had any kind of conclusion... and when i made a point to watch the news for a few nights after this, i saw ONE interview with someone who lived there saying that it was ridiculous that the police force put all this effort into finding a cop's killer, when they have put zero effort into finding the killers of school children who happened to be walking down the street at the wrong time...

america loves a hero... and we will do anything to make sure that the general public knows that we are superior to everyone else... and that those who are defending us are even more important than the rest of us...

shit is ridiculous...

i say show more dead american soldiers...

TheoHuxtable

04-23-2004, 11:23 AM

Originally posted by vinyl junkie
i only read the first couple of posts in this thread, so this has probably already been said, but...

how often do you see a dead american soldier on the tv or in the newspaper? sure you see a couple of coffins every now and then, but that's it... not and not even talking about pictures, how often do you see these in the papers or on tv:

but every time i watch the news, or read shit about it i see shit like this:

i firmly believe that most americans are complete idiots... and they need to be sheltered from images that depict americans as "just another casualty in a stupid war", rather than claiming each one is a hero that we should all look up to...

a week or two ago an undercover cop was shot and killed in a neighborhood near mine... within hours cops were going door to door with guns drawn trying to find someone who matched the killer's description... within 24 hours they found the guy (and not even in the neighborhood... in fact, the dude lived and was found in a whole other county...)
this was in a neighborhood where people are killed on a nearly daily basis... and i don;t think any of those killings have had any kind of conclusion... and when i made a point to watch the news for a few nights after this, i saw ONE interview with someone who lived there saying that it was ridiculous that the police force put all this effort into finding a cop's killer, when they have put zero effort into finding the killers of school children who happened to be walking down the street at the wrong time...

america loves a hero... and we will do anything to make sure that the general public knows that we are superior to everyone else... and that those who are defending us are even more important than the rest of us...

shit is ridiculous...

i say show more dead american soldiers...

I see what you're getting at, but at the same time, show some respect. No one said he was perfect in high school and he was fighting crime like superman or some shit. But he did something that you probably wouldn't want to do, and that's get killed in Iraq over some George W. Bush/Dick Cheney lie. He deserves the memorial that he gets and he deserves to get mentioned in the news. I feel bad about this shit because I truly feel these soldiers are dying for an unjust cause. This war was not necessary.

And the ages of these people dying. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22... the majority of the people dying are the younger ones since they throw the more able-bodied and lower-ranked people on the front lines.

There was this 20 year-old half-Cambodian half-Mexican girl from northern Cali who got killed when the helicopter she was in was shot down near Baghdad. I also can't stand to see young women die over this shit either.

DR+DELUSION

04-23-2004, 12:33 PM

this is so very shocking.

i had no idea that people were dying over there.

:rolleyes:

im gonna go take a shower now.

TheoHuxtable

04-23-2004, 12:42 PM

Originally posted by DR+DELUSION
this is so very shocking.

i had no idea that people were dying over there.

:rolleyes:

im gonna go take a shower now.

[img]http://members.optusnet.com.au/lanemeyer/forum/forumpics/prize.jpg'>

yoink

04-23-2004, 01:33 PM

Im goin to go head and side with smart on this one...its a war people die, these people made the ultimate sacrifice, if that was my dad/brother/girlfriend etc...I wouldnt want to see her image plastered all over the media....why would that be neccesary. Its the same as every day on CNN " Well an american soldier has died in Iraq..." shits happening over there, and the media is allready all over the death thing just making people feel more and more shitty about it. ITs a fucking war for christsake.
by the way this is the same argument as with what happend with those four contractors in fallujah (sp?) to what extent should the media show what happened to them, it was a choice the gov gave to them, have some sense when letting us know about it. Some papers ran the car on fire, some ambigious shots of cheering iraqi citizens...would it have been neccesary/tasteful for a full page spread of a human beings body charred/beaten/tortured hanging from a bridge.? no. I dont know Im sure this has been said before, and maybe im rehashing, but its my 2 cents on the matter.

yoink

04-23-2004, 01:41 PM

"The U.S. government prevented these photos from being aired in the US; afraid that people would see how bad the war really is. "
oh and I only responded because of this really, I think this is misleading, honestly do you think the government is trying to cover up that people are dying? I mean the soldiers arent over there on a vacation....people know how fucked up it is, they hear about it everyfucking day on the internet, the tv, the newspaper, the media waves are saturated with how awful it is. Sooooo...I think displaying these photos would just be tasteless to the familes of those invovled. I dont need to see someone elses dead body to feel/know about whats happening,

seeking

04-23-2004, 01:48 PM

as soon as i read someone claiming that the images had not been banned by the bush administraion, i quit reading. it is a fact that they have gone to great lengths to avoid having any images of US deaths being published. and if you want to start talking about first amendment rights, let's start talking about journalists being 'embedded', and how all of their stories need to be cleared. that's not censorship? not hindering out first amendment rights?
last week someone snuck into a shipping yard in seattle and took pictures of the coffins being unloaded. they were printed on the front page fo the seattle times (or whatever it's called.) readers overwhelming responded favorably to it, understood it in its correct context, and did not find it offensive.
acknowledging that our soldiers are being killed is a hell of alot better than trying to sweep it under the rug. yes, we all know in a war people die, but if you don't have friends/family members over there, it's real easy to become detached and forget. exposing the truth is not 'exploiting' anything.

pez roc

04-23-2004, 01:49 PM

i agree with Yoink

showing the pictures are disrespectful to the families. Is it news.. yes. Is it necessary.. no.
How would you like it if a family member was raped and murdered and pictures of a half naked dead family member who died a horrible death were pushed all over the world by the news. It was news..

These men died with HONOR. SHOW SOME FUCKING RESPECT!!!!

seeking

04-23-2004, 01:58 PM

ummm, maybe my eyes have gone incredibly bad very quickly, but none of those pictures shows anyones face clearly enough for anyone to be able to tell who they are. quit making up scenarios that arent happening in order to argue this one.

yoink

04-23-2004, 02:01 PM

I dont know if your reffering to me or the majority of this thread, but I dont think I was in any wrong with what I said.

pez roc

04-23-2004, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by seeking
ummm, maybe my eyes have gone incredibly bad very quickly, but none of those pictures shows anyones face clearly enough for anyone to be able to tell who they are. quit making up scenarios that arent happening in order to argue this one.

Its doesnt matter if they are recognizeable it is still DISRESPECTFUL.

Far as making up scenarios.. Are you saying these men were not Brothers,Sons,Fathers? Are you saying that people are NOT raped and murdered? Are you saying that it is NOT news. Or are you saying that there is no need to show the photos of that news.

Respect is not a right.. its earned! These men have earned ALL OF OUR RESPECT and should be shown that respect. Regardless of support or nonsupport of the war.

imported_El Mamerro

04-23-2004, 02:26 PM

My question is... those of you arguing against showing these pictures, did you have the same opinion when the pictures of Udai and Qusai Hussein were released and televised by the US?

seeking

04-23-2004, 02:30 PM

it is not disrespectful, you think its disrespectful. that is your oppinion. my oppinion is that if americans could see the reality of what war looks like, they would be alot more involved in the political process that surrounds it. is that disrespectful to the soldiers or their family? not in my oppinion. in my oppinion it is more diesrespectful for them to die having served no purpose. so the current administration can continue lying and destroying our country and the safety of the world. every soldier knows they are joining the armed forces with the possibility they will die. they are doing it because they care about keeping america 'free'.
well, my oppinion is that america is not free, is becoming less free every single day, and it's due in large part to people being oblivious to the reality at hand, 10,000 miles away.
finally, i'm not advocating posting pictures of dead soldiers all over our newspapers and tv's, but a photo of 100 flag draped coffins is a very powerful image that both pays homage to those who gave their lives, and reminds us what is really at stake here. if you can't understand that, then, well.... continue on with your oppinion, and i'll continue on with mine.

seeking

04-23-2004, 02:33 PM

also, i would like to re-point out the fact that these pictures were posted here by an american soldier who obviously felt that we were a bit out of touch with what war really looks like.

yoink

04-23-2004, 02:36 PM

Originally posted by El Mamerro
My question is... those of you arguing against showing these pictures, did you have the same opinion when the pictures of Udai and Qusai Hussein were released and televised by the US?

actually yeah. I didnt find it neccesary but for dif. reasons. I dont hold any remorse for their deaths...but I didnt need to see them on tv, interweb etc.

and seeking, your right its notdisrespectful because it is reality, but what do you think it would be like if those images were all over tv, and the news...the media would exploit them and their families...and thats fucking wrong. then do you do it for every soldier that dies and so on? every innocent? I think there are other ways to be politically motivated.

*just read the rest of your post, I see where your coming from, I hope you understand where Im coming from.

seeking

04-23-2004, 02:55 PM

i do see where you're coming from, and no, i don't think that people need to be blasted daily with images of decomposing bodies. however, i do think they need to know what their government is getting them in to. i think there is a delicate balance between information, and exploitation, and unfortunately, our media has no fucking concept of where to draw that line.
when it comes to life and death matters, i'd rather know too much and be haunted, then not know enough and be dead.

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 02:57 PM

Originally posted by seeking
last week someone snuck into a shipping yard in seattle and took pictures of the coffins being unloaded. they were printed on the front page fo the seattle times (or whatever its called).

That lady was fired (http://www.boston.com/dailynews/113/nation/Woman_fired_by_military_contra:.shtml). As was her husband.
Tami Silicio, 50, was fired Wednesday by Maytag Aircraft Corp. after military officials raised ''very specific concerns'' related to the photograph, said William L. Silva, Maytag president. The photo was taken in Kuwait.
Silva declined to identify the Pentagon's concerns but said Silicio violated company and federal government rules. He declined to comment further.

Silicio said she hoped the photo of the 20 flag-draped coffins awaiting transport from Kuwait to the United States would show the relatives of soldiers killed in Iraq that civilian and military crews return the remains of their loved ones with care and devotion.

''It wasn't my intent to lose my job or become famous or anything,'' Silicio said.

Silicio's husband and co-worker, David Landry, was also fired, but the company gave no reason for his dismissal.

Under a policy adopted in 1991, the Pentagon bars news organizations from photographing caskets being returned to the United States, saying publication of such photos would be insensitive to bereaved families. Critics say the public is being denied information by not being able to see photos of coffins coming back from Iraq.

hotshot

04-23-2004, 02:59 PM

lets just get them back from iraq!

BROWNer

04-23-2004, 04:56 PM

Originally posted by Smart
neither Seeking nor Are2, or even Browner has even broached the subject of a successful exit at this point (or any time previously)..

actually i was prodded awhile ago, and tried, but the thread flopped away
becuz nobody else had much to add, coupled with the complexity
and mass of the problem. i'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on
an exit strategy though...

seeking

04-23-2004, 05:25 PM

smart, why are you bringing me up and trying to make some example of me? do we really wanna start that whole war again? who gives a shit if i have an exit strategy or not? i'm a graffiti writer. my exit strategies involve holes in fences and trying my shoes tight enough so they don't fall off in a swamp. my ability (or potential lack there of) to forumlate a plausible exit strategy for the war in iraq, utilizing common sense and a patchwork collection of facts and beliefs is incredibly irrelivent. especially when considering i was not trying to discuss such a topic in the first place.
however...
you want an exit strategy? hand it over to the UN.
we can't just leave, the country would eat itself. we can accept that no one in iraq (or anyplace in the middle east -save israel) trusts us or anything we have to say. so we step back into the shadows, keep supplying money and keep supplying troops in a non-combat, structual building capacity. we focus our attention on civil services, repairing roads, hospitals, sewers, water, etc. we allow countries with no financial interest in the outcome of the situation to selflessly make decisions that are in the best interest of iraq's people, not in the best interest of our upcoming election, and we remove ourself from decisions that will never be accepted, no matter what they are, simply because we're involved.

there, that was easy.

BROWNer

04-23-2004, 05:49 PM

this doesn't have anything to do with the specifics of the
thread, but here's another notch of shit..what's become of
the japanese hostages since returning to japan?: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/internat...sia/23JAPA.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/international/asia/23JAPA.html)

metallix

04-23-2004, 09:34 PM

pull out strategy: cum on her stomache.
no seriously install a dictator and pump all the oil out , then leave forever. ala SH #2. ;)

Poop Man Bob

04-23-2004, 09:53 PM

Originally posted by BROWNer
this doesn't have anything to do with the specifics of the
thread, but here's another notch of shit..what's become of
the japanese hostages since returning to japan?: http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/internat...sia/23JAPA.html (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/23/international/asia/23JAPA.html)

What the fuck? This absolutely baffles me.

villain

04-24-2004, 01:07 AM

I don't think I would want my face and personal information and relationships plastered all over the media. But then again I would like a realistic perspective on the war. An unfiltered look. But there is always going to be a certain amount of censorship to protect sensitive issues, which is understandable from a strategic standpoint. Considering though that the images of Vietnam did galvanize the opposition I can see how it would be important to see the horrors in it's true unsterilized form. Without information we can't make informed decisions. Randi Rhodes on Air America Radio said that the bodies coming through Dover Air Force base are not counted.... ???? ....... This would be a serious issue.

All in all though I don't really see what the big deal is.... Sure I might be embarrassed or something to see my ass plastered all over the media having gotten waxed in iraq but then again i would be dead so i guess i wouldn't care. Maybe my family would get some respect and free ice cream cones. I dunno. Besides they show every soldier that dies face, name, hometown, and a little bio in The Army Times. Wanna see?
Interesting to note that The Army Times is more pessamistic about this war than the major media.

metallix

04-24-2004, 04:26 AM

its good hearing input from people that matter in the us armed forces.

i say let the uncensored information flow. minus anything of strategic importance. which of course could mean everything..but hey!

Smart

04-24-2004, 05:01 AM

Originally posted by seeking
smart, why are you bringing me up and trying to make some example of me? do we really wanna start that whole war again?

What are you talking about, you were mentioned as part of a group... these things happened... lighten up champ, everything isn't an attack.

Browner had the right reaction...

So... yeah, exit strategy... man, I dunno, and to be honest, I don't think I foresaw the complexity of one particular flavor of the war that has really left a flank exposed.

The failure to secure the borders and prevent a huge influx of insurgents, who I do NOT believe are Al Queda but I do believe they are every bit as passionate about the collapse of the western world and establishment of a fundamental Islamic regime... I don't think this is something mainstream Iraq wants, so, basically, it's our fault for exposing them to a battle on that front that didn't exist before our arrival...

Anyway, the Armed Forces have failed SO badly on this point that 'Radical Clerics' are running small armies of their own... and that aspect alone seems way out of control...

SO, what I thought was a good move towards giving the Iraqi's an interem government of their own people now fills me with dread.

In fact, the failure to properly impose martial law has probably led to 10 extra years of conflict...

From what I can tell, the pipelines have been restored to a point where production can equal profit. It seems like the economy, while shaky, is getting it's legs. I think the majority of Iraqis are actually pretty forward thinking so... At this point I would prescribe the power turnover followed by several years of strict policing, border protection and training for Iraqis by the US military under Iraqi advisement.

I hate to think of the cost but we are well and properly fucked, I hope the election results reflect that.

*Finally, back to the main topic... If the people need to see the 'reality' of war they can go see Saving Private Ryan or Platoon or someshit... If you can't understand what it means for people to die even when you can't see them then you might be too young to have an opinion on the war.

In fact, a picture of 20 or even a hundred coffins is ALSO spit in the face of the TRUE realization that we have lost 3000 or so already...

Smart

04-24-2004, 05:04 AM

Originally posted by Smart
If you can't understand what it means for people to die even when you can't see them then you might be too young to have an opinion on the war.

THOUGH, there is the very real possibility that you might be old enough to fight and die...

villain

04-24-2004, 04:15 PM

I'm not some goremonger. I just want an unbiased perspective of the conflicts.

And I seriously doubt this administration can maintain a fair position in Iraq. I think KaBar asked in the other thread if we had been through Fallueja before. I know people who have been through Fallueja before and there was obviously not resistance on this scale. I think as long as Bush is in power and we are in complete control over the country and it's resources we are not going to see significant reconstruction and instead skirmishes like this and pipeline sabotage. We will never be able to secure the borders. We cannot even keep immigrants from crossing our own porous borders. As long as we are seen as the enemy there will be an influx of foreign fighters. As for an exit strategy I would second what Seeking said.

Pistol

04-24-2004, 05:30 PM

Columbia dead among photos of Iraq victims
Fri Apr 23, 6:26 PM ET Add U.S. National - AFP to My Yahoo!

WASHINGTON (AFP) - Images of the coffins of the dead astronauts from the Columbia disaster got mixed in with some of the pictures splashed across US newspapers of military dead being returned from Iraq (news - web sites).
[img]http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/afp/20040424/capt.sge.jza72.230404222618.photo00.default-380x304.jpg'>

NASA (news - web sites) made an impassioned plea for newspaper editors to double check the published pictures which have caused a controversy as the Defence Department bans media coverage of the return of war dead.

An individual, Russ Kick, circumvented the ban by using freedom of information legislation to make the US Air Force hand over more than 350 pictures of coffins taken at the Dover Air Base in Delaware.

Kick's website, www.thememoryhole.org (http://www.thememoryhole.org), said he had requested all photos taken since February 1, 2003 concerning US soldiers.

Air Force spokeswoman, Lieutenant Colonel Jennifer Cassidy, said "some of the pictures are from the space shuttle" which crashed on re-entry to the Earth's atmosphere on February 1 last year.

"My guess is Mr Kick just asked for all photos from this period of time and he got a disc of 350 pictures." She could not say how many were of Columbia coffins but warned the media against using pictures from the website.

The National Aeronautics and Space Administration announced earlier that "many news organisations across the country are mistakenly identifying the flag-draped caskets of the space shuttle Columbia's crew as those of war casualties from Iraq."

In a statement, NASA said "editors are being asked to confirm that the images used in news reports are in fact those of American casualties and not those of the NASA astronauts who were killed February 1, 2003, in the Columbia tragedy."

According to the agency, "an initial review of the images featured on www.thememoryhole.org (http://www.thememoryhole.org) "shows that more than 18 rows of images from Dover Air Force Base in Delaware are actually photographs of honors rendered to Columbia's seven astronauts."

PalestineOne

04-25-2004, 12:54 AM

oh shit! soldiers really really died! just like that? fuck! they never die in the movies! not like that!

High Priest

04-25-2004, 03:30 AM

Originally posted by Smart
they look like regular old dead people... just wearing funny clothes...

I think you've got ahold of a non-issue...

And what, exactly, would be the point of showing those images? What does that prove?

It's like showing pictures of the bodies at a car wreck, and if you can't understand why that's NOT news then... you probably don't get some of Andy Warhol's earlier works, and possibly never will...

Probably the most on point post in this thread, and def. worth noting.

PalestineOne

04-25-2004, 03:35 AM

andy warhol? is he related to andy capp? cause andy capp needs to quit smoking newports

HYDRO BILL

04-25-2004, 04:37 AM

Speaking as a Canadian...
You all should get the truth about the war, unfiltered, through media better than your shitty CNN, etc. especially since you`re all about to be drafted ( you young ones, at least). Then maybe you`ll get off your asses and get into the streets next time your adminiistration steals a presidency.

villain

04-25-2004, 05:44 AM

effyoo

04-25-2004, 06:16 AM

Originally posted by HYDRO BILL
Speaking as a Canadian...
You all should get the truth about the war, unfiltered, through media better than your shitty CNN, etc. especially since you`re all about to be drafted ( you young ones, at least). Then maybe you`ll get off your asses and get into the streets next time your adminiistration steals a presidency.

If you think you're so informed, why don't you "kick the knowledge"?

The Canadian coverage offers a (semi)different viewpoint; definately less biased than the US coverage, but it can hardly be considered the real deal.

And if you were just talking out your ass, good luck with that. There is only room for one of those fools and Jim Carrey already has the job.

villain

04-25-2004, 06:23 AM

Originally posted by effyoo

And if you were just talking out your ass, good luck with that. There is only room for one of those fools and Jim Carrey already has the job.

I'm sorry but this shit made me laugh and burp at the same time. At this point in my life I believe that is noteworthy....

PalestineOne

04-25-2004, 06:43 AM

we fucked the middle east

HYDRO BILL

04-25-2004, 07:27 AM

I made you angry! YAY!
I wan`t saying that Canadian media is better (it is-CBC Newsworld) And I`m not about to "Kick the knowledge" But if you watch different media it is amazing to see how much the perspective changes from say BBC world news to CNN.
FOR EXAMPLE: the recent polls saying that the majoity of Americans would like to see America stay the course in Iraq was spun as being people supporting Bush (CNN-Wolf Blitzkrieg) . I personally think that everyone can agree that bombing the shit out of a place and leaving it in the middle of civil war then bouncing is a pretty deplorable idea, but it doesn`t mean that they support Dubya. All I was saying is that the media`s role is to put it all on the table like they did with Hussein`s sons or Saddam`s beard. Unfortunately there are far too mant corporate interests to do that. Now go trim that Bush!

HYDRO BILL

04-25-2004, 07:40 AM

yes, we all know in a war people die, but if you don't have friends/family members over there, it's real easy to become detached and forget. exposing the truth is not 'exploiting' anything. [/B][/QUOTE]

What he said^^^^

HYDRO BILL

04-25-2004, 05:07 PM

Just so I don`t seem too one-sided, I was impressed with both Wolf Blitzer and Tim Russert (meet the press) grilling Bandar Bin Sultan about his connections to the Bush Fam shadyness. Homeboy was squirming. Now get angry!:mad:

yoink

04-25-2004, 05:30 PM

Originally posted by HYDRO BILL
Speaking as a Canadian...

hahahahahahaha..............hahahahahahaha.
whoo...
sorry I couldnt read anything after that...it was too much.

;)

villain

04-25-2004, 05:39 PM

Originally posted by HYDRO BILL
Now get angry!:mad:

I've been angry for YEARS about this already. You are preaching to the choir son.

!@#$%

04-27-2004, 04:30 PM

Originally posted by BROWNer
actually i was prodded awhile ago, and tried, but the thread flopped away
becuz nobody else had much to add, coupled with the complexity
and mass of the problem. i'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on
an exit strategy though...

yep.

Smart, i had added to the ideas a bit..

we all recognize the need for a true coalition..
best in the form of the UN, probably acceptable as NATO

without a doubt, the u.s. kickback/corruption schemes with rebuilding have got to end

there needs to be a temporary government elected/selected by iraqis, who represent the citizens of that country, not just expats that the u.s. thinks it can control..

goodbye bremer.

but none of this shit is going to happen anyway, how can one argue the hypotheticals of an exit strategy when it is so obviously a futile excercise?

at least with the opinion/editorial discussions, we may be convincing or educating those who are on the fence or uninformed.

yeah but back to the main topic..
show the atrocities..
where are the photos of dead iraqi children?
i saw so much of that in foreign press last year i was quickly convinced that the war was far too costly.

Smart ...and p.s...it's !@#$% now.. ;) low profile, thanks.