Real War - Can we Take it?

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Sep 04, 2009 9:45 pm

AP picture of wounded Marine sparks debate

By DAVID BAUDER

Associated Press Writer

NEW YORK (AP) -- Defense Secretary Robert Gates expressed disappointment Friday at news outlets that used a picture taken and distributed by The Associated Press depicting a U.S. Marine mortally wounded in combat in Afghanistan.

The AP distributed the picture despite personal pleas from Gates and the dead Marine's family in a case that illustrated the difficult decisions in reporting on a conflict where Americans have seen relatively few images of fallen U.S. troops over eight years.

.............

AP News : Daily Press

end story

______________

Personally, I don't see the difference between putting pictures of those we kill up as opposed to ours who have been killed. In my opinion, some mother somewhere is losing her mind at the view.

I can only hope I am not the next.:-1

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Thu Sep 10, 2009 8:57 am

God this is embarrassing, you and your thread sitting out here all alone for almost a week now.

Post by **spot** » Thu Sep 10, 2009 12:42 pm

The question was also put in Sunday's News Of The World, a shoddy rag but a well-crafted article.

This is about who we are we win or we invite hell | Fraser Nelson | News Of The World

"So why do we stick at it? Because it's about who we are as a nation: what Britain is for."

I agree with him entirely. If we simply pull out we'll not learn the bitter lesson that we shouldn't have ever gone there in the first place. It's a lesson the West has to fully absorb if this sort of murderous deployment is to be finally abandoned as a way of interacting with the rest of the world.

Yes it's a real war. It's politicized a generation of Afghans who no longer have a say in their own government. It's time it did the same to to young people back home too. How much longer are we going to take it.

As for printing photos of war casualties, that's part of real war too. It's an accurate communication of the reality there to the people who actively cheer them on to fight. Publish and be damned.

mikeinie · Post by **mikeinie** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 2:16 am

To be honest I did not go into the detail on the journalism side of this topic, but I do like the title real war can we take it.

The fact is.. no we can’t

Back in WW1 the catch phrase at the start of the war was ‘We will be home by Christmas’, but years later and millions dead, the worst war in the history of the earth at that time had taken place.

War is hell, and this became particularly evident during the Vietnam war when live color news feeds of the war were being shown on TV in a way that war was never shown before.

War is always fine when it is somewhere else and you don’t have to look at it, and with technology today people almost expect a civilian casualty fee war, and like our other ‘instant’ expectations in life, we also expect out soldiers to be little Rambo’s and go in there, kill the bad guys by the dozens and come home. This is not what happens, it takes time, it takes bodies, and it should not be entered into lightly. And once entered into, you cannot go running home once you see realize that people do die, should have thought of that beforehand.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Fri Sep 11, 2009 6:23 am

And a week later we are rebroadcasting a picture of that poor little girl running down the street naked after a napalm attack.

I just don't think folks get it. Why is it okay to see other folks kids being destroyed and yet disrespectful to show our own?

If you are telling the story, you need to tell the real story. It's like reporting a football game and only reporting your teams offensive moves.

I think putting the picture out there every night was what finally got us out of Vietnam.

I don't want a picture of my son to be the one that is flashed in news stories for the next 50 years when they talk about this war..

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:48 am

flopstock;1240546 wrote: And a week later we are rebroadcasting a picture of that poor little girl running down the street naked after a napalm attack.

I just don't think folks get it. Why is it okay to see other folks kids being destroyed and yet disrespectful to show our own?

If you are telling the story, you need to tell the real story. It's like reporting a football game and only reporting your teams offensive moves.

I think putting the picture out there every night was what finally got us out of Vietnam.

I don't want a picture of my son to be the one that is flashed in news stories for the next 50 years when they talk about this war..

Being cynical not showing coffins being brought back helps diminish the real cost of war-as does keeping quiet about the numbers being wounded and maimed. Not seeing them keeps them hidden from public consciousness. It's often mooted that seeing the coffins and pictures like those of the little girl are what helped turn the american people against the war in vietnam. If you're on power and want war you want to hide anything that might stir up opposition to it. It's when people see their soldiers dying for a war they see as pointless and unjustified that they get irate.

In the UK the public ceremony at their initial return gets shown-it started as a purely spontaneous thing in the town the coffins are driven through. It's a sign of respect for the fallen not glorification of war.

lou lou belle · Post by **lou lou belle** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 5:20 am

I think the problem is the guys on the front line dont really know what they are fighting for. I have lost two friends one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan both serving in the Royal Marines. They had a hero's welcome but lets face it people have already forgotten their names.

Being ex forces i know that you are conditioned to go into war and that is what is expected from you, but its difficult to see just how many are coming back maimed and fatally wounded.

Its very frustrating to know that the guys dont have all the kit they require and that a lot of the vehicles needed are still here in the UK.

However this is war and people will die, its the reason behind the war that is important. If its worth fighting for then we will fight.

I personally am not sure if it is truly a war against terrorism. Especially when you know that we have terrorists living in the UK and seem to be doing very little in dealing with it.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 11:19 am

lou lou belle;1240845 wrote: I think the problem is the guys on the front line dont really know what they are fighting for. I have lost two friends one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan both serving in the Royal Marines. They had a hero's welcome but lets face it people have already forgotten their names.

Being ex forces i know that you are conditioned to go into war and that is what is expected from you, but its difficult to see just how many are coming back maimed and fatally wounded.

Its very frustrating to know that the guys dont have all the kit they require and that a lot of the vehicles needed are still here in the UK.

However this is war and people will die, its the reason behind the war that is important. If its worth fighting for then we will fight.

I personally am not sure if it is truly a war against terrorism. Especially when you know that we have terrorists living in the UK and seem to be doing very little in dealing with it.

Part of the problem is our politicians all got suckered in by Tony Blair-no one wanted to shout rubbish-except Robin Cook- and now they can't bring themselves to admit it was a colossal mistake and we should pull out. Spin becomes it's own justification they all talk in circles and clasp hands to show sincerity and open them to show honesty lying through their teeth like demented marionettes. I despise the lot of them.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 4:38 pm

gmc;1240924 wrote: Part of the problem is our politicians all got suckered in by Tony Blair-no one wanted to shout rubbish-except Robin Cook- and now they can't bring themselves to admit it was a colossal mistake and we should pull out. Spin becomes it's own justification they all talk in circles and clasp hands to show sincerity and open them to show honesty lying through their teeth like demented marionettes. I despise the lot of them. Did the politicians get suckered in or were they part of It? Hans Blix told Blair he needed another three weeks to prove Iraq had no WMD's. It was Ignored and we invaded, with Blair telling the public an Iraqi missile could reach us within 45 minutes. Anyone who thinks we are still there for that reason is deluded.

Nomad · Post by **Nomad** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:43 pm

flopstock;1240546 wrote:

I think putting the picture out there every night was what finally got us out of Vietnam.

I don't want a picture of my son to be the one that is flashed in news stories for the next 50 years when they talk about this war..

Which is it?

Theyre all someones son.

I cant tell if you favor broadcasting the images or not floop.

flopstock · Post by **flopstock** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 8:57 pm

lou lou belle;1240845 wrote: I think the problem is the guys on the front line dont really know what they are fighting for. I have lost two friends one in Iraq and one in Afghanistan both serving in the Royal Marines. They had a hero's welcome but lets face it people have already forgotten their names.

Being ex forces i know that you are conditioned to go into war and that is what is expected from you, but its difficult to see just how many are coming back maimed and fatally wounded.

Its very frustrating to know that the guys dont have all the kit they require and that a lot of the vehicles needed are still here in the UK.

However this is war and people will die, its the reason behind the war that is important. If its worth fighting for then we will fight.

I personally am not sure if it is truly a war against terrorism. Especially when you know that we have terrorists living in the UK and seem to be doing very little in dealing with it.

But does your press show pictures of your wounded and dying? We really haven't over here, it's mostly the bad guys laying dead that we have the stomach to show.... or view. I think the idea is that the family is entitled to its privacy... that's it has given up enough already.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Sat Sep 12, 2009 9:02 pm

flopstock;1241053 wrote: But does your press show pictures of your wounded and dying? We really haven't over here, it's mostly the bad guys laying dead that we have the stomach to show.... or view. I think the idea is that the family is entitled to its privacy... that's it has given up enough already.
No... I've never seen wounded or dying in tabloids of late. We get pics of them and pics of the coffin coming home but not wounded or dying. That's not to say that they don't turn up on forces sites on the web. I agree, the family needs the privacy. I believe there has to be pics... to record history for future generations but to print them in a tabloid newspaper is utterly repulsive and shows no respect.