The AP recently published a picture of a fresh faced 21 yo Lance Corporal that was gravely injured by an RPG in a firefight despite wishes of his family and the Pentagon.
Should more of these images be published? Should we sanitize the war, or should we see more images? Didn't we have this debate during Vietnam and didn't we see these same images?
With respect and a heartfelt thanks I submit this post. :(
So I'm clear, are you asking for the opinion of servicemen and servicewomen or asking the opinion of anyone with an opinion on the subject?
Chris L
Anyone.
I just know that those that serve give so much. That sounds trite, but it is true. I just do not want to offend.
I personally don't have a problem with it being published. That said, I'd expect news/media outlets to use the same discretion they would with any such images. If they wouldn't publish gory shots of murder victims, or the aftermath of a bad car accident, I don't see how this particular image would get a pass.
(Edit)
To clarify my first sentence, I think that if it is available anywhere, it should be in an online format with a click-through notice that warns that it's a graphic depiction of war, etc. That sort of thing.
I agree on the sacrifices that servicemen and servicewomen give and I'm also grateful to them.
Up until recently I would have said that it would be highly unlikely for graphic war images to become more prevalent in the media because of the high probability that the images would foster an outrage and fervor among the public against our involvement in war.
An analogy of much lessor import would be the reason you don't see graphic images of animal slaughter and processing. Personally that wouldn't stop me from eating meat, but then again I still butcher poultry from time to time and have dressed game that I've killed. Still, the public's meat consumption would undoubtedly decline if people saw slaughter, gutting, etc.
That was then.....I argue that we are well into a "culture of death" now. When I was a kid, Atari and Coleco had just come out; pong and space invaders were played. The graphic violence of games now is incomparable. Violence in movies and TV is as well. I believe the culture is now unfortunately receptive enough to and titillated enough by violence and death that if war images were presented in such a way, the public could actually find them interesting rather than abhorrent furthering our spiral downward. Sad but true.
How far off are we from having a War channel? Not an historical channel about war, but a real time full on 24/7 televised war channel. Killing right onscreen and unedited. A network could pay the government for the rights to film and operate the channel. That would be the perfect desensitization and recruitment tool. It would not surprise me if some such thing will happen in my lifetime. I'd have to be tied to a chair to watch such a thing, but it wouldn't surprise me. Almost nothing does anymore.
Chris L
I agree, however, I find the images sad and they do outrage me.
If you watch the Leher Newshour on PBS at the end of the broadcast they sometimes show portrait photos of servicemen and women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan. They give their name, age and rank and branch of service.
I always view it with reverence, respect and sorrow that we are repeating the same mistake we made forty years ago. If there was a draft we'd have never gone to Iraq and might have 'won' in Afghanistan had we used the resources there instead of pulling them out when we did. One way or another if there was a draft we would be out of there now.
OK I am going to open my big fat trap here...
Unfortunately the mainstream media is bias, let's face it...
Showing US servicemen/women dead/wounded is OK, showing them doing bad things OK etc: etc: etc:
Showing the Islamic terrorists/religion crashing planes into the Twin Towers is BAD, Executing Americans is BAD, Torturing Americans is Bad, Beheading Americans is Bad.... See a pattern here????
Promoting that America is bad = OK
Showing America as Good = Bad
To all US Military Personnel "Thank You for your service".....
On the one hand I think the general public should be well aware of what war is, to qoute Bobby Lee, "It is a good thing war is so horrible lest we grow too fond of it.". On the other hand, without the familys consent the best that can be said is they are "selling papers" at that kids and his familys expense. I say shame on them!
Edit:2nd Infantry Div 77-79/101st ABN 79-80/1st ID 80-82/25th ID 82-84
I feel we should not sanitize war. Any war. Why on earth would you clean it up? War is vile, disgusting, filthy and horrendous. The American people shouldn't be shielded from that. To read that some of our kids have been wounded or died is sad. To actually see it, to me anyway, drives the war home in a stronger way. I think people need this.
Of course there is the argument that too much graphic coverage can desensitize people. I'm sure this is true to an extent. But people need to know the ugliness of war. Not just the feel good stories.
A friend sent me a video of an Iraqi kneeling with an RPG aimed who is killed. My son saw it and was bothered by the image. Good. He has been thinking about going into the service and in my mind he has a romanticized image of it. He said that image shouldn't be "out there". My answer was not much of one, but I said, "why not? That's what war is".
My dad is a Korean vet. We were talking once about this and he said that there is nothing sanitary or romantic about being stuck in a foxhole for four days and sh****ng your pants because you can't get out or you'll be killed.
I'm not opposed to war. Sometimes it's needed. Just don't sugar coat it to make me feel better.
Kevin