|
My take on the cartoon is: Someone (in this case, Rumsfield) is belittling the wounded soldier's fresh injuries. Furthermore, it is making light of the entire situation by having Rummy make a witty and weak comment in regards to someone that has literally sacrificed life and limb to serve his country.
The soldier is being disrepected by Rummy, but the cartoon is disrespecting everyone involved IMO. The cartoon seems inappropriate to me. Generally, I am not a fan of using injured troops as a means for political satire, jokes, and comic strips, even if they are intended to be portrayed in a good light; which I still don't think they are in this case.
The cartoon pisses me off primarily because Rummy is belittling the injured soldier, but it also pisses me off because a recently injured soldier is the means through which a cartoonist is trying to send his message. There may be nothing wrong with that, but it bothers me. I guess I am not big on seeing people that sacrifice so much only being represented when they are in bandages and disabled.
I will admit I may be wrong about the letter, and that logic would dictate the writers are writing more for the defense of Rumsfield, than the soldier portrayed, but I also have trouble accepting the fact that they are heartless bastards that take no issue with their soldiers being featured/represnted in cartoons in such a injured condition.
__________________
Desperation is no excuse for lowering one's standards.
|