Quote:
Originally Posted by Willravel
Only you're completely missing my point. Those aren't just ticks, they're people. The cost of the war is people, real people. These aren't just 10 second reports on the news or numbers on a casualty website if you can actually show the casket with the American flag draped over it surrounded by saluting men and women. That helps to translate the truth of the matter to people, not some meaningless statistic. Each of those 4,659 coalition members that have died left behind friends and family, a real life ended. Each of those 1,374 coalition members had dreams and loves and potential that will never happen precisely because of the inability here at home to do what's necessary (be it impeaching a terrorist or electing someone capable of ending BOTH wars).
I'm unwilling to sit idly by and allow further deaths in an unnecessary war. It's not pouring out my beer on Memorial day, it's actively seeking to prevent needless deaths and suffering.
|
"I was driven by an inherent sense that a picture that revealed the true face of war would almost by definition be an anti-war photograph." -- James Nachtwey
Though remember please that this topic was not meant to be directly about the justifiability of the war itself. I did not desire to make this a pro vs anti war thread. This was meant more to explore the topic of journalistic ethics related to war coverage. I realize that the war itself is a heated topic which in itself is a great exploration of human thoughts, behaviors and emotions and it is tough to avoid in a thread such as this.
I can agree however that those figures that you have listed have been greatly influenced my thoughts on the media, how they have been handled in such an impersonal manner. I was absolutely disgusted to see the "ticks" or figures on the screen marking the death toll. Why? It is not so much in the knowledge of the figures which I believe should be very public, it is in how it was done. I would prefer in death to be memorialized by my name and not death #4,659, wouldn't you?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spiritsoar
Can't it be both ways? I mean I honor and respect my fallen my fallen brothers, and want the public to honor and respect them as well. On the other hand, the public should see the cost of this war, to make an honest appraisal of what this war is costing us, and whether it should continue. Despite my curiosity about the truth of why the war began, it's really just that, a desire to know. The true fact of the matter is that we are at war, it is affecting our us, we're still dying (46 US deaths that I know of in Afghanistan in August). As someone who will most likely be going back to combat within a year, again, I would like to know that I'm doing what the American people want. But they can't know what they agree with without knowing what's going on. That, in my opinion, is another important part of media coverage.
So, like I said, I see both sides. I want my fallen comrades honored for what they've sacrificed. And I want the American people to be able to make an honest appraisal of what's going on. But like I've said before, and maybe I'm just bitter, but I really don't think the majority of people pay attention or care anymore, as long as it doesn't affect them.
|
Yes, I believe it can be both ways. I think there is a healthy way to express mortality. A photo of a soldier at his marriage, a photo with his child or even a boot camp photo.