posted on Nov, 19 2002 @ 02:12 PM
Well, true that the ability for immediate digital upload ( or anyplace to load it to) was not a thought outside of the Kodak labs back during Bush the
1st's war; but many old photos get up via scanning these days. I would think they'd be out there.
We're now at the point where Barbie playsets include digital cameras, the tech is so ubiquitous, so where are the photos of the dead from the Afghan
campaign? Same place as the Desert Storm ones, I suppose.
I don't think anyone surmised that there was no deaths from Desert Storm, to the contrary, I remember it sometimes being the equivalent of holding up
a buck rack for all to see, the we went-we-saw-we triumphed show. But I remember those were from briefings and those were numbers, not photos. I was
still more focused on my active duty brother who was finishing up his TDY tour of the Banana Republics in support of the War on Drugs marketing
campaign, and how I was pissed that my godfather voucher could be called in over nothing more than political misdirection.
But William, I've been to your site ( real nice stuff) and can postulate you to be a Graphic Artist by trade or hobby; you more than most should
understand the veracity of " A Picture tells a Thousand Words", and as it relates to the shaping of opinion. The opinion drives policy, policy
drives actions, and you know.
That's my point. I thought folks would connect the dots from the article as to the relevancy of today and how so many arguments on these boards about
the pros & cons of going to war are carried out by people in the 'pro' not visualizing or actually seeing bodies blown asunder, so I thought no
fleshing out was necessary. I will next time.