It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by StevenDye
Well then why does this man get any better, there is no legal reason anyone can stop the papers publishing the pictures. (Is there??)
Originally posted by StevenDye
If you think its wrong to see our guys dieing, then we shouldn't be there....if you can't look at a picture of the man dieing, he shouldn't have been there. I saw that footage, and it digusted me because I don't think that man needed to die.
Originally posted by Arrowmancer
Originally posted by oozyism
reply to post by deepred
Question, what about the Afghans and Iraqis. I'm assuming the Western population don't give a damn about them compared to their own people and that is a shame.
And thus, Slayer69's observation is proven.
Originally posted by deepred
After reading this article I started to think about how sanitized and whitewashed the coverage of war by the media has become.
I remember as a young child the adults watching the evening news in horror as pictures of young American soldiers with legs and arms missing or babyfaced teenage soldiers with their intestines spilled on the ground were part of the coverage of the Vietnam war.
While the images of war are disturbing I think it helps to portray the reallity of war and these graphic images were credited with helping to end the war in Vietnam.
The sanitized coverage we get today makes it easier to eat dinner while watching the evening news but, I think it also makes it easier to forget that young men and women are being killed, disfigured, disabled and dismembered in horribly brutal fashon.
What do you think, is this sanitized news coverage a positive or a negitive?
Do you believe Americans might be more opposed to our current wars if the media were to show the true graphic nature of what is happening to our yong men and woman?
Originally posted by Daemos
While I am in support of transparency of war and its ugly face that few of us ever see, this utter disregard for the wishes of the deceased soldier's family is outright ridiculous. The family made it explicitly clear that they did not wish for their loved one's tragic photo to not be used by the press, and instead of having any sense of decency, they decided to use the image for the effect that they desired, despite the family begging otherwise.
The idea that they only published the picture, because they "felt that the picture told a story that people needed to see and be aware of," is a poor excuse for their actions, and in my opinion, is just a justification for doing whatever the hell they want without any regard for what is right.
Originally posted by internos
The point in my opinion is that the family of that man could suffer, it's not nice to attend the agony of one of your relatives, but definately this type of pictures should be spreaded EVERY DAY, and for EVERY victim, so people have some chance to realize what war means
Originally posted by SideWynder
reply to post by flice
ok, so you and I and most people on this thread do agree that WAR is WRONG.... that being said....how are "enlightened people" like us going to change "human nature"????
[edit on 7-9-2009 by SideWynder]