Gruesome

Tough question, but aren't soldiers better prepared to face these hostile conditions than a civilian? Not saying that a soldier's death is any less than another, but it just seems more tragic when it involves someone outside of having any experience defending themselves.
Still, I take your point. Though If any soldier's corpse were carried through the street, I warrant the reaction would still be the same. I believe we were reacting to the terrible act of dragging the bodies moreso than who was killed. Sorry if it offended you in any way.

Take care all.

"I think they will embrace us as liberators" -Dick Cheney

this whole thing reminds me of things like when you have two friends who are at odds and you try to step in and reconcile them. often you just end up getting stuck in the mess yourself and everyone is worse off.

Yes, soldiers are trained to defend themselves against such an attack, while civillians are typically not. It does not make it any more or less gruesome whether it is a soldier or a civillian, but it is certainly more shocking when civillians are the target of this brutality.

I think that these news stations and websites should remove these pictures. These people obviously want attention from this atrocity, so I don't think they should be given any. As long as they continue to show these awful images, they are only giving passive support to the animals that did this.

It goes both ways, because without the photos, people will probably continue to be ignorant to the issue. Pictures speak a thousand words, or so it says, and hopefully these thousand words equals stability and peace soon. I think pictures are a double-edged sword, yes they give exposure to those who did this, but also, they help to really drive home the point of how terrible it was. We are very much a visual society.

Take care all.

In World War I, after the Battle of the Somme, the bloodiest battle of the war (and possibly of the 20th Century), a British photographer decided to take pictures of the aftermath in an attempt to boil Britain's blood and strengthen her resolve to keep fighting against Germany. He took pictures of everything - trenches that had been turned into mass graves, corpses that were being devoured by rats, bodies that had been mutilated beyond any recognition. The result was opposite what he intended. Many British, upon seeing their sons, fathers, and husbands slain and face-down in the mud, began to riot, and popular support for the war began to dwindle.

It wouldn't be equally as horrific if the dead were soldiers? Soldiers or civilians, it should never be acceptable to act in such a way. --Talus

The killings themselves are what I was referring to. Mutilating dead bodies is horrific no matter who the people were, yes. If you kill a soldier, you could at least make some weak argument of self-defense. At least soldiers know they might die, and volunteer to join the military knowing and accepting the possibility. Civilians should expect to feel safe. They shouldn't be murdered in the streets for no reason.

But yeah, even if in this case it was soldiers killed, the soldiers in Iraq are HELPING the Iraqis. Sometimes it seems like people over there don't know anything but to mindlessly kill everyone who isn't in their immediate social group.

this whole thing reminds me of things like when you have two friends who are at odds and you try to step in and reconcile them. --eestlinc

Reminds me more of a dog biting a vet when the vet is trying to save its life.

I believe, the reason that failed was because the photographer was using the pictures for the wrong reasons. In my opinion, photographs should be used to inform, not rally support.

Would 9/11 support have been as high without photos? Tough to call, but more or less, I think those photos were taken, not to stir emotions, but to capture events so that they could be grasped by anyone who wasn't there.

Take care all.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Dr Unne
The killings themselves are what I was referring to. Mutilating dead bodies is horrific no matter who the people were, yes. If you kill a soldier, you could at least make some weak argument of self-defense. At least soldiers know they might die, and volunteer to join the military knowing and accepting the possibility. Civilians should expect to feel safe. They shouldn't be murdered in the streets for no reason.

---

I see, I was connecting everything with the draggings. I agree, we prepare for the worst and can atleast defend ourselves whereas the contractors couldn't.

Does anyone know what they were doing in Iraq? Were they helping to rebuild something?

Take care all.

"In Iraq, the company was hired by the Pentagon to provide security for convoys that delivered food in the Fallujah area, the company statement said."

I say send Saddam back to these animals. Let him run them feet-first through a plastic shredder, just like old times.

it should be noted that the jobs these contractors were doing are jobs formerly done by military personnel. The privatization of the US military is going to result in civilian casualities.

Don't know about that, in my humble opinion. There are many people in Iraq that want our help, need it, and completely disagree with what has transpired since Saddam was captured. Would we just strand them as well? If not, how do we pick out who to leave and take? It gets very complicated..

Take care all.

EDIT:

"In Iraq, the company was hired by the Pentagon to provide security for convoys that delivered food in the Fallujah area, the company statement said."

Heh, probably should have read the article more than once before posting. I completely missed that part.

[q=Dr Unne]it's hard to think that the people in Iraq even deserve to be saved from their former dicator. Sometimes it's hard to believe the depths of human ignorance.[/q]Clearly, the entire population's not to blame for the actions of extremists. It's pretty close to racism to say that the whole country's full of bloodthirsty murderers just because people like that are active there.

What west should do is to hunt down the guilty, but contine doing everything possible to help the innocent. A horrific crime like that can't go unpunished, but it won't help anyone to treat every Iraqi like a terrorist.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by eestlinc
it should be noted that the jobs these contractors were doing are jobs formerly done by military personnel. The privatization of the US military is going to result in civilian casualities.

---

Yes, but they are civillian contractors who agreed to take the job despite the inherent risk involved. We pay these people well for a reason. Of course, it doesn't make it any better when some ignorant animals butcher their bodies.