Military Blocks Photos Of US Dead

[bcp (Premo)]

Originally Posted by annoyance

But you're not disgusted by the way W has exploited the military? If someone disagrees with you myopic view of the world, they're a basement dwelling #######?

.

without us being privilaged to the security information that Bush is, as you obviously are, how can anyone here make an informed decision that Bush has exploited the military?

seems to me thats what the military is supposed to be doing. I knew it when I went in, I can only assume that others knew it when they went in.

[annoyance]

Originally Posted by dustin

how could photos of the "dangers of war" be reported without bias?

Easily. Show the pics and describe what happened and let the viewer decide whether the war is worth it or not. Why does this strike a chord of fear into many, to the point that they go from discussion to insult in mere seconds?

[dustin]

Originally Posted by annoyance

Easily. Show the pics and describe what happened and let the viewer decide whether the war is worth it or not. Why does this strike a chord of fear into many, to the point that they go from discussion to insult in mere seconds?

Bias would be created by whatever means the photos were shown.

It's impossible to do without bias.

[bcp (Premo)]

Originally Posted by annoyance

Easily. Show the pics and describe what happened and let the viewer decide whether the war is worth it or not. Why does this strike a chord of fear into many, to the point that they go from discussion to insult in mere seconds?

an individual picture can not tell you if the war was worth it or not. only the end product.

with your reasoning, the civil war was not worth the effort.

[annoyance]

Originally Posted by bcp

an individual picture can not tell you if the war was worth it or not. only the end product.

One image, no. Consistently honest and forthright pics and reports, from all angles and points of view (not just those that support the administration), yes.

[dustin]

Originally Posted by annoyance

One image, no. Consistently honest and forthright pics and reports, from all angles and points of view (not just those that support the administration), yes.

I can't believe that.

There has never been such a thing, and never will be, as reporting that is unbiased.

[annoyance]

Originally Posted by dustin

I can't believe that.

There has never been such a thing, and never will be, as reporting that is unbiased.

Therefore, nothing should be reported?

[dustin]

Originally Posted by annoyance

Therefore, nothing should be reported?

Nothing should be reported that is sensitive and personal in nature which could not be reported without bias.

[annoyance]

Originally Posted by dustin

Nothing should be reported that is sensitive and personal in nature which could not be reported without bias.

You could make the case that any- and everything is sensitive and personal. At what point does our need to know what's being done overseas, in our name as Americans, carry more gravity than shielding next of kin from something they should have known may happen.

[dustin]

Originally Posted by annoyance

You could make the case that any- and everything is sensitive and personal. At what point does our need to know what's being done overseas, in our name as Americans, carry more gravity than shielding next of kin from something they should have known may happen.

You are correct. That case could be made on many things.

As for this instance, and as a compromise between my beliefs and socities "need to know", no photos of our dead military should be publicly published without consent of parents/family and the respective command's public affairs officer due, simply to, respect for the family AND security concerns. Wounded military photos should not be publicly published without consent of servicemember. This happens to be nearly the same as the current law as per the previous post with the link of the srticle.