digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at thinkprogress.org

"Tell me the last time you saw the body of a dead..soldier"

thinkprogress.org — CBS’s Lara Logan: ‘Tell me the last time you saw the body of a dead American soldier.’ Appearing on the Daily Show last night, CBS’s Chief Foreign Correspondent Lara Logan crticized the lack of media attention to the Iraq war. She said she felt responsible for the fact that “no one really understands” what is happening in Iraq.

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • ironeus, on 08/01/2008, -91/+24Dealing with a soldier's death on a global level is a very sensitive issue. Say what you will about mass media but in death they must exercise respect. Also, Iraqi militants would use this type of American footage as propoganda to glorify their cause.
    • ileen4justice, on 06/18/2008, -16/+80With all due respect my friend, THIS IS B.S.!! If you haven't checked lately, Iraq, post-Blackwater and Haliburton, has become a terrorist making machine. They don't need any f'in pictures -- THEY SEE UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL. Free speech demands that we bear witness to the horrors we are wreaking on the earth!!! Wake up and smell the white phosphorous illegal bombs and depleted uranium we dropped on the Iraqis (wait until you see those pictures!!) that are now causing deformed babies and cancer not only for the innocent Iraqis but for the U.S. soldiers who served there -- is that too sensitive an issue????
      • ironeus, on 08/01/2008, -20/+9We do see it up close and personal. Unlike past wars there are endless RSS feeds, blogs, mainstream and alt-media sources as displayed by your very own submission. Nobody is restricting your free speech.

        I'm completely for bringing all U.S. troops home and focusing on securing our borders and domestic issues 1st and foreign policy 2nd. Neither Democrats nor Republicans are pro-war, believe me, only extreme radical militants enjoy this barbaric act. I disagree that showing graphic images of soldiers' death will expedite an end to this conflict. Once the Iraqi army can stand on its own feet, and maintain its borders and national security American and ally soldiers will be happy to return home.
        • digitalhair, on 06/18/2008, -4/+29this is all dogma. anybody with a practical sense of reality would not defend the lack of hard-hitting, up-close-and-personal, and visually-objective news coverage by assuming that any call for increased accountability would result in the publication of exploitative and graphic images that dishonored the lives of the soldiers depicted.

          WE CAN'T EVEN HAVE PHOTOS OF THEIR CASKETS PUBLISHED without some CHIMP declaring that they were offended by the lack of "respect" shown by the media, when it really has more to do with being offended that they reminded you that those boys died defending your daily apathy!!!

          How, sir, does your position make sense if the meaningless phrase "I'm completely for bringing all U.S. troops home" is so uninspired that it simply perpetuates the continued acceptance for any lack of significant action toward that goal?

          The whole point is that your continued lack of exposure to the harsh reality of this war has facilitated your self-absorbed notion that you're meaningless "support" is righteous and patriotic when, in fact, it's actually an empty gesture that acts to facilitate more unnecessary death and a subsequent increase in the lack of the necessary news coverage of it - news coverage moving enough to motivate self-affirming zombies like yourself to actually DO something supportive instead of - if you'll allow me to paraphrase Mahatma Ghandi - "be[-ing] the [*****] that you wish to see in the world."





        • chicofaraby, on 06/18/2008, -2/+15"Neither Democrats nor Republicans are pro-war"

          How do you square a statement like this with reality?
        • ileen4justice, on 06/18/2008, -8/+7He can't, reality is a liberal pinko thing. More to the point, the neocon fascist twisted rancid freaks are pro-DEATH AND DESTRUCTION. The Republicans, just to name a few, opposed benefits for the veterans, giving detainees the right to simply know the charges against them, supported the real reason we went to war -- $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ -- for Blackwater and company. You can take that to the bank!!!!
        • tidu, on 06/19/2008, -0/+13actually, both parties are pro-war if it's in their best interest: money and power.
        • orenshk, on 06/19/2008, -9/+3I must agree with shlishkes. Can you imagine seeing your son's mangled remains on national television? I wouldn't wish that on anyone. And it gets worse -
          In Feburary of 1997 two Israeli Sikorski helicopters carrying troops collided mid-flight. The media reacted quickly, and the area wasn't properly closed off at first. This resulted in a shot of one of the deceased soldiers' kitbag, bearing his name on it. This is how the soldier's mother found out he was dead, because it aired before authorities had time to contact her.

          Personally, I believe that the horrors of war are far worse then images of dead and mutilated soldiers can ever imply. They come in the form of stories and accounts of friends, wifes, husbands, children, parents and siblings. With all respect, I think pictures serve as a shock strategy for capturing the attention of an ADD audience.
        • crazydiode, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6No Dude. It's called "hiding from reality"
        • luciferin, on 06/19/2008, -0/+11If I ever, EVER, haul my ass across this ***** planet and hold a gun to another human being's skull so that you can drink your morning coffee and read the newspaper then you better show me the god damn respect I deserve by looking at the pictures of my maimed body lying on the ground and covered in blood published on the first page. Because I would have had to go through every second of that pain for you.
          The LEAST you can do for those that die for you is to show them the respect of seeing and acknowledging their sacrifice.

          So you either look at the ***** blood running down my face, or down my son's face, or down my god damned father's face. Or else they died in vain.
        • MrWhite7, on 06/19/2008, -8/+1They show photos of dead soldiers all the time.
      • Zetsubou, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRIa0_ah8sI
    • familynight, on 06/18/2008, -3/+36How is it disrespectful to show a picture of someone's dead body? Journalists aren't going to make fun of the corpses of soldiers. Showing the body of a dead soldier could help make people more aware of the price of war. Right now, we are showing disrespect to our soldiers by ignoring them. I agree that the media should show soldiers respect but ignoring death is not any kind of respect.

      Also, anti-American forces in Iraq have access to more than enough pictures of dead American soldiers, if that's what they want. From what I've seen and I'm not criticizing here, Al Jazeera doesn't hold back on the images of death. The idea that we shouldn't publish images of dead American soldiers because anti-American forces might use them is ludicrous. Graphic images of war published by the media were a major factor in turning public opinion away from the Vietnam War. The fact that the media has been so self-censored and confrontation averse with the current Iraq War is probably a pretty big part of why more Americans aren't demanding that the troops be sent home.
      • drinking12many, on 06/19/2008, -10/+6ewhy must people see the dead to know they are dying. Would you as a parent want to see your dead child being used on tv to push the media or some other agenda.
        • afpunk, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6Remember that by not showing it, they're pushing an agenda as well.
        • MrWhite7, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3showing it pushes an agenda too...
        • ExitMoose, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3not showing it also pushes an agenda...
        • humptyz, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1And then...
      • poam27, on 06/20/2008, -0/+1Over 50,000 American military members died in Vietnam; exponentially more than have perished in Iraq. Every death is a tragedy, but maintain some perspective. As for displaying the bodies, that's a very private matter for the deceased. At least spare the dead the indignity of having their corpse splashed across the TV screen. These guys and gals selflessly volunteered to defend freedom, the last thing they need is to be used as a propaganda tool. Do you really need to see the body or does the verbal report of death not suffice? I never saw my grandmother when she passed away, but I believe that she's dead. I didn't need the morgue to trot out her body to convince me.
    • pintomp3, on 06/19/2008, -5/+31so the proper way to show respect for a soldiers death is to ignore it and pretend it doesn't happen?
      • orenshk, on 06/19/2008, -8/+6No, it's to report it. And keep reporting it. Showing the dead body is just sensationalism. And it's unnecessary. Are you telling me that you can't fathom people dying with out actually seeing their bodies? I can't believe your imagination is that limited.
        • ExitMoose, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4It's not his imagination that we're talking about; it's the imagination of the average American. The fact is that images are much more powerful than words or statistics. By censoring out images of dead soldiers, you're sterilizing the story. These are images that average people need to see to be compelled to seriously consider the enterprise we find ourselves in.
        • iamchewy, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0Wait, so showing reality is now considered sensationalism?
      • siszam, on 06/19/2008, -1/+10The people who ignore it are the people who cheer the war on like it's a game. Republicans need to see the people they are responsible for killing. They use propaganda to glorify their cause and treat our troops like they are disposable and not real sons and daughters. Americans need to see bodies. It's disrespectful to our troops for their deaths to be minimized and hidden. As the parent of a Marine I can tell you, if my son died I would want his picture plastered everywhere so his murderers couldn't pretend that war is some wonderful, patriotic thing that inspires picnics and bumper stickers. If those people won't send their precious snowflakes to fight their damned war then the very least they deserve is a daily reminder of all the casualties. Not numbers but real faces.
      • MrWhite7, on 06/19/2008, -6/+1Sounds like someone can't come to grips with choices made by his own child.
    • CryRightardCry, on 06/20/2008, -1/+1Hey, that is a great load of crap you've got there.
      Did you get that from Cheney?
      Maybe you don't know this, but he's a lying sack of *****.
      I can't believe you idiots say things like that with a straight face.
  • netfreehost, on 06/18/2008, -15/+53They hide things and only concerned about dead American soldier what about others injured in war ?
    • Simonft, on 06/18/2008, -6/+27They do show picture of Iraqi civilians, but the sad truth is Americans care much more about the deaths of their on people than the deaths of people in a far off country.
      • ChileanGoD, on 06/19/2008, -8/+9Shouldn't we care of any human death equally? It should not be a death importance popularity contest.
        • ChileanGoD, on 06/19/2008, -15/+11I consider humanity part of my family.
        • RiverBelow, on 06/19/2008, -1/+12OK well my aunt recently died, would you like to come to Canada and attend her funeral?
        • ChileanGoD, on 06/19/2008, -8/+6Joke all you want. Keep trying to make joke out of a valid point while you ignore the one that I'm trying to make.
        • luet, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Obamaisanagger: and that's the reason humanity is doomed to repeat its own mistakes over and over. monkeysphere amirite? Closer we get to isolationism and caring for certain people over other people, the closer we are to abandoning communication completely and becoming defunct.

          also I hope your name is actually a joke
        • WNW3, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5We actually are not physically capable of caring for every human to the same degree. Ever hear of the Monkeysphere? http://www.cracked.com/article_14990_what-monkeysp ...

          And if we did care for everyone equally it would really suck, we're be crying all the time.
        • userperson, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5"Shouldn't we care of any human death equally?"
          Not quite sure what you mean.
          Obviously if people close to me were killed I would care more, than some random person I don't know.
          For most people this means Soldiers.
          Though I take a contrary view, as soldiers are blindly implementing violence to no good 'cause. Generally I'd rather those complicit in such violence die, than innocent civilians.
          Ideally, I'd rather neither die, but none of that is up to me.
        • ChileanGoD, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4As in every human as an equal right to live and have access to happyness. Of course we care about our family, friends.. etc. But, just because we personally care about a number of individuals that are more or less close to us that we should not care for anyone else.
    • warsongs7, on 06/19/2008, -3/+10All good and true. But even if some innocent civilian in Iraq dies and they are of no relation to you whatsoever except for the link of humanity, we are still responsible for thinking about the emotional impact of their deaths on their loved ones. Especially when those deaths are caused by an irresponsible war started on false claims.
      • userperson, on 06/19/2008, -3/+4... because thinking about this does a great deal of good.
        I am not responsible. I did not vote anyone into office to do this. I do not support them taking peoples' money for this.
        • byronm, on 06/19/2008, -2/+3If you didn't stop them you're culpable to their actions.
        • userperson, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1@byronm
          If anyone tried to physically stop them, they'd be shot.
          Otherwise any such action will be ignored.
          I am not culpable for that which I did not initiate, and that which I cannot control.
    • Myonosken, on 06/19/2008, -3/+2They don't count because they aren't the superior American race.


      Apparently.
  • girwen, on 06/18/2008, -22/+63“no one really understands” what is happening in Iraq. That is not a correct statement. The media war cheerleaders from FOX (undisputed champion cheerleader) all the way down to the WP and NYT (last two run hot and cold) try to limit coverage of anything that the defense industrial complex http://tinyurl.com/97d9d would get upset about.
    • Simonft, on 06/18/2008, -1/+20Im always scared as to where tinyurls lead to.
      • mikesbaker, on 06/19/2008, -0/+15and well you should be
      • DiggMasterJ, on 06/19/2008, -0/+10It's like a stranger saying: "take my hand, I'll show you something nice".


        And then you do.
    • mikesbaker, on 06/19/2008, -0/+9http://preview.tinyurl.com/97d9d
      "In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist. We must never let the weight of this combination endanger our liberties or democratic processes. We should take nothing for granted. Only an alert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the proper meshing of the huge industrial and military machinery of defense with our peaceful methods and goals, so that security and liberty may prosper together."
  • zfolwick, on 06/18/2008, -24/+205We feel lost and forgotten because we're defending people who are unwilling to defend themselves. Not Iraqis or Afghanis, AMERICANS! I'm ashamed that there's no public outrage. It's like people don't care. People don't even KNOW what their rights are. This administration should've been impeached a half-decade ago, but no-- 51% of the people RE-ELECTED THE GUY!

    No excuse, republicans. No excuse liberals. Everybody in America should feel ashamed because of their lack of action. Instead, they pussyfoot around whining, "what can *I* do, I'm just one small person!". This is not the home of the brave with words like that.
    • whatthefu, on 06/19/2008, -18/+10True. I think we should all take action by going on digg and digging up Obama articles or Ron Paul articles mindlessly. That's how you carry out a revolution!
    • kanvas, on 06/19/2008, -1/+17What do you suggest?
      • inhaler, on 06/19/2008, -6/+26Think for yourself.
      • akula89, on 06/19/2008, -1/+18get involved, get informed, inform others. protest. Write your congressmen, get involved in politics at a local level. donate money to worthy causes.
        • Insolent, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Protests are less effective than they used to be and haven't resulted in anything that I have seen so far (there have been especially large ones organized in the last several years). Writing congresspeople is worthless because they're on the same team and they've already shown themselves to be amoral and unaccountable. Donating money has yet to fix corruption in the government from what I can tell and companies like mediamatters are nice but simply get smeared and anyone who thinks for themselves doesn't need mediamatters to tell them the mainstream media is not working in the public interest. Informing others is either starting a fight or preaching to the choir. All seemingly nice but feckless ideas.

          1. Make lots of money and power and maintain your idealistic ways.
          2. Find others who have done the same.
          3. Form an organized group to expose corruption and hold people accountable.

          Only problem is, the people who want power the most (and thus will get the most power) care least about the consequences and will probably crush any legitimate attempts at organization and revolution. On top of that, they're already very well organized and in control. Even if you ignore the number of suspicious secret societies that are well-known and not scrutinized, there is still the Republican party as an example of a powerful corrupted entity, there is the Project for the New American Century, etc.

          The other problem is that to actually cost-effectively fight the sort of corruption that is prevalent in just about every major government (and worse in the war-torn and third-world countries such as in Africa or South America), it may be necessary to use the same kind of power-seizing, public-manipulating tactics that have worked for centuries and will continue to work for as long as these institutions exist.
        • fyrescraps, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0In other words Annie get your gun
        • h3lx, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4I saw a great T-shirt the other day, it had a guy with a rifle and the tagline read "When all else fails, Vote from the rooftops".
        • Emmo213, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Protests aren't necessarily the best way. Of the soldiers I know, they all get really upset when they see people protesting the war because they take it as a personal offense to their decision to serve in a military force.

          I also agree that yes, we should be able to see the dead soldiers, if only because we should be reminded what this war is really costing us. While the quote below is from a different war and a different time, it can still be valid today.



          "The dead of the battle-field come up to us very rarely, even in dreams," wrote a reporter for The New York Times.
          "We see the list in the morning paper at breakfast, but dismiss its recollection with the coffee. There is a confused mass of names, but they are all strangers; we forget the horrible significance that dwells amid the jumble of type...We recognize the battle-field as a reality, but it stands as a remote one. It is like a funeral next door. It attracts your attention, but it does not enlist your sympathy. But it is very different when the hearse stops at your front door and the corpse is carried over your own threshold...Mr. Brady has done something to bring to us the terrible reality and earnestness of the War. If he has not brought bodies and laid them in our door-yards and along [our] streets, he has done something very like it."
      • smpx, on 06/19/2008, -1/+8The best course of action is obviously that we all blame each other for not taking action.

        (gets ready to be dugg down)
        • geoff1210, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4dude, wait, I thought YOU were going to take action... oh.
    • drinking12many, on 06/19/2008, -8/+6You do realize iraqis are defending themselves somewhat now. It takes time to build a nation. Read about the marshall plan in WWII and see how screwed up europe was for several years after the war
    • jaksu, on 06/19/2008, -5/+3Rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble rabble
    • drunkinbda, on 06/19/2008, -2/+2So what have YOU done?
    • nimbleprune, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Im not whining...I actually like GW
  • ileen4justice, on 06/18/2008, -7/+60As former Vice President Wallace stated:

    "American fascism will not be really dangerous"...."until there is a purposeful coalition among the cartelists, the deliberate poisoners of public information..."
    • xtinamo, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1 "When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross."
      - Sinclair Lewis
  • digitalhair, on 06/18/2008, -8/+156the war profiteers must have learned their lesson back when the birth of TV journalism brought our boys home from Vietnam...

    It infuriates me to hear them eulogizing the life of Tim Russert in a one hour special then, immediately after their looping coverage of the debate about whether we should loosen restrictions on off-shore oil drilling (while we have the highest oil reserves we've ever had), we hear them coldly report that the number of U.S. soldiers that have been killed in Iraq has climbed by 5 people to 4,150+ without showing us ONE image of a soldier's face to be able to comprehend the human loss of life.

    people might dismiss my statement about Russert as insensitive, but they should really think about the context of the situation as it relates to their own self-preservation as citizens and not "Washington insiders."

    I think it's rather contemptuous for TV journalists to focus airtime on their personal grief due to the loss of their close friend while they willfully go to work everyday and fail to object to suppression of coverage of the loss of OUR close friends...

    it's a twisted scenario that escapes recognition in such a way that we should be profoundly questioning our complacency that, in reality, is really complicity.
    • dwright99, on 06/19/2008, -1/+15Well said.
    • mrraven200, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7Very true it was the constant talk of body bags on the evening news that helped bring U.S. war crimes in VIetnam to an end
    • BlacklabelSAR, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6Huge respect.
    • verbose, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7This is an excellent and lucid point, and one of the reasons I come to Digg on a daily basis.
    • superkendall, on 06/19/2008, -5/+4Reserves do not mean squat to actual production use of petroleum. Why does it make more sense to continue to send vast sums out of country for a resource we have right here? No other country on earth is that stupid, Brazil for example just found another 33 BILLION barrels of oil of their coast.

      And if you worry about having cheaper oil leading to waste, remember that hybrid sales were already hot BEFORE gas prices spiked. Having more options is always god regardless of what you do with them!
    • geoff1210, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4how about them looping the video of the man being hit by the car over and over, and discussing how no one would help. Then they show a few soldiers names to signify they died, no pictures of any kind.

      While I'm commenting, I feel like this nation's government is being hit by a car, and most everyone is all sorta watching it writhe in pain instead of doing something.
      • bluekross, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1I'm sure there are hundreds of people that get hit by cars everyday. Just because it happens overseas or because it happened in a country at war, it doesn't mean that it's any different than what goes on here daily.
    • joot2112, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Good point and well expressed. You should send this message to the closest major newspaper.
  • ileen4justice, on 06/18/2008, -10/+19Wow!! Very eloquent -- you said what I was thinking....
  • SheilaNoya, on 06/18/2008, -8/+75The war in Iraq has been sanitized so all we ever see is the "Hallmark Card" version. The Bush Administration was very careful to "embed" journalists with the troops so our news is filtered and we aren't shown anything the military leadership doesn't want us to know about.

    During the Vietnam War, all of the media (magazines, newspapers, and television) showed us the horrific pictures of the death and destruction of war. We saw the charred bodies, the slaughtered babies, the armless and legless soldiers, and the TRUTH about war. Today's MSM won't even show us our mangled veterans, or let us hear from the thousands of them who oppose the war (with the exception of a few spots on Keith Olbermann's show).

    It's time for the MSM to stop kissing the ass of the Bush administration and let people see and hear the reality of what's going on in Iraq. When was the last time the media even mentioned the 4 million Iraqis who have been displaced by Bush's war? The entire coverage of this war has been white-washed and carefully filtered to make it more palatable for the gullible idiots and that makes me sick to my stomach.

    • chicofaraby, on 06/18/2008, -5/+11"It's time for the MSM to stop kissing the ass of the Bush administration"

      That's not going to happen without breaking up the media cartels that use OUR public air to make money while lying to us. No one, Democrat or Republican is going to do that. The only way to make real change happen is to vote for leftist candidates. The center-right and the extreme right have been in power since the founding of the nation. Voting for them again will only produce more of the same. Vote left.
      • userperson, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3I'm not saying vote right.
        but to think the left will end this is laughable and sad. Obama has talked about bringing some troops home, but I've never hear him be strong on the issue, save for "the right made a mistake" and "I was against it from the beginning", but he doesn't say "I will end this." I've even heard him say "We will not pull out immediately because that will put the troops in more danger." ... by pulling them out of the warzone!?!? I've even heard about ideas to start other fighting else where (from both candidates).
        You can vote left, maybe I'm wrong and it'll change things for the better, I'd be please to be proven wrong.
        • chicofaraby, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Obama isn't "left." He's center-right.
        • userperson, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1@chicofaraby
          If he's "center-right" what the hell is McCain?
          We did these guys get their economic policies from?

          All the crazy leftist have some scary ideas aside, but they at least talk about "ending" the war. Were they to get such power, I believe in their follow-thru more than these big candidates.

          We might not agree on exactly what to call it, but I commend you for not advocating a "peace vote" for a candidate which in all likelihood will not grant peace.
    • PolarBearCa, on 06/19/2008, -1/+11"Hallmark Card"? Nah, it's more like the A-Team version.

      No blood, no one dies, and 'bad guys' are brought to justice among lots of explosions.
    • dbh102595, on 06/19/2008, -10/+1While reading each reply from this initial "Digg" it's amazing to see the opinions of everyone. Almost all posts and replies are written as though the people writing them were in Iraq yesterday and have seen something that no one else sees. To say that MSN should stop kissing the Bush Administration's ass is a little disturbing of a statement to make when you consider that the mass majority of all media outlets are considered to be "Liberal" in their views of reporting and most of the key reporters for these agencies have voiced their personal views against the Bush Administration and the war as well. If anything, the media should take better action to report the news and not just opinion. It is not to say the war is right or wrong, and every individuals opinion is worthy of respect, but that respect is a two way street.

      As an individual with an opinion, I respect the opinion of all. One of my own individual opinions based on belief rather than fact is that no matter how justified a war is when we first go in, within a couple of years, we the people of America, are quick to say that we were never for the war. I guess you could say that "armchair quarterbacking" is a way of life in America.
      • chicofaraby, on 06/19/2008, -1/+9"consider that the mass majority of all media outlets are considered to be "Liberal""

        By ultra right wing assholes, maybe. Here in reality the corporate media told us that Iraq had WMD and the mission was accomplished.

        Millions of us were in the streets protesting before the war. The "liberal media" ignored us. We were right. ***** you right in your "respect."
    • GunnerMan, on 06/19/2008, -8/+1It is not hard for you to see the true nature of war. If the media showed showed you what the terrorists do to people maybe you would have a different view on things as well. Remember there are multiple sides. http://youtube.com/watch?v=fB8uNwcQB_0&feature=rel ... take a look at one example. It is true you have no ***** idea what it is like over there. You say we get the "polished, white washed version from the media." It seems when we started making good progress over there I quit hearing about it on the news, I read the first success story I had in a long time in the Washington Post a few days ago. Unless someone got killed you generally don't hear about it on the news.
      Oh and BTW we are not your boys, most of us support the war, and we ask you kindly to take off your damn "Support Our Troops" stickers, take off your "Bring Them Home" sticker because you don't support *****. If we had people like you around in numbers in the 40's we would have lost that war too.

      I respect your oppinions on everything that is what America is about but the only people we feel forgotten by is the ultra-liberal left who can't seem to say anything good about us. That is why we joined, to protect your right to protest, to protect this great nation from outside threats, to help make a better life for people.

      As one Marine said about Iraqi military trainies "A lot of people say these guys just signed up for the money and they have no will to stand up for their country. Thats not true i'm around these guys every day and I see it in them, I see it in their eyes. They know they are fighting for a cause and they belive in what their fighting for."

      It is true people that sit down and watch CNN, MSNBC, FOX News what haveyou have no clue whats going on over there and before you start using dead soldiers bodies as an "object" to exemplify your feelings remember that soldier signed up to fight, he knew full well he may give his life for the country. All service men have the option to request a discharge if they don't belive in what they are doing. So please let us do the killing and let us do the dieing because we would rather you say nothing at all about us then use our dead bodies as examples of how things are going.
      Also I am glad media is blcoked out from attending military funerals, look at Cindy Shehan. I know if my mother was her i would be absolutley disgraced. Look at the WBC and thier protests... ill tell you I don't know of a service men who wants any more of that around them then they have to.
      No go ahead and bury me because I don't stand for what you do, and then go say we don't get balanced media. lol
      • ExitMoose, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1"If we had people like you around in numbers in the 40's we would have lost that war too."

        This isn't WWII. This is Vietnam.

        "It is true people that sit down and watch CNN, MSNBC, FOX News what haveyou have no clue whats going on over there and before you start using dead soldiers bodies as an "object" to exemplify your feelings remember that soldier signed up to fight, he knew full well he may give his life for the country."

        Your loyalty is laudable, but your marching orders ultimately come from regular citizens, not from some abstract "country". If regular citizens are disturbed enough by images of dead American soldiers that they can't support a war, it's probably not a war we should be fighting, regardless of whether you signed up to be there. This may be callous, but yours is not the only opinion that matters here, regardless of the sacrifices you may have chosen to make.
    • sk11, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3So true. War coverage has become sterilised and sanitised beyond reason. It's like a movie about the mafia without showing any crime, drugs, violence or even swearing. People are starting to believe that war is no big deal and through this desensitisation they will become more supportive of pre-emptive military campaigns, for increasingly weak reasons: wars for the sake of spreading ideology, boosting the economy, etc.. Seriously, I see a fox news item on how peace would negatively impact the economy, on the horizon.
    • rkdmrd, on 06/23/2008, -0/+0This is my war and two of my family members who were actually there. They report of meetings with women and children very much in awe of what America has done for them. Also the only bodies they saw in the course of a year were Iraqi children torn apart by the suicide bombs of fellow Iraqis. Let the media report the truth of our success.
      The bodies I remember were primarily those of the people falling from the twin towers. Now all those who moan, 'why are we in this war', have forgotten the reality that we were attacked on our sovereign soil in our own workplaces. We can be grateful that it was not in our own living rooms. And that gratitude goes to our government who made the brave and impossible decision to fight those who have been trying to kill us all over the world. Now we call them to task and return the favor if necessary. And it is necessary unfortunately because whether you believe it or not someone wants you dead because you are an American. Appease, deny and still it will be the same. The Iraqis who left are those who are primarily Christian. They seek asylum because their existence is threatened by radical Islam. So is yours.
  • Fangsinmybeard, on 06/18/2008, -7/+22That show brought down the White house. National participation of presidential impeachment is now in your hands. go to impeachmentforpeace.org and print off your own petition for impeachment.
    • keymanjim2, on 06/18/2008, -1/+6I'm all for impeachment.
      It will give an opportunity to see who knew what and when. Especially the back stabbing democrats that are now distancing themselves from their own statements they made during the run up to the invasion.
      • Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3I certainly would like to see Pelosi and Reid explain to the American people why impeachment remained off the table despite evidence of crimes, obstruction of justice and fraud.

        To be perfectly frank, I'm not enthused about anyone currently running for POTUS, since neither of them have mentioned anything about it, either. If they are this complacent about not saying anything right now, imagine what they will be like in office.

        It is high time that the silence was broken and words like "impeach" "investigate" and "prosecute" were spoken in conjunction with actually doing it.
    • Caprica7, on 06/19/2008, -5/+1Right... let's waste more money getting rid of an outgoing president to satisfy your curiousity about "who knew what when"... I'm sure our lawmakers don't have anything better to do.
      • MacSuxWindozSux, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2"who knew what when" is only the tip of the iceberg. There's the whole illegal activities and programs, crimes against humanity, war profiteering, secret propaganda campaign, etc. The list goes on.
      • CoolHandLuke70, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3We NEED to impeach just on principle -- to show that the U.S. STILL HAS principles!
  • keymanjim2, on 06/18/2008, -54/+8Liberals love the pictures of dead American soldiers. They masturbate to them.
    thinkprogress = buried.
    • Zarokima, on 06/19/2008, -4/+21Keymanjim2 loves little boys. He masturbates to them.

      Wow, this is easy!
      • PolarBearCa, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1Pedobear approves.
      • keymanjim2, on 06/19/2008, -8/+1Zarokima butt ***** dead donkeys.
        The difference between your statement and mine is that mine is true.
    • MadHarvey, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5Maybe one day it will hit you. You'll just be sitting their eating your frosted flakes one morning reading the news paper telling your wife what some liberal ***** said about such and such, and BAM!!! OH *****! A rush of enlightenment just washed over you!

      Suddenly, you see that the terms liberal and conservative are just illusions. All this time you have been defining your every thought and opinion based these two categories: Black and White. But now you can see gray! And colors too! All these beautiful colors that you've never seen before! Maybe this is what all those hippies taking acid were talking about! Its so beautiful! life isn't black and white! You see it now!

      You run out your front door and start soaking in this new found world! Everything you used to take for granted is erased, and all your opinions are formed anew. Where once, your thoughts were based on illusion, now you are forming them based on logic and reason! You see a homeless person in the street--a sight that had formerly filled you with contempt and disgust. Now the sight of this poor starving man brings you to tears. It doesn't occur to you which imaginary category this thought fits into, there is only you and this man on an empty street, and you feel truly sad for your fellow man. You reach into your pocket and pull out your wallet, and give the man the $200 dollars that is there. He takes it slowly, and a wise smile slowly appears on his face. You can see that you are just an infant in this man's world. He experiences and knowledge of life far surpasses your own. He says to you "You are awake now. This is the first day of your life. You are alive"...

      "Honey! HONEY! What about that *****?" You abruptly realize that you have been staring into your, now soggy, frosted flakes for some time. "What? *****..? Oh, I, nevermind. Hey sweetie, we haven't gone for walk in a long time, you want to go for a walk?" Your wife sees a glow in your eyes that she hasn't see since you were college lovers. "Uhh.. sure. Yeah. Yeah, I do" As you walk out the front door, the last few years of your life seem like some dark, fuzzy dream. As you reach the end of your block, you see a man on a pogo stick. He looks vaguely familiar, and he gives you a wise smile as you walk by.
    • internetcoward, on 06/19/2008, -2/+5is this really him, the stupidest person on digg?
      • keymanjim2, on 06/19/2008, -6/+2Yep, right above you.
        I know, the truth hurts. Now that your secret has been exposed, maybe you can get some help.
        AND STOP USING OUR SOLDIERS BODIES AS PROPS FOR YOUR SOCIALIST AGENDA.
        • internetcoward, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3No i meant you, and no, the non-use of soldiers is just using a fake war. I had family DIE man this war is ***** ***** and morons like you help keep it going. Stop ruining America. Please.
  • leffunov, on 06/19/2008, -9/+4Obviously they are not going to show something depressing, is to be expected from WAR, and would only inflate the perception of American casualties. Remember broadcast companies are for profit institutions. Do you really think that corporate sponsors expect good sales from advertisements during war casualty pieces?
    • swellman, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5Exactly. It's all about the bottom-line and has absolutely nothing to do with real journalism. Everyone in the mainstream press should be ashamed of themselves for being such corporate sellouts.
    • siszam, on 06/19/2008, -2/+6Public television is supported by the people and corporations. It's proof that people very willing to pay for truth. PBS shows each days casualties. They run a name and picture in silence. You don't have to sell out to run a station, company or anything else. Showing the dead troops doesn't "inflate the perception of American casualties". Not showing them creates the perception that casualties aren't much to be concerned about. They aren't real. That's what MSM has done. They cater to the government and warmongers who push the war. They don't do it based on corporate sponsors. Grow up. Don't be so naive.
    • leffunov, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1That's it I'm leaving Digg. Too many elitists who follow their idealist thought processes never considering any logical observation that dismantles some part of their Utopian dream only to insult the person making that opinion. Idiots, you really thought Ron Paul would win?
  • Frostman3D, on 06/19/2008, -0/+72The problem is the News isn't the News any more..... It's entertainment.
    • defwheezer, on 06/19/2008, -3/+1Infotainment? Calling it "entertainment" seems wrong somehow.
    • merry81, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2I wish you were wrong, but you're not. *sigh*
    • ileen4justice, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2No its fascist propaganda. You know the concentration of power in the corporate hands. Guess how many war profiteers sit on the boards of media giants?????
  • mike17032, on 06/19/2008, -20/+8Because we dont want to see pictures of dead Americans. Not a real hard concept, but I guess thinkprogress had to invent some ***** the diggiots would buy to make the home page.
    • Noein, on 06/19/2008, -3/+9You are right! Why would someone want to see news that make them upset? Let's only report on good news and weather! In fact, bad weather makes me upset too, let's only report on good weather. Ah it's nice to live in a bubble!

      This is not about showing pictures of dead Americans. This is about the coverage on the war. And news is not about what you want to see, that's entertainment. You are missing the point.
  • Croecop, on 06/19/2008, -17/+88I'd hit Lara Logan
    • gunner453, on 06/19/2008, -10/+4sicko....
    • diggystardust, on 06/19/2008, -2/+49Hitting women is wrong.
      • Misogyny, on 06/19/2008, -1/+14What if they ask for it?
      • mooseofshadows, on 06/19/2008, -1/+5I hope your username here does not go unnoticed.

        edit: speaking to misogyny. though actually, diggystardust is pretty clever too.
      • digdugdog, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Unless it's with your penis.
    • flip, on 06/19/2008, -3/+8I believe the use of the word "hit" means "to have sexual intercourse with"
      http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=hit
      • WNW3, on 06/19/2008, -2/+6I would have MAD sexual intercourse with Lara Logan. I would have sexual intercourse with Lara Logan ALL NIGHT LONG!!

        Seriously, she is crazy hot, and smart and that accent! Sweet zombie jeebus!
      • Nick519, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1you're right, it does have that meaning, too, and i think that's part of the problem. a word that means "to strike" and also "have sex with" is troubling to me.
    • shondell, on 06/19/2008, -0/+17I was wondering what was up with all these smart comments about the Iraq war and the mass media. I was beginning to think I wasn't on Digg anymore till I saw your comment.

      Anyways, Dugg for *****.
    • cme884, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3My God, when I saw her on TDS the other day, I couldn't believe I wasn't watching more CBS News. She's stunning! And intelligent to boot. I think I've found my new wife.
  • omgwhataguy, on 06/19/2008, -8/+9I thought Bush passed a law making it illegal to show dead soldiers on TV?
    • drinking12many, on 06/19/2008, -17/+6Do you want to see your dead child on TV? Guess what no one does its disrespectful and not necessary. Why would you want to see a dead us soldier any more than a dead iraqi? I personally find it disgusting that someone would want to see the dead from a war. Especially if the picture you see is your brother/friend/son etc
      • siszam, on 06/19/2008, -1/+11It's disgusting that anyone would support wars that kill our sons and daughters. THAT is the disgusting thing. I specifically watch PBS because they show the deaths and don't treat them like forgettable garbage like Republicans do.
      • munkiemadd, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3What? Disrespectful? What's disrespectful about death? It would be upsetting to that persons family/friends, but that's not being disrespectful. When someone close to you dies, do you want it to be kept a secret? No, not really. Nobody does.

        You sir, are strange
    • Futurejunior, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6"In 2004, the conservative-controlled Senate backed President Bush’s ban of photos of military coffins returning to Dover Air Force base. The Pentagon still restricts journalists’ access to military funerals." From under the video
  • tykwondingo, on 06/19/2008, -6/+514,000+ of our soldiers dead. 3 trillion dollars spent. Over one million dead iraqis.

    It's time to find another way to "win" this "war".
    • DemonWasp, on 06/19/2008, -4/+2Perhaps your government could "win" by cutting their losses and retreating, tail firmly rammed up their collective rumps.

      The time for talk of victory is over; at this point it's more a question of whether it's an 8, 9 or 10 on the richer scale of colossal *****-ups. It's sad that this was visited on the world, and I pity you for living in a country under such oppressive and tyrannic rule.
    • GunnerMan, on 06/19/2008, -11/+14,000 soldiers died in 30 minutes in WW2. We are doing extremely well. Like I said in my other post, let us do the killing, let us do the dieing. You sit back relax and play with your kids ok?
      • DanMcGuinness, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7If you can't see any difference between the war in Iraq and WWII, then you are incredibly stupid.
  • nastronomical, on 06/19/2008, -25/+5Go ask the parents and love ones of the dead soldiers, maybe they will give you permission to desecrate the fallen grave and dance on their graves.
    • nblsavage, on 06/19/2008, -1/+11Neither the right or the left are happy with the death of soldiers. Don't pretend otherwise but ignoring the fact of their deaths dishonors their sacrifice.
    • tufftugg, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6you would have to if your an American...the rest of us in the 'free' world can watch it on the news.
    • siszam, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3The people dancing on their graves are their attention whoring parents who play the death for all it's worth for a chance to worship Bush and get to touch his hand. Why would you want to shake the hand of the mass murderer who killed your child? Why would you support anything that puts your child in harms way? You have to be sick and depraved to do that.
  • purelithium, on 06/19/2008, -3/+32This is excellent, I'm happy that Jon Stewart is starting to be recognized as a legitimate News Man, and getting great stories from people. Congrats Jon, and thanks for showing another side of the story.
    • sahaskatta, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5I can't agree more, shows like the daily show and the colbert report are pointing out the wrongs of our country more effectively than news programs do despite being a comedy program. Hopefully this type of media can help stop the war and help fix the mistakes that have been made.
    • thescimitar, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5It's pretty funny when these two shows, that began as an ironic response to "entertainmentization" of the news media, are no longer ironic as a result of going so far with their irony that they have linked back up with regular news.

      It used to be that the Colbert Report and the Daily Show were dadaist-inspired programs with the underpinnings of mocking some of the more famous talking heads on television. Now the only thing that separates their reportage is that their correspondent reports are fake(r).

      The hyperbole, misinformation, and entertainment values are identical to normal news media. Hell, the production values are often better.

      Sad. Funny, but sad. Like when you read a news story that is so preposterous, you think it's from the Onion, and then realize that it's actually from FOX or CNN.
  • AlanFang, on 06/19/2008, -6/+17I am pretty sure the hotness factor of Lara Logan is why this is getting so much press online. No one cares when an old distinguished male journalist says something, but if it's a hot young woman they pay attention. Not saying this is necessarily a bad thing, just my observation.
    • flip, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4What I care about is that she's able to get people to pay attention.

      This nation (society) has been transformed from a thoughtful (murrow) type of interview
      to fox's creative use of language (NLP) to form viewers thoughts.
      Simply, the audience has been dumbed down to the point where they don't see the need for respecting knowledge or experience. that's how bush got elected.
      He's a dumbass like they are.

      This woman is able to get past those blocks and with her soft voice
      simply say things that are accepted by people what dismiss what is said by the older grey generation.
    • WNW3, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7But she is OH SO HOT!
    • fdiskit, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Ann "If I didn't look good in a dress, I'd just be another John Birch crank" Coulter FTW
  • Ne007, on 06/19/2008, -8/+25Go back to sleep...our media doesn't give a *****!

    hell...they are part of the military industrial complex...
    • johnnyfistfight, on 06/19/2008, -3/+3So is Cyberdyne Systems Corporation and we think you know too much. Please do not leave your house because our advanced T-1000 series has difficulties locating individuals via the yellow pages.
  • samespbn, on 06/19/2008, -12/+4Sorry Big Media, I guess you didn't get the memo.

    Troop deaths are at all an all time low. Sure, you might not have as much anti-war drama to cover, but it is good news for families and the US as a whole. I know it won't have the catchy headlines you are wanting, but it is for the best.

    Yours truly, patriotic citizen.
    • YukosEyes, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6Our deficit's at an all time high. I guess if America is predominately defined by war and military then you are quite patriotic. If you think America is defined by a plethora of other things like, for example, being the first country to implement public education on a national scale resulting in the highest literacy rates in the world and, at a time (now history), cultivating some of the greatest minds in history, then you're not very patriotic, because we're not going to have any more money left for those kinds of things.
    • geodebug, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7Um, I doubt troop deaths are at an all-time low. I'm sure they were much lower before we chose to start a war in Iraq.
      • samespbn, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1I thought the war-time part was implied enough, but I take it that went right over your head.
        • DemonWasp, on 06/19/2008, -1/+3Why would the war-time part be implied? You may have meant it, but his point still invalidates the statement you *actually* made. What you said was wrong: death rate among the troops was far lower before the war started. The fact that the war started wasn't even a given until your government started it; the problem could have been solved by a helping of diplomacy and perhaps some international cooperation.

          Handled properly, the aftermath of 9/11 could have been (if not a shining example), then at least a not-half-bad example of how to handle international terrorist incidents. It may even have been an effective deterrent against future terrorism, though that's iffy at best. Instead, it's been turned into a three-ring-circus populated entirely by serial killers and war profiteers clad in the colourful dress of clowns.
        • geodebug, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Just pointing out the necessity of being accurate is all.

          That and your post seems to draw the opposite conclusion of what the article is stating:

          You appear to criticize the media's biased coverage toward only the costs war; excluding the good side like "less of our soldiers are dying now"

          Lara Logan criticizes the complete lack of any substantial coverage at all.
    • devin_mm, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Oh ***** at an all time low?!?!?

      Feel free to stop reporting it when there are 0 deaths, until that point every single time someone dies it should headline news, the first thing people see when they turn on the 6 o'clock news.
      • samespbn, on 06/19/2008, -2/+1You are right. Every time a soldier died in WW2 also it should have been headline news. Sorry, but that wouldn't have been realistic.
        • geodebug, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4I'd say this war is a bit different than WW2. Maybe you should update your references grandpa?

          It would be possible given technical advances in how the military tracks soldiers and multiple global 24-hour media outlets.

          But, more importantly, this war is criminal. A bipartisan report, five years in the making, just came out last week declaring that all evidence points to the fact that this administration purposefully lied and manipulated data to push America into war. So whether or not the "surge" is working every death in this war is news because the soldiers are dying for a lie: that this war is both justified and is, somehow, making us "safer".
  • dionysius89, on 06/19/2008, -6/+15There are more important things to cover. Like Obama's Baby Mama.
  • MaceSoul, on 06/19/2008, -3/+6That's a red herring to blame it on the ban on photos of military coffins. That ban doesn't stop a single US journalist from showing a dead American soldier in Iraq.

    Advertisers might though.
    • merry81, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Thank you. You said what I was thinking.

      My question is: Why are there NO pictures from Iraq. I'm not overly keen on seeing death and mayhem (though I know it exists), but I would like to see the humanity. Am I alone in this?
  • swellman, on 06/19/2008, -5/+16But wait, I thought the media had a liberal bias? And if they are liberal and oppose the war, why won't they show the public such things? Oh right, they aren't liberal at all. They are just a bunch of corporate shills and shamefully unprofessional. There are some exceptions of course, but not nearly enough.
    • wojtyk, on 07/09/2008, -0/+0They were. The war was plastered on every media outlet when the war wasn't going well. Now that it is taking a turn for the better, they hush up in a hurry. That seems like pretty good evidence to me.
  • jrw5362, on 06/19/2008, -2/+24This Daily show episode riveted me. Chills went up and down my body. What the hell are we doing about Iraq and Afghanistan?!
    • superkendall, on 06/19/2008, -7/+2Well we're finally helping Iraq get on the right foot, and trying to use the same technique in Afghanistan.

      But then you didn't want the reality, like the rest of Digg...
    • solid12345, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1What more do you want us to do about Iraq? We have a US friendly government there that is a democratic parliamentary government. But we cannot magically be there to stop some insurgent from car bombing a neighborhood of people, it has to be Iraqis that stand up and curb this violence not us.
  • lasVegas702, on 06/19/2008, -19/+5Wow... beautiful, eloquent, intelligent, hates America... She is the perfect woman.
    • tufftugg, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5 Someone point out some facts and the simple whine "hates America''.
    • YukosEyes, on 06/19/2008, -0/+9She doesn't hate America. She hates our media.
  • kolinkoolface2, on 06/19/2008, -16/+12We lost 6821 soldiers on iwo jima..... that was for an island we didn't even need in the pacific. Just a thought.
    • andy314159pi, on 06/19/2008, -3/+14Right, but Japan declared war on us. Iraq was just sorta hanging out oppressing its own people. If we took arms against every nation that oppressed its own people, we'd be totally fukced.
    • chicofaraby, on 06/19/2008, -2/+7Thanks for pointing that out. That totally justifies the murder of a million Iraqi civilians. Good point.
    • erikwithaknotac, on 06/19/2008, -0/+9Iwo Jima was NEEDED. It supplied the airstrip that our planes needed to be within bombing range of mainland Japan. Don't even dare say Iwo Jima wasn't needed. Why was it bunkered down for armageddon then by the Japanese if it was a worthless island? Please read your history before you declare Iwo Jima as worthless.
      • kolinkoolface2, on 06/19/2008, -6/+1yea dare i say your a ***** idiot? Sometime military leaders send soldiers to their slaughter. Yea they died for a greater cause but the small battle they were in, did nothing in reality. Stop acting like you don't want to hear the truth. It was bunkered down because thats how the Japanese fought you ***** idiot. They never wanted to give up anything they owned, no matter how small.

        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Iwo_Jima#St ...

        God you're pathetic. It was a worthless island. Go ***** yourself.
        • erasedgod, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2The strategic importance of Iwo Jima has been in question after the fact. That hardly means it was worthless. You should read "With the Old Breed" by EB Sledge. It's a first-hand account of the battles for Peleliu and Okinawa. Those two islands were useless. Peleliu was of little strategic value, and Okinawa wasn't used because we nuked Japan just six weeks later.
    • laserdog, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6Those soldiers got a memorial.

      Ours are greeted by a camera blackout and a president who has never stood beside the coffin of a single returning soldier.
  • Tssst, on 06/19/2008, -6/+7Tell me the last time you saw the body of a dead innocent civilian killed for just being?
    In recent news: Only ONE person is left to charge in the Haditha cases, everyone else was let go. And most likely this last one will go free as well. To jog your memory, that was the incident where after a convoy got hit, the soldiers went door to door slaughtering civilians at random who were INSIDE their houses the whole time.
    Have you seen their dead bodies?
    • Jaguwar, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4"soldiers went door to door slaughtering civilians at random"

      Please check your facts and stop repeating lies.
      The reason for the dismissals is precisely because Time Magazine/Mr Murtha's slander has been proven false.

    • erikwithaknotac, on 06/19/2008, -2/+4I went to boot camp with SGt DeLACRuz, who was one of the Marines charged. His story is completely different from that BS article in TIME.
    • SuperVepr308, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Where you there? No. Murtha is an corrupt idiot. He wasn't there either so he can stfu too.
  • pintomp3, on 06/19/2008, -2/+19one of the things that helped end the vietnam war was color tv. seeing the images of soldiers bleeding drove home the sacrifice we were making. the pentagon was determined to not let this happen again, so they embedded the journalists so they could not cover the stories or show images in a neutral detached manner.
    • orenshk, on 06/19/2008, -0/+8Another thing that helped end the war, was 58,000 U.S casualties and nothing to show for it. If you'll remember it took 16 years.
  • kenvsryu, on 06/19/2008, -3/+14The public is now focused on gas prices. The war is so 2006.
    • laserdog, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4I *can't* wait until that war starts paying for itself, we'll be rich!
    • defwheezer, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Another distraction- they are two interlocking gears: Oil price and War in the Middle East.
    • obdurate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1The public is not focused on the war because the news from Iraq has been improving and coverage has lessened. The media's motto has more than once been summed up as "if it bleeds, it leads." There's less bleeding and so, less reportage.
  • obdurate, on 06/19/2008, -11/+5What's happening in Iraq is that we are winning. I have no doubt she's partially responsible for the public not really understanding that fact. History will judge that the invasion was entirely justified and the right move. You don't often get to choose between good and bad. Often the choice is between bad and truly awful. It's adolescent to want good geopolitical outcomes without any human cost. The defeat of Germany and Japan required millions of deaths before they were straightened out, yet few argue World War II should not have been fought. By historical standards, Iraq has been an easy win for the forces of good (for those of you on the political left, that means the United States). That fact does not diminish the sacrifice made by too many members of our professional military and those innocents murdered by anonymous terrorist killers.
    • tufftugg, on 06/19/2008, -0/+11 What are you smoking? Do you have any idea of the History in this region? Any idea of how many countries over the centuries have tried? The ''Ho-rah'' mentality has gone to your head.
      • obdurate, on 06/19/2008, -8/+1I have an excellent idea of the history of this region. I also recall recent history when we were told victory in Afghanistan was also impossible; after all, the mighty Soviets were defeated there. Like so much conventional wisdom, that was utterly wrong. The subtext of your comment is that because others have failed, no one should try and any effort is doomed to failure. You would condemn millions to despotic rule through inaction. Positive change will not come to the region by holding hands and wishing it so. Nor will our enemies be deterred by moral preening such as you display. Moreover, the late Iraqi regimes violations of cease fire terms alone were more than sufficient cause for a resumption of hostilities. Rather than "pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe, in order to assure the survival and the success of liberty" you will not even support and honor the sacrifices of others in that cause. As Churchill put it, "...if you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly; you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a small chance of survival. There may even be a worse case: you may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves." You seem quite content to let others live as slaves even when volunteer to free them. Simply brushing past the facts with a comment on "ho-rah mentality" (perhaps you meant "hoorah") is simply a way of saying you can't be bothered with a sober consideration of the trade-offs and hard decisions the U.S. government necessarily must make.
        • merry81, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3Wow. You put an American ton of words into tufftugg's text box. Just because you see something one way does not mean you can imbue your thoughts on other people. Statements such as "You would condemn millions to despotic rule through inaction." Nothing in the reply implies that. "You seem quite content to let others live as slaves even when volunteer to free them." How do you know that to be true? Do you know anyone here personally? Have they whispered in your ear these sentiments? Then it's absurd to put such extreme words in other peoples mouths. If I say that I disagree with the way the "war" is being handled, that doesn't mean I want a tyrant running rough-shod over a nation.

          The fallacies you've committed here are mind-blowing.
        • statsman1982, on 06/21/2008, -0/+0One of the things that you have to remember, obdurate, is that the the people under despotic rule have to want their freedom more than than the U. S. does. That was clear in WWII with the French Resistance and all of England, for example. A large part of the problem now is that the people in Iraq are more loyal to their sect or tribe than to the concept of a unified "nation of Iraq". We made a foolish conclusion that American values would carry over without translation to the people of Iraq, which is now a painfully obvious error.

          And beyond all of that, it should not be official U. S. policy to go around invading nations that we know to be despotic and belligerent. There are far too many nations in the world that treat their people badly for us to invade every one and rebuild their governments: North Korea, China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, several African nations, etc.
    • YukosEyes, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Why is it adolescent to believe good geopolitical outcomes without any human cost? Sorry. You actually said it's adolescent to WANT good geopolitical outcomes without any human cost. Great dualistic thinking too with all that "good" and "bad." Who's the adolescent?
      • obdurate, on 06/19/2008, -5/+1Apparently the adolescent would be you. Attempting a game of "gotcha" is certainly not a mature approach (also, check the structure of your first sentence before you start down that road). If you want good outcomes without human cost, good for you. Good luck with that and let me know how you make out. It may surprise you to learn that you're not the first to figure out that war is bad and to be avoided. Unfortunately, there are often worse choices. Regarding "dualistic thinking", my explicit point was that one does not always get a simple choice between good and bad. That said, there is such a thing as good and bad; particularly when comparing the former Iraqi regime and the United States. In case you're confused: U.S. =good; Iraqi dictatorship = bad. Moral relativism is not a hallmark of sophistication.
        • YukosEyes, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3I'm a 24 year old Graduate student at university, not an adolescent, who was typing my response to your comment too quickly and didn't care to review it. That's a good thing since communication with you is clearly a waste of my time anyway. I guess if everybody used your method of communication, we never could avoid war and violence. I am still seriously concerned that you used the word "want."

          Additionally, know that I was not confused about the intended meaning of your dualistic statements; I just tried to explain why I disagree. Disagreement is not a game of "gotcha." I can't believe I'm wasting my time.
        • YukosEyes, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0I don't want to carry on this conversation, but I feel obligated to help you understand what I see in you, no matter how much you resist it. I don't think it's possible to use my language to successfully do that.

          Imagine an Iraqi posted this: "It's adolescent to BELIEVE that desirable geopolitical outcomes will come without any human cost." You might think to yourself, "that person sounds like a terrorist -- a person who believes the value of human life can be quantified and that change can ONLY come from violence and physical force." But then you might retract that thought: "Well, maybe not. Maybe that person has just had the kind of life experience in which s/he cannot actually conceptualize alternatives or maybe that person has just had the kind of life experience in which s/he has never seen a sophisticated, non-violent (alternative) approach to conflict." Maybe that person is just a member of the military or comes from a military family and doesn't even realize that that kind of thinking rationalizes the meaning and purpose they have infused into their life and identity.

          Imagine an Iraqi posted this: "It's adolescent to DESIRE geopolitical outcomes that don't involve human cost." Well, that is a much more aggressive statement. Actually a statement like that places every human being in the category of your enemy, and it reveals that the person making the statement believes that the value of human life varies from person to person. Even YOU would say that person is most likely a terrorist (if not in action, certainly in mind.) That person even sounds like a Nazi to many people including me. But that is exactly what you said, and you can't even seen that you're looking in a mirror when you interpret the enemy. The cognitive dissonance that would normally follow from something like that is alleviated when you use dualistic thinking and labels such as "good" and "bad." That is called "projection," and it's a very dangerous thing because it's not rational, it's rationalizing for anything your ego can imagine.
    • geebs61, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4The war was unnecessary and poorly planned, and I doubt it will ever be looked at as "justified and the right move" by a majority of people
    • sooperspook, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3World war 2 wasn't STARTED by the Allies.
      It was started by Germany when they decided to invade other countries.

      It was a war that should never have happened because it's cause should never have happened.
    • statsman1982, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1I find it humorous that you chose your nickname (obdurate) thinking that it was an unqualified virtue. The same "virtue" of hardheadedness has been attributed by many to George Bush, as if to somehow excuse his willful avoidance of critical evaluations of decisions. Being stubborn or persistent is not a virtue per se. The mark of an educated person is the ability to step back from previous decisions, reevaluate as additional evidence comes to light, and proceed with alternative courses of action if necessary. Keeping one's mind made up in the face of contradictory evidence is not virtuous, it is simple minded. What if I were to tell you that the earth is actually rotated by a giant hamster, and despite whatever argument you provide me, I stubbornly cling to my hamster belief. Is this "obdurateness" virtuous in your eyes?

      You and Bush can do all of the post hoc rationalization you want, but clinging to the idea that this war was justified, given all that has come to light in the years hence, is simply foolish.
      • obdurate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1How do you know why or when I chose my nickname? You've made a gratuitous assertion and then based your response upon it. You're just talking to yourself.
  • SeraphimJulius, on 06/19/2008, -2/+33It is a sad that I get most of my TV news from the Daily Show and Colbert Report...
    When comedy shows are giving you more information about the world than real news shows, you know there is a problem.
    • Zaeth, on 06/19/2008, -0/+6I too only get my TV news from these sources.

      Is it sad that i trust a comedian more than a news anchor on truthiness?
    • BobScratchit, on 06/19/2008, -0/+5I think the only way you can get real news through censors is if you tell the government it's all for fun.
    • SuperVepr308, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Yeah, that is sad.
  • DavidThaGnome, on 06/19/2008, -3/+21 Well as an American who watches and reads only network news and mainstream media I can confidently say that war is comprised of nothing more than, large black and green fireworks shows, perfectly framed sunrises shining down upon our soldiers silhouettes as they gaze off the side of an aircraft carrier in classic boy band formation.
    Getting hugged by thankful Iraqi's, saving lost dogs and all the while fighting the "enemy" with robots from the safety of a big blue tinted room covered in holograms and doohickeys.
    It's funny, I remember during Vietnam you could see people dying on the news and it was generally a lot more war like. Well I imagine with computers and and cell phones nowadays you most likely can just zap your enemy with a mind lazer or email them aids or something. I'm not real good with computers, I'd much rather just watch the TV, oh gotta go, American Idol is on...sweeeet.
  • VolSurrealist, on 06/19/2008, -11/+2"Go back to sleep America, your government is in control... "

    Don't fret precious I'm here, step away from the window
    Go back to sleep
    Safe from pain and truth and choice and other poison devils,
    See, they don't give a ***** about you, like I do.

    Count the bodies like sheep
    Count the bodies like sheep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    Count the bodies like sheep

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep

    Go back to sleep
    Go to sleep
    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    Go back to sleep
    Go back to sleep

    Counting bodies like sheep
    To the rhythm of the war drums

    I’ll be the one to protect you from your enemies and all your demons
    I'll be the one to protect you from a will to survive and a voice of reason
    I'll be the one to protect you from your enemies and your choices son
    They're one in the same, I must isolate you…
    Isolate and save you from yourself …
    • innocentsinner, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
      Around the world, around the world.
  • tufftugg, on 06/19/2008, -2/+8 It does seem weird that Americans don't see the dead Marines. Not being an American and seeing the caskets roll by, one forgets how isolated they are from the war. Land of the free..hmm.
    • geebs61, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1We're raising a nation that will never know what a 21 gun salute is.
      • merry81, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2And doesn't know that Taps is played on a bugle, not a boombox.
  • seantubridy, on 06/19/2008, -0/+11If it took showing my child's dead body on national television to make people aware of the horrors of war, then yes, I'd allow it and have to deal with it. No, it wouldn't be pleasant but maybe it would do more good that actually fighting a pointless, illegal war ever could. At least it would give some purpose to their death.
  • kirk89, on 06/19/2008, -18/+1anything with John Stewart deserves a immediate bury. So sick of him.
  • geodebug, on 06/19/2008, -2/+57I think she's right, and unbelievably attractive.
  • dizilbdog, on 06/19/2008, -6/+1She's Right I hope we don't find her in the backyard after she hangs herself.
  • suttercain, on 06/19/2008, -10/+2"Tell me the last time you saw the body of a dead..soldier"

    This afternoon I shot a mo-fo in the head, point blank with a desert eagle, while playing Call of Duty 4. Boo yah BIATCH!
    • acliffhang3r, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4Well what can I say.. looks like you are ready for the real thing, tough-guy. Sign up at your nearest army recruitment center! Go get those freedom-hatin jihad-lovin sons-of-bitches for us. By the way, if you get shot and don't make it back home, no one will hear about it.

      • suttercain, on 06/19/2008, -1/+1Do they allow people in wheelchairs in the service now? If so, I'll sign up.
    • statsman1982, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0Weren't you the Juggernaut at one time?
  • knodi, on 06/19/2008, -2/+6The problem is every one does understand the war on Iraq... Its a monkey ***** fest. We Americans ***** up ***** up big time. Times the dead toll on Americans by around 50 and you have the Iraqi death toll.
  • mongrel, on 06/19/2008, -5/+4That's the kind of hot that makes me say ouch down there.
  • krnldmp, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2When you're talking about war for profit nobody out to sell you on it is going to be in a real hurry to wake you up to the overhead of the business. If it were a fight for justice or freedom it would be the first thing on the news every single night.
  • Jaguwar, on 06/19/2008, -8/+0Simply Amazing, both of these serial liars make a living giving aid and comfort to the enemy and then show mock concern for American soldiers who are killed by that same enemy.
    I do not know how the soldiers who have lost friends over their, resist killing the left wing reporters.
    • obdurate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+3I don't think they do "resist" it. I think they don't do violence to reporters because it would be wrong. Simply speaking out with an opposing view is not giving aid and comfort to the enemy; it's public political debate. Our military men and women understand the liberty which they defend, even if they don't approve of how other citizens exercise that liberty.
  • mbraynard, on 06/19/2008, -13/+7I'd like to see some dead insurgents' bodies.

    Anyone who wants to see innocent Americans getting their heads sliced off can find it on the internet.

    Showing the American population dead American soldiers is demoralizing to the cause. Sorry, but it is. So if you are interested in winning this, you just don't do it as a journalist.

    So do the better thing - show dead insurgents and demoralize THEIR fighters.
    • laserdog, on 06/19/2008, -0/+7Their fighters go to heaven.

      A vast majority of our injured soldiers get put in ***** hospitals and then get screwed out of their benefits.
      • mbraynard, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1How many of the 'vast majority' have you spoken to?
        • laserdog, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1So I can ask them how they feel about missing a limb?

          I'm betting I can guess their answer.

          Or perhaps you're referring to VA Hospital satisfaction, because a bunch of people in Congress looked into that awhile back if I recall...
    • KingCritter, on 06/19/2008, -0/+4Actually, I think that's the point -- America needs to be demoralized so we hurry up and get the hell out of there.
      • mbraynard, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1How long do you think the US can survive if pursuing the run and hide strategy that you so eloquently articulate?
        • RonBurgundy76, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1How many times will we poke our nose and our guns into the affairs of other countries until the world gets tired of it and decides it needs to stop?
        • KingCritter, on 06/19/2008, -0/+0Much, much longer then otherwise.
    • sooperspook, on 06/19/2008, -1/+2Showing the truth is 'demoralizing' eh? I would think that soldiers find it far more demoralizing to think that people don't care about what they do or what conditions they do it in.
      • mbraynard, on 06/19/2008, -4/+1Showing the truth would be showing the Towers coming down daily.

        Alternatively, please provide me the location of a dead relatives grave so I may dig it up and throw it at you. It's 'truth', you know.
    • deadbaby, on 06/19/2008, -1/+4It's not going to demoralize insurgent soldiers who volunteer to die for their cause.

      And most importantly journalists shouldn't be worrying about winning the war. Their job is to cover the war for what it really is. If the reality of the situation upsets people then perhaps they will consider why we're really there and what our goals are. The administration has done a horrible job explaining that it other than the news today that Iraqi old fields would be given to big oil companies on a no-bid basis. No doubt American troops will be there long into the future to protect our oil interests. That's what this war is really about. Let's just be honest.

      We just have to collectively decide as a country how many American solders we're willing to sacrifice for cheaper oil. I think we'll find there is a number, more than zero, but less than the current rate that the American public will accept. 20 soldiers a month for 50 cents off? That's really the question we should be asking right now -- not if the media should feel an obligation to our government to hide the truth of the war from the citizens. Both questions are equally as troubling to me.
    • ucccft, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2Dear Coward,
      so what are you doing sitting at home, if you want to see some dead insurgents' bodies, get your sorry ass over to Iraq, else go back to mommy and stay under the bed.
    • sk11, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Because being in a war zone and watching your comrades getting killed and maimed isn't demoralising?

      If a people will not support a war when given the truth about it, then the war is already a lost cause. If the war is just, the people, even when confronted with the reality, would be supportive. So there is no need to lie to and deceive the people about such a thing.

      A war isn't a some stupid game, which has to be won for the sake of honour or pride, the gravity of it should dissuade it's casual use. It should be the absolute final resort, to be over as soon as possible.
  • DeFex, on 06/19/2008, -1/+6They are just protecting your freedom. freedom from thought or care in this case.
  • spiffwalker, on 06/19/2008, -5/+3TF2
  • Caffeinate, on 06/19/2008, -0/+2We need more real journalism, more investigative reporting and people willing to tell the truth. Right now, only a handful have the guts to say anything because so many idiots have a knee-jerk reaction of blame the messenger. We need to start acting like a nation of adults and be willing to hear the truth even if it is unpleasant.
  • wbg34, on 06/19/2008, -5/+4If you need to see a constant stream of bodies to remember the sacrifice of our troops, then you haver larger issues than the media.
  • KDX200rider, on 06/19/2008, -3/+4
    I think we should see more stories from Iraq, the good and the bad. We should hear about the good things we do as well as the bad. All I hear from most of the biased news agencies (NYT, CBS, et al) is the bad. I believe part of the problem is how insulated a society we have become. People eat meat everyday, but don't give a thought to the fact that an animal was systematically killed to provide it. (No I am not against eating meat.) Many could not watch as this happens, but they blissfully order another Big Mac. Countries go to war to protect their national interests, and yes that includes economic interests.

    Bottom line, the news agencies should do their best to present both sides, then each of us should be mature enough to decide for ourselves.
    • sk11, on 06/19/2008, -0/+1Soldier: We came under rocket attack, I lost both my legs and my buddie didn't make it. It was carnage, we didn't even have proper armour or support and
      "Journalist": Yes, but can you tell us about the good news, we want to show "both sides" of the war.
      Soldier: Are you ***** kidding me you stupid bitch, I lost my ***** legs, I'll never be able to walk again. Good ***** news is I'm not dead.

      Iraqi translator: The bombs they landed in wrong place she, this woman she say, lost her son. She is in most grief, he was young boy.
      "Journalist": But what about the good news?
      Iraqi translator looks stunned.
      "Journalist": Didn't the school the boy went to get brand new American computers?
      Iraqi translator still stunned.

      We live in a world completely different to that of hollywood movies, where there's always justice and balance.
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.