Apparently the Washington Post thinks that injured troops are a joke.

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Umm, no actually the point was that Rumsfield doesn't give a damn about them

First off his point is total bullshit.

Second off, what happens when a troop that supports his mission who got his leg blown off in Iraq is sitting in his hospital and turns to the editorial section only to see someone not only degrading his sacrifice but also making light of it? How can you condone that?

 

[Kelzie]

First off his point is total bullshit.

Second off, what happens when a troop that supports his mission who got his leg blown off in Iraq is sitting in his hospital and turns to the editorial section only to see someone not only degrading his sacrifice but also making light of it? How can you condone that?

First off, you don't have to agree with his point. Plenty do.

Second off, drawing attention to the fact that our Secretary of Defense, whether you believe so or not, does not care about the injured is neither making light of their situation nor degrading it.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

First off, you don't have to agree with his point. Plenty do.

Second off, drawing attention to the fact that our Secretary of Defense, whether you believe so or not, does not care about the injured is neither making light of their situation nor degrading it.

How can you say that the depiction of a limbless troop to make a political point in a comic strip is not making light of the situation?

From the Joint Chiefs:

A Reprehensible Cartoon

Thursday, February 2, 2006; A20



We were extremely disappointed to see the Jan. 29 editorial cartoon by Tom Toles.

Using the likeness of a service member who has lost his arms and legs in war as the central theme of a cartoon was beyond tasteless. Editorial cartoons are often designed to exaggerate issues, and The Post is obviously free to address any topic, including the state of readiness of the armed forces. However, The Post and Mr. Toles have done a disservice to readers and to The Post's reputation by using such a callous depiction of those who volunteered to defend this nation and, as a result, suffered traumatic and life-altering wounds.

Those who visit wounded veterans in hospitals have found lives profoundly changed by pain and loss. They also have found brave men and women with a sense of purpose and selfless commitment that causes battle-hardened warriors to pause.

While The Post and some of its readers may not agree with the war or its conduct, these men and women and their families are owed the decency of not having a cartoon make light of their tremendous physical sacrifices.

As the joint chiefs, we rarely put

our hand to one letter, but we cannot let this reprehensible cartoon go unanswered.

PETER PACE


General, U.S. Marine Corps


Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff


EDMUND P. GIAMBASTIANI JR.


Admiral, U.S. Navy

Vice Chairman, Joint Chiefs of Staff


MICHAEL W. HAGEE


General, U.S. Marine Corps

Commandant of the Marine Corps


PETER J. SCHOOMAKER


General, U.S. Army

Chief of Staff


MICHAEL G. MULLEN


Admiral, U.S. Navy


Chief of Naval Operations


T. MICHAEL MOSELEY


General, U.S. Air Force

Chief of Staff


Washington

 

[vergiss]

Umm my problem with issuing Fatwahs on these pictures is that it inflames an already tennous situation, it gives these people a religious justification to burn down embassies, riot, threaten, and kill people.

Rarely will a fatwa actually encourage violence. They may condemn something, but so what? The Vatican condems abortion, is that religious justification for violence against abortion doctors?

You said the press is free well uh duh, that's not the issue the issue is what people do with that freedom, the Washington Post is free to print Jim Crow style cartoons that doesn't mean that we have to tolerate it now does it?

So, just because the Danish want to print offensive cartoons doesn't mean the Muslims have to tolerate it, does it?

 

[Kelzie]

How can you say that the depiction of a limbless troop to make a political point in a comic strip is not making light of the situation?

From the Joint Chiefs:

Dude, we get it. That's like the fifth time you've posted that damn thing. I understand they're upset. It still doesn't mean that the comic made light of injured soldiers.

 

[Mikkel]

I sometimes feel like we're going in circles here. Someone put this thread out of its misery.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Rarely will a fatwa actually encourage violence. They may condemn something, but so what? The Vatican condems abortion, is that religious justification for violence against abortion doctors?

Ya o.k. turn on the news and tell me that the fatwahs haven't encouraged violence in regards to these cartoons.

So, just because the Danish want to print offensive cartoons doesn't mean the Muslims have to tolerate it, does it?

No they don't I too found the pictures to be offensive, religious persecution is religous persecution any way you slice it, it's the tactics used to express their dissent that I have the problem with.

 

[Trajan Octavian Titus]

Dude, we get it. That's like the fifth time you've posted that damn thing. I understand they're upset. It still doesn't mean that the comic made light of injured soldiers.

That's exactly what it did, putting a limbless soldier in a cartoon intended to invoke a comical response from the reader is making light of the situation, there's no other way of describing it end of story.

 

[Mikkel]

That's exactly what it did, putting a limbless soldier in a cartoon intended to invoke a comical response from the reader is making light of the situation, there's no other way of describing it end of story.

It wasn't meant to invoke a comical response, and simply posting that dam article over and over again doesn't change that. Unless YOU found it funny, I don't think one person on these boards did, regardless of whether or not they agree with the message.

Cartoons aren't always meant to be funny. Quit assuming.

 

[Navy Pride]

It is just in very poor taste to use a military personn will his limbs shot off to promote a political belief.........You liberals can try and justify it all you like but it does not wash..............Periosd.........

 

[Mikkel]

It is just in very poor taste to use a military personn will his limbs shot off to promote a political belief.........You liberals can try and justify it all you like but it does not wash..............Periosd.........

I'd be inclined to believe you, except conservatives can be just as tasteless when promoting a political belief. Thinking one side is morally superior in this regard is foolishness.

 

[Navy Pride]

I'd be inclined to believe you, except conservatives can be just as tasteless when promoting a political belief. Thinking one side is morally superior in this regard is foolishness.

That is your opinion and you know what they are like..How about providing some proof.....

 

[Mikkel]

That is your opinion and you know what they are like..How about providing some proof.....

"'Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years,
one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals."
Dr. Paul Cameron

"many of those people involved in Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many of them were homosexuals, the two things seem to go together, it is a pathology it is a sickness." - Pat Robertson

"[Homosexuals]want to come into churches and disrupt church services and throw blood all around and try to give people AIDS and spit in the face of ministers." -Pat Robertson

There's plenty of hate spewing from the right. Expressing offensive or repugnant views is hardly a liberal phenomena.

 

[Scarecrow Akhbar]

If the muslims dislike those cartoons in the Danish press so much, why are they working so hard to confirm the imagery?

Muslim Violence Spreads
BEIRUT -- A mob burned and ransacked the Danish Consulate in Beirut yesterday in anger over newspaper cartoons depicting the prophet Muhammad, prompting the interior minister to resign over his inability to prevent the violence.
The rioters, many of them Syrians, also attacked a Maronite church and scuffled with security forces, burning police and army vehicles. The State Department held the Syrian government responsible for similar actions a day earlier in Damascus.
Muslims worldwide are enraged at a series of cartoons that a Danish newspaper ran in September, depicting Muhammad in the company of veiled women and as a terrorist with a bomblike turban. Islam forbids any portrayal of its prophet as idolatry.
Many of yesterday's protesters arrived in Beirut in buses and carrying flags. They engaged Lebanese security forces in running street fights with rocks and sticks, burning or capturing police and emergency vehicles before storming the Danish Consulate in the majority-Christian neighborhood of Ashrafiyah.

I mean, why do those people think the cartoons were drawn in the first place.

At least Denmark has the guts to print them. The press and the policians in the US are still whining about how Islam is a religion of "peace". :2sick1:

 

[libertarian_knight]

Dude the drawing was obviously intended to bring about a laugh from the reader. I'm not saying his finger was pointed at the troops, however, it was making light of the situation, and imagine if a wounded soldier who supported his mission and who had his leg blown off in Iraq is sitting in a hospital bed and turns to the editorial section and sees that sh!t. Now Mr. Toles has all the right in the world to express his hatred for Rumsfeld and the war in Iraq but the troops aren't pawns to be used in his cause and I have every right to say so!

I didn't laugh, you didn't laugh. I am pretty confident most people didn't laugh in fact. I would even venture Toles himself didn't laugh.

Rumsfeld can use the troops as pawns which results in losses of sense, limb and life, but Toles can't point that out? That is what Toles was doing afterall.

 

[libertarian_knight]

It is just in very poor taste to use a military personn will his limbs shot off to promote a political belief.........You liberals can try and justify it all you like but it does not wash..............Periosd.........

Even poorer taste to have a military person with arms and legs, have them shot off to persue a political agenda though.

But I guess it suits the war supports psyche that they never have to consider the amputees of their wars.

 

[Navy Pride]

"'Unless we get medically lucky, in three or four years,
one of the options discussed will be the extermination of homosexuals."
Dr. Paul Cameron

"many of those people involved in Adolf Hitler were Satanists, many of them were homosexuals, the two things seem to go together, it is a pathology it is a sickness." - Pat Robertson

"[Homosexuals]want to come into churches and disrupt church services and throw blood all around and try to give people AIDS and spit in the face of ministers." -Pat Robertson

There's plenty of hate spewing from the right. Expressing offensive or repugnant views is hardly a liberal phenomena.

None of your so called examples use wounded military personnel to spew their hate for political purposes..........Where are they?????

 

[libertarian_knight]

None of your so called examples use wounded military personnel to spew their hate for political purposes..........Where are they?????

Navy,

you do understand that the administration is not going to use wounded military personnel for their own political purposed right? Well, at least not SERIOUSLy wounded amputees, because well, it was their descions that ultimately led to the amputations.

Of course, the reps were willing to greatly espouse the wounded soldier Jessica Lynch in a manner even contrary to what Ms. Lynch said about her wartime expiriences.

So, the Military and Government heralded Jessica Lynch, and, was it Tillamn, the football player, amongst MANY others for POLITICAL PURPOSES by relaying events, at times in complete contradiction, to actual events.

Yes, the reps DO in fact use wounded military personnel for political purposes.

 

[aquapub]

Here is a much more accurate and to-the-point cartoon about what is going on in this war:

http://www.dougmarlette.com/img7.gif

 

[Navy Pride]

Navy,

you do understand that the administration is not going to use wounded military personnel for their own political purposed right? Well, at least not SERIOUSLy wounded amputees, because well, it was their descions that ultimately led to the amputations.

Of course, the reps were willing to greatly espouse the wounded soldier Jessica Lynch in a manner even contrary to what Ms. Lynch said about her wartime expiriences.

So, the Military and Government heralded Jessica Lynch, and, was it Tillamn, the football player, amongst MANY others for POLITICAL PURPOSES by relaying events, at times in complete contradiction, to actual events.

Yes, the reps DO in fact use wounded military personnel for political purposes.

Give me and example and don't say Jessica Lynch.That whole situation was and embarrassment to the administration...........Show me where the administration used wounded soldiers as political pawns...

 

[Mikkel]

None of your so called examples use wounded military personnel to spew their hate for political purposes..........Where are they?????

I never claimed that conservatives used wounded military personnel for tasteless political purposes. I simply said that the right wing could be just as tasteless as the left. I then posted some quotes citing evidence of that. Unless the Miriam-Webster dictionary definition of 'tasteless' has changed to somehow include wounded military personnel, then I guess I'm wrong, but last time I checked, tasteless fell under the spewing of any generally offensive material, regardless of subject or topic. I'd say the quotes I provided fell under those guidelines. Please don't manipulate my words.

 

[Navy Pride]

I never claimed that conservatives used wounded military personnel for tasteless political purposes. I simply said that the right wing could be just as tasteless as the left. I then posted some quotes citing evidence of that. Unless the Miriam-Webster dictionary definition of 'tasteless' has changed to somehow include wounded military personnel, then I guess I'm wrong, but last time I checked, tasteless fell under the spewing of any generally offensive material, regardless of subject or topic. I'd say the quotes I provided fell under those guidelines. Please don't manipulate my words.

Yes but that is not what this thread is about.........Its about using military wounded for political gain.........How come you can't understand that???

 

[libertarian_knight]

Give me and example and don't say Jessica Lynch.That whole situation was and embarrassment to the administration...........Show me where the administration used wounded soldiers as political pawns...

Tillman, of course, his wounds killed him.

 

[Mikkel]

Yes but that is not what this thread is about.........Its about using military wounded for political gain.........How come you can't understand that???

I do understand that. After debating the specific topic until one of my eyes started bleeding, I decided to take a step back and look at the broader political implications of such a cartoon. The conclusion that I drew was that, regardless of political or ideological affiliation, people express tasteless views everywhere, and that the disgust was emanating more from a political preference than anything else. It is therefore hypocritical to denounce one person's 'tasteless' expression, while either upholding or ignoring the 'tasteless' expression of someone else simply because you agree with them, politically.
If you can't look at the bigger picture, then you really aren't learning anything, and if you aren't here to learn, why are you debating?

 

[akyron]

It just started with people bitching, you realise? The sentiment is the same, albeit unarmed.

Its the quiet ones that show up at your embassy with Russian made AK-47s and firebombs you have to worry about eh?


Cartoon protests turn deadly

"Two protesters were killed and 13 others injured"