Actually it’s pretty easy to argue against not showing graphic footage which will incense the already overzealous extremists and bring more people into their “holy Jihad” against the oppressing West. People who are happy to send a 12 year old boy into a market to blow himself up would like nothing less than seeing that blood and horror shown all over the world. Releasing images of Bin Laden dead would not be in the best interest of non-extremists and instantly make him a martyr, these guys are really good at spin.
The problem cuts both ways. The bloodlust is already there on both sides. The reaction of people in the US has been a little disquieting, and showing people already in that kind of fervour a photo of bin Laden with a hole through his face probably wouldn’t so much cause them to pull back and reflect as it would increase the mania.
…ok so we have the pov from a overzealous extremists and how the images will impact them, but I think you have to explore the social impacts such pictures will have, not only on extremists but other people in society.
- a man living in the US with a son who’s a solider
- a teenager growing up in Afghanistan
- a uni student in Australia
how are they effected when they see the pictures of war?
I’m sure they will all react differently because of where they are and how it will effect the society they live in. Then we can weight up the pros and cons of releasing such pictures and make a decision.
From what I have heard from US citizens, there were very few people who were actually celebrating. Most were more of the opinion ‘well its good that its over, but disappointing it ended in more death’ it’s just that New York and the capital are the two places the most affected, so those that did want to celebrate got together there.
I don’t judge either way, whether you wish to celebrate or not, I just don’t want people thinking that all americans are happy that things ended this way.
Also I have heard but not seen myself that there was a father of a soldier who died over there that spoke simply about how it is nice that other people have closure now, he is happy for them, but it does nothing to bring his son back and does nothing to lessen his pain.
I agree we shouldn’t forget about war and its certainly not a video game but is this the path you really want? You want to be showing the gruesome blood photos of wounded service men and the aftermath of serious gun fights. Every time we kill one of the enemy leaders have front page coverage of a gruesome bloody head? By showing it every day you run the risk of trivialising it. The only way one could know war is to have to live amongst it every day and not by see gory pictures in the news to satisfy peoples curiosity.
I think you misunderstood the point? I don’t think Jon Stewart wants to glorify war with bloody photos, it sounds more like he wants people to understand the horror of war, so that they don’t take it for granted.
But Scott, it -is- trivial now. You can tell because a man is dead, and people are dancing and cheering and being full of joy over it. It should have been a solemn day, not a raucous one.
Pretty sure the US government decided that showing people what war actually was really wasn’t in their own political best interest. The Vietnam backlash owed quite a bit to the prolific and graphic media coverage of the time, after all.
I think you’ve also missed the point of what he’s saying here.
He is saying that there is no reason to flaunt photos of a dead man, even if he is an enemy who ‘got what he deserved’ (as I hear people say often). If you want to show those kind of images, there is no difference between deciding to show OBL photos and show the photos of dead soldiers our countries sent over, because it’s the wrong thing to do.
If we want to shock people by seeing what a head with a hole in it looks like, don’t detach it from reality.
Yes, I think the point he’s making is that you either see all of war, or you see none of it. If you want to see the photos of Bin Laden with a hole in his head, fine – but while you’re at it, you should look at all the photos of Iraqi and Afghani civillians, of troops from all over the world missing limbs with holes in their faces, because THAT is the reality of war. Or, you see none of it. He’s not glorifying it – he’s saying, understand that this is what war is.
It’s not often I find myself disagreeing with Jon Stewart but this is one of them. It’s only a very primitive form of warfare that consists in displaying the scalps of your enemy in all their goulish detail. Sure there’s a macarbre appetite for this sort of thing but responsible armies like the US army shouldn’t be engaging in this basest form of communication. That was what we got from the Bush administration which, in terms of communication at home and abroad, and neutralising the enemy, was an utter failure from start to finish. I think Obama’s administration was right to hold these images back. It’s enough to know that Bin Laden is dead and we surely don’t need to be subjected to the horrific images of his bullet-ridden body.
Stevoisiak
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 8:54 AMIts been said many times, but Stewart put it best right here.
Adam Ruch
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:09 AMVery difficult to argue rationally against that.
Casey2
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:23 AMActually it’s pretty easy to argue against not showing graphic footage which will incense the already overzealous extremists and bring more people into their “holy Jihad” against the oppressing West. People who are happy to send a 12 year old boy into a market to blow himself up would like nothing less than seeing that blood and horror shown all over the world.
Releasing images of Bin Laden dead would not be in the best interest of non-extremists and instantly make him a martyr, these guys are really good at spin.
crotchdot
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:38 AMPretty sure it was killing him that instantly made him a martyr.
Monkey Butler
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:43 AMThe problem cuts both ways. The bloodlust is already there on both sides. The reaction of people in the US has been a little disquieting, and showing people already in that kind of fervour a photo of bin Laden with a hole through his face probably wouldn’t so much cause them to pull back and reflect as it would increase the mania.
aped
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:45 AM…ok so we have the pov from a overzealous extremists and how the images will impact them, but I think you have to explore the social impacts such pictures will have, not only on extremists but other people in society.
- a man living in the US with a son who’s a solider
- a teenager growing up in Afghanistan
- a uni student in Australia
how are they effected when they see the pictures of war?
I’m sure they will all react differently because of where they are and how it will effect the society they live in. Then we can weight up the pros and cons of releasing such pictures and make a decision.
706
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 11:12 AMFrom what I have heard from US citizens, there were very few people who were actually celebrating. Most were more of the opinion ‘well its good that its over, but disappointing it ended in more death’ it’s just that New York and the capital are the two places the most affected, so those that did want to celebrate got together there.
I don’t judge either way, whether you wish to celebrate or not, I just don’t want people thinking that all americans are happy that things ended this way.
Also I have heard but not seen myself that there was a father of a soldier who died over there that spoke simply about how it is nice that other people have closure now, he is happy for them, but it does nothing to bring his son back and does nothing to lessen his pain.
Braaains
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:13 AMWell said. War isn’t a videogame.
If it was then the Navy SEALS would have teabagged bin Laden after they shot him.
James Mac
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 11:51 AMWell, they apparently dunked him in water.
Effluvium Boy
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:17 AMIndeed…
Scott
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:27 AMI agree we shouldn’t forget about war and its certainly not a video game but is this the path you really want? You want to be showing the gruesome blood photos of wounded service men and the aftermath of serious gun fights. Every time we kill one of the enemy leaders have front page coverage of a gruesome bloody head? By showing it every day you run the risk of trivialising it. The only way one could know war is to have to live amongst it every day and not by see gory pictures in the news to satisfy peoples curiosity.
MadDogMike
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:31 AMI think you misunderstood the point? I don’t think Jon Stewart wants to glorify war with bloody photos, it sounds more like he wants people to understand the horror of war, so that they don’t take it for granted.
Fenixius
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 11:12 AMBut Scott, it -is- trivial now. You can tell because a man is dead, and people are dancing and cheering and being full of joy over it. It should have been a solemn day, not a raucous one.
ShiggyNinty
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:49 AMNot enough truthiness for my liking.
Mannon
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 9:52 AMPretty sure the US government decided that showing people what war actually was really wasn’t in their own political best interest. The Vietnam backlash owed quite a bit to the prolific and graphic media coverage of the time, after all.
Alex Rogan
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 1:19 PMYeah I agree. Photos of war not only show uncomfortable truths, but allow for empathy – the last thing politicians want you feeling for the ‘enemy’.
womble
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:25 AMHow much do we like it when our enemies parade images of OUR dead soldiers?
Oh that’s right: we don’t like it. Not at all.
Maybe Jon Stewart should try his hand at military service sometime. It may give him a different perspective on such things.
Phil
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:38 AMI think you’ve also missed the point of what he’s saying here.
He is saying that there is no reason to flaunt photos of a dead man, even if he is an enemy who ‘got what he deserved’ (as I hear people say often). If you want to show those kind of images, there is no difference between deciding to show OBL photos and show the photos of dead soldiers our countries sent over, because it’s the wrong thing to do.
If we want to shock people by seeing what a head with a hole in it looks like, don’t detach it from reality.
David Winston
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 10:45 AMI think you’ve missed the point of what he’s saying here.
He’s saying we (you US Americans) NEED to see what war’s like to understand it.
SupremeBeans
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 6:25 PMYes, I think the point he’s making is that you either see all of war, or you see none of it. If you want to see the photos of Bin Laden with a hole in his head, fine – but while you’re at it, you should look at all the photos of Iraqi and Afghani civillians, of troops from all over the world missing limbs with holes in their faces, because THAT is the reality of war. Or, you see none of it. He’s not glorifying it – he’s saying, understand that this is what war is.
Ben
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 12:09 PMExactly the argument stated in ‘Masters of Doom’ as to why id wanted persistent bodies in Wolfenstien 3D….
Dick Galley
Friday, May 6, 2011 at 7:05 PMGood thing that ba****d has gone for ever; no paradise for him!
panda_snfr
Saturday, May 7, 2011 at 12:07 AMMethinks John Stewart hasn’t seen too many videogames in the last decade.
Tom
Saturday, May 7, 2011 at 12:16 AMIt’s not often I find myself disagreeing with Jon Stewart but this is one of them. It’s only a very primitive form of warfare that consists in displaying the scalps of your enemy in all their goulish detail. Sure there’s a macarbre appetite for this sort of thing but responsible armies like the US army shouldn’t be engaging in this basest form of communication. That was what we got from the Bush administration which, in terms of communication at home and abroad, and neutralising the enemy, was an utter failure from start to finish. I think Obama’s administration was right to hold these images back. It’s enough to know that Bin Laden is dead and we surely don’t need to be subjected to the horrific images of his bullet-ridden body.
quasimod
Saturday, May 7, 2011 at 3:10 AMWait, is he saying I could have been getting gold coins?!