] "When Iraq broadcast photos of dead American soldiers,
] the U.S. considered that against human rights," Jordanian
] political analyst Sahar al-Qassem said. "So, why are they
] violating that now by showing such inhumane pictures?"

I strongly agree with this position. Although I am sympathetic to the position that hiding the public from the realities of war has as much to do with desensitizing them as it does with respecting the families of the dead, if we are to take the position that it is morally inappropriate to show pictures like this, and we absolutely have taken this position, then to turn around and do so is an abomination. We are obviously violating our own moral platitudes. I am extremely disappointed.

Don't be fooled by explanations that there are "strategic" reasons for this; that people in Iraq need evidence that the "tyrants have been deposed." The Iraqi military had "strategic" reasons for showing the pictures that they showed: that people in Iraq need evidence that American soldiers can be defeated. The POINT of a moral platitude is that it overshadows strategic interests.

If they wanted to prove that these men were dead they could have found another way. Publish the dental xrays. It would be just as open to scepticism as these pictures have been.

Yesterday, if speaking honestly, I'd have told you I was on the fence about the administration. I don't like the way they've been going about things, but I understand the strategy, and it does appear to be working, and you have to give them credit for that.

However, this kind of blatent moral hyprocracy is beyond the pale. If you don't stand behind your own moral platitudes, then what IS it that separates you from the terrorists? Nothing at all.

I'm going to vote for the most promising opposing candidate in the election.

] "When Iraq broadcast photos of dead American soldiers,
] the U.S. considered that against human rights," Jordanian
] political analyst Sahar al-Qassem said. "So, why are they
] violating that now by showing such inhumane pictures?"

I strongly agree with this position. Although I am sympathetic to the position that hiding the public from the realities of war has as much to do with desensitizing them as it does with respecting the families of the dead, if we are to take the position that it is morally inappropriate to show pictures like this, and we absolutely have taken this position, then to turn around and do so is an abomination. We are obviously violating our own moral platitudes. I am extremely disappointed.

Don't be fooled by explanations that there are "strategic" reasons for this; that people in Iraq need evidence that the "tyrants have been deposed." The Iraqi military had "strategic" reasons for showing the pictures that they showed: that people in Iraq need evidence that American soldiers can be defeated. The POINT of a moral platitude is that it overshadows strategic interests.

If they wanted to prove that these men were dead they could have found another way. Publish the dental xrays. It would be just as open to scepticism as these pictures have been.

Yesterday, if speaking honestly, I'd have told you I was on the fence about the administration. I don't like the way they've been going about things, but I understand the strategy, and it does appear to be working, and you have to give them credit for that.

However, this kind of blatent moral hyprocracy is beyond the pale. If you don't stand behind your own moral platitudes, then what IS it that separates you from the terrorists? Nothing at all.

I'm going to vote for the most promising opposing candidate in the election.

[ I agree with Decius. I remember the outrage and disgust I felt when I saw the pictures of dead American soldiers on that website, and I don't understand why we have "stooped to that level" so to speak. All strategy aside, this is hypocracy. - Nano]