If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
William Graham wrote:
Of course....Exactly when we should leave is a judgment call....the people whose opinions I like the best have "guesstimated" in around 18 months...... Sounds reasonable, but I would never unfairly hold anybody to that at this point. But to say that there is no justification for staying now that Saddam Hussein has been deactivated is ludicrous....... I agree completely. That's like saying "Ok, we got our guy, we're outta here. Now that we've de-stabilized your power and bureaucratic governing structure and created a HUGE leadership void, you all can now go about the business of a civil war and killing each other in large numbers until something shakes out." That's irresponsible and ridiculous. That would be worse than what's happening now. -- As long as Major League Baseball expects public funding for their facilities, and as long as they enjoy an added level of freedom of operation from an anti-trust exemption, then there is a public trust and public interest involved. IOW, they owe me. |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
I'll tell you what is offensive, Mr. Mike Jacoubowsky.
YOU...were more upset that there were ratings offered by default on this particular web-site, than you apparently were to the horrific image of death. Don't start THIS AGAIN!! Most people...UNLIKE YOU...were too busy being floored by the enormity of the tragedy to notice something as petty as you have, least of all to stop and whine about something so totally unrelated. UNBELIEVABLE that one cannot post an image without someone...somewhere...taking offense. I am so sick of this politically-correct BS that I could just spit. I'm supposed to apologize for being offended that the photo was used in a commercial for-profit setting where people are making money by having it seen? That somebody should have the guts or whatever to recognize that the massive destruction and death deserve better than that? Even the "evil" network TV folk ran the 9/11 coverage for probably a day solid without commercial interruption. And no, that wasn't because no advertiser would pay to be associated with it. --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
The very picture in question was published on the front page of the Arizona
Daily Star last week. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
"Rate this image! 3697 people have rated this image, and the average
rating is 3.88."... Makes you wonder what people were rating it for, and what it would have taken to get a higher rating. Are you blaming the site, or the OP? Definitely not blaming the OP. The photo needs to be seen. It's a tragedy of epic proportions, and there's no reason to hide from it. Viewing the photos helps us to understand the magnitude of human suffering, the need to provide aid and work on how such things might be mitigated (you can't prevent a Tsunami, but you can certainly minimize the loss of life). And I'll admit, I over-reacted. Ideally, there should be a site where such photos can be viewed without advertising or something asking for a rating. Maybe I should have been offended only by the fact that many *had* taken the opportunity to rate the photo? --Mike-- Chain Reaction Bicycles www.ChainReactionBicycles.com |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Aguyathome writes:
It's the worst single human tragedy that I know of that has taken place in my 41 years on the planet ... That's the same thing the radio announcer said about the Hindenburg crash. -- Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
"The Dave©" wrote in message ... William Graham wrote: Of course....Exactly when we should leave is a judgment call....the people whose opinions I like the best have "guesstimated" in around 18 months...... Sounds reasonable, but I would never unfairly hold anybody to that at this point. But to say that there is no justification for staying now that Saddam Hussein has been deactivated is ludicrous....... I agree completely. That's like saying "Ok, we got our guy, we're outta here. Now that we've de-stabilized your power and bureaucratic governing structure and created a HUGE leadership void, you all can now go about the business of a civil war and killing each other in large numbers until something shakes out." That's irresponsible and ridiculous. That would be worse than what's happening now. Not only that, but that is exactly what we have been accused of doing too often in the past. In fact, it is the main reason why Bush Senior pulled out when he did in march of 1991........He didn't want to bother with all the work that would be involved with replacing Saddam Hussein, so he just walked away from it and left him in power. I was so mad at him that I didn't vote for him in 1992........ |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
"The Dave©" wrote in message ... William Graham wrote: Of course....Exactly when we should leave is a judgment call....the people whose opinions I like the best have "guesstimated" in around 18 months...... Sounds reasonable, but I would never unfairly hold anybody to that at this point. But to say that there is no justification for staying now that Saddam Hussein has been deactivated is ludicrous....... I agree completely. That's like saying "Ok, we got our guy, we're outta here. Now that we've de-stabilized your power and bureaucratic governing structure and created a HUGE leadership void, you all can now go about the business of a civil war and killing each other in large numbers until something shakes out." That's irresponsible and ridiculous. That would be worse than what's happening now. Not only that, but that is exactly what we have been accused of doing too often in the past. In fact, it is the main reason why Bush Senior pulled out when he did in march of 1991........He didn't want to bother with all the work that would be involved with replacing Saddam Hussein, so he just walked away from it and left him in power. I was so mad at him that I didn't vote for him in 1992........ |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic wrote:
Mike Henley writes: Hi. I didn't post it on that site. I saw the link on some news forum and it shocked me, so i shared it here. In fact, it shocked me enough that i didn't notice the rating thing you mention. Why did it shock you? The media have been talking for days about 135,000 people dead, and mass graves and cremations. Does it surprise you that thousands of bodies would be floating near the beach? It's not surprising that there are all those bodies there, but it's hard for most of us outside these areas to imagine what that many dead people actually LOOKS like, which is why the picture comes as such a shock. Perhaps these photos should be more widely distributed, as it sounds like people don't reflect very much on the texts they read. A photo is harder to ignore, I think. I don't think it's so much that people don't absorb what they read; as has been noted before, most pictures published in the media are so sanitized - bodies are covered or in bags, and only small numbers of them shown at a time - that we're just not used to scenes like that. 135,000 dead is an unfathomable number - consider that even in that picture, there are probably no more than 200-300 bodies, which is more like what we're used to seeing in the aftermath of a plane crash or something... and again, with the bodies mostly bagged or covered up already. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Mxsmanic wrote:
Mike Henley writes: Hi. I didn't post it on that site. I saw the link on some news forum and it shocked me, so i shared it here. In fact, it shocked me enough that i didn't notice the rating thing you mention. Why did it shock you? The media have been talking for days about 135,000 people dead, and mass graves and cremations. Does it surprise you that thousands of bodies would be floating near the beach? It's not surprising that there are all those bodies there, but it's hard for most of us outside these areas to imagine what that many dead people actually LOOKS like, which is why the picture comes as such a shock. Perhaps these photos should be more widely distributed, as it sounds like people don't reflect very much on the texts they read. A photo is harder to ignore, I think. I don't think it's so much that people don't absorb what they read; as has been noted before, most pictures published in the media are so sanitized - bodies are covered or in bags, and only small numbers of them shown at a time - that we're just not used to scenes like that. 135,000 dead is an unfathomable number - consider that even in that picture, there are probably no more than 200-300 bodies, which is more like what we're used to seeing in the aftermath of a plane crash or something... and again, with the bodies mostly bagged or covered up already. |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
"Mark²" mjmorgan(lowest even number wrote in
news:caGBd.67965$QR1.63045@fed1read04: Perhaps you would prefer we remove him, and then disappear? Interesting strategy. I just say that you have to be consistent in your argumentation. If you want to stay there you cannot use Saddam as a motivation. /Roland |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
What caused the horizontal stripes in my picture? How do I fix it? | Bubba | Digital Photography | 5 | October 30th 04 05:47 AM |
Picture editing question, help wanted please | Andy | Digital Photography | 6 | October 9th 04 01:32 PM |
[SI] Old stuff comments | Martin Djernæs | 35mm Photo Equipment | 23 | August 18th 04 08:30 PM |
How to Exhibit and Sell your picture and photos from your website | Film & Labs | 0 | January 26th 04 08:52 AM | |
How to Exhibit and Sell your picture and photos from your website | Other Photographic Equipment | 0 | January 26th 04 08:52 AM |