Replies

You are correct in your analysis of the situation (of course; you are the one experience in this stuff).

I would rather love to see several nasty letters written in to the Globe for this; I realize that no real legal action is necissary or deamed in this sitation.

My problem with this caption, and the similar things that happen, is that it is an attempt to smear our military. Or, even if the journalist who wrote the caption was just naive and didn't think about the effect it would have on people reading it and how he/she should give more respect to the Marines in the picture and to the military in general, this person is still in the wrong. Yes, I know, they were simply doing their job by using a more 'sensational' headline, but why not show more respect and quit trying to sensationalize everything! I have met one person who works for the Globe who was conservative, but I would almost lay money down that the journalist who wrote this caption was a liberal.

My main point is that that there comes a point where you suddenly quit showing any respect whatsoever for those men and women who protect you, your peace, and your life at their own free will. This caption crossed that line. The reason why this caption crossed that line is because of the references to activities that are generally deemed 'bad' by the general public. The basic idea of this caption was that everyday PFC and LCPL Joe are wandering through the palace, tearing things apart and picking up things that they want to take home to their moms and girlfriends or keep for themselves....i.e. taking them...i.e. looting...i..e. stealing--and we all know what the general public thinks about stealing. It also used 'sensational' words to describe them pilfering through files and the like throughout the palace, which would also be generally considered bad.

I also wonder about the cigarrette part...From the picture I saw, I could not tell whether the guy actually had a cigarrette in his hand or simply had his hand up by his mouth. Unfortunately, I am on a public computer, and a Mac at that (I don't know how to use Macs and generally avoid and despise them), so I can't blow the pic up and take a closer look at it. I plan on doing that tonight as soon as I get back to my computer. In the meantime, I wonder if the original story that went with the picture said anything to confirm that this guy was indeed smoking... I do agree that it's no big deal; only very naive and dense people don't understand that everyone is human, and even Marines sometimes have addictive habits, including smoking. One cannot expect a person with a habit as such to completely give it up cold turkey when they are deployed and the item is still available, so, it is perfectly acceptable for this to be occuring.

BUT, still, I don't want to see a large number of guys in the military who are smoking, because that gives a misrepresentation to the general public. I see a lot of pictures of guys with glasses on, as well as of the women in the military, giving the impression to those portions of the general public who know nothing about the military and don't wish to take the time to actually research, that there is a high number of women in the military, as well as an unproportionately high number of those who wear glasses.

I think the biggest issue is that most journalists could care less about and aren't trying to represent things in the most proper way; instead, they are just trying to get 'the' story...

Now that I have spent a significant amount of time (much more time than I wanted) explaining my exact thoughts on the subject, I should take off, b/c, like I said before, I'm in between classes--and I should be doing work right now...

Oh, and just to add quite quickly, I speak of the 'general public' in terms of not just those living in city and urban areas, or even suburban areas, but instead across the country; I speak of those middle-of-the-road types who hold themselves and others around them to high morals and values. These are the type of people who mostly see these type of activities as 'wrong', while the majority of the public, or so it seems, that lives in very populated areas and often has 'the word or say' in things and stereotypes of the American public, are more liberal, and, therefore, think less of items and activities as such.

I understand your concerns. FYI, there have been LOTS of photos on the wire of guys smoking, so apparently there's no steps being taken to restrict their use of tobacco. I used the one photo, although it wasn't our troops, and I'm not an anti-smoking zealot but I do have a bit of unease about it as well ... the thing is, though, these guys are under pressure that we back here at our computer screens who've never experienced anything like it can only dream about. My feeling is that if it takes a little nicotine to get them through, then let 'em have the nicotine. Maybe patches would be more P.C. (insert laugh track!).

I had a teacher in high school who was an infantryman during World War II ... great guy, just a peach of a man. Anyway, he said he smoked during the war simply because it helped to (a.) relieve the boredom of waiting around in foxholes for the fighting to start (as he did during WWII, I don't think we've dug any in Iraq, we've been too busy moving) and (b.) relieve the pressure caused when the fighting started.