Echoes of Vietnam

Echoes of Vietnam

I felt I had said everything I had to say about the debate over the recent AP photograph of a dying Marine in Afghanistan, when a sharp-eyed editor at my new home Military​.com pointed out its similarity to a 1965 Life magazine cover, which also stirred up controversy for its gritty depiction of the reality of war.

The dramatic photograph, taken by Life magazine photographer Larry Burrows, shows helicopter crew chief James C. Farley shouting to crew as wounded comrades James Magel and Billy Owens lay dying at his feet.

The story behind the photograph can be heard on the blog USMC81

I also wanted to paraphrase a few comments I got from former colleagues who generally agreed that withholding the AP photo was not an effort to sanitize war, but to spare his family additional pain.

Still some were questioning if there wasn’t a double standard.  One cited a CBS 60 Minutes piece with an embedded reporter, that showed graphic images of enemy casualties.   Is that okay?  As long as they’re “bad guys?”

Another asked what to me is the key question: Do the wishes of one family outweigh the potential or assumed benefit to American society as a whole from seeing this photo?  That really IS the question.   And in this case I believe the reality could be conveyed without this painful image.  But I also understand, as one reporter said to me privately, what happens on the battlefield is not a private matter.  It’s very public.

The Life magazine photo was arguably more important,  journalistically speaking.  It brought the reality of war home to a generation of Americans who did not have the internet, or 24/7 cable news.   And it didn’t stop the war.   160,000 U.S. troops went to Vietnam after its publication, and 58,195 died.

Tags:

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

Join the Conversation

I’ve embedded three times as a freelancer in Iraq, in 2007, 08 and 09.

Mostly, I’m aggravated at the AP for spending so much time and effort justifying the photo. I don’t know what kind of internal or external debate occured with the Life photo, but I doubt there was a lot of “soul-searching” and rationalization by Larry Burrows, as we saw in the AP’s package.

A photograph should not need justification, or the audience walked through what they’re seeing and why. The Life photo is summed up perfectly — “With a brave crew on a deadly flight.”

Had the AP simply released the Cpl. Bernard photo with the simple caption, “Cpl. Bernard receives treatment from fellow Marines after an RPG attack. He later died,” wouldn’t that have been much more powerful than the pages of justification they added to the image?

I think the self-serving journals of Julie Jacobson put the emphasis on the reporter, where it shouldn’t be. The pre-publication notice to the photo guaranteed controversey. Now, the family feels ignored and betrayed, along with horrified and in a state of loss. All for what?

I’ve maybe made the wrong choice. Once, I had begun taking pictures of wounded Iraqi policemen coming in on an ambulance, being offloaded by their fellow officers. Nobody was going to stop my picture taking — but I didn’t want to be “that guy,” photographing somebody bleeding on a stretcher. So I stopped. Now there’s no pictures at all — but they were men enough to go out there, and get shot doing battle — so couldn’t I have been tough enough to take pictures of their blood and effort? Burrows and Jacobson wouldn’t have stopped shooting.

The photo of Cpl. Bernard should have remained the same as Burrows’ Life cover, a hard photo to look at, of what war is all about. And that’s it. But if you’re justifying and rationalizing, then you’re not really just a reporter anymore, and the photo becomes a tool to an end, and that’s not right. It’s not at all fair to Cpl. Bernard.

PS — while trying to edit my long comment because it was too long, I cut out a primary opinion. I believe in “do no harm,” and with no compelling and timely requirement to release the photo now, the family’s request should have been honored.

Vietnam has been ringing in my ears since Powell gave his UN show on “mobile WMD trailers”… the things that turned out to be hydrogen generators for tethered observation balloons. It was “The USS Maddox” redux, all over again. We installed our trademark clumsy puppets, Thieu/Perv/Karzai. Then the soldier’s hell of fighting an enemy who blended into the “friendlies.” Outnumbered, enter the total reliance upon air power. Finally, we lose all support in the errant bombs and collateral damage. Nothing hit home so hard as the recent documentary on Pete Seeger and his Smothers’ Brothers segment where he sang “Big Muddy,” delivered with a passion and a fire showing that not one day had passed between Twiggy and Twitter.

NS Webster, thanks for giving the embed perspective. I agree with your perspective here
“I believe in “do no harm,” and with no compelling and timely requirement to release the photo now, the family’s request should have been honored.”

It seems heartless to me to not at least give the family a grieving period before release. I understand the complexities of the issue and that Iraqis have been photographed in similar ways with no similar deferences.

It is a good debate and if nothing else will bring much needed attention to the heros on the front line.

http://​www​.hooahnews​.com

This is only My opinion. Vietnam as haunted Me for 43 year’s My friends died in My arms and When I got home i was treated less then a dog. I was no ones Hero. But I will honor the boys out in battle and they are now My hero’s. So show all the photos let them show the world that our troops never run. and When they come Home thank them for giving us all the freedom that we have.

I remember the picture series from lifr magazine. There where about 8 more photos of the light inside the issue.

All I have to say is this. I went to Vietnam in 1971, where I lost my illusions about patriotism and “fighting for freedom” and all those other wonderful images, and discovered the reality of beating a determined enemy who was trying to win a war in his own backyard. And with a Draft Lottery number of 321, you can tell that I was a REAL volunteer.
We didn’t belong in the deals that got us in SEA, but once we were there, we should have fought to WIN. We never really did. Blame that on political expediency. We won every battle and still lost the war.
Now we’re in another war that’s going the same way, for the same reasons; political expediency. The Soviet Union lost in Afghanistan because they were fighting both the mudjahedin and Us; now we’re fighting the mudje/Taliban/al Qaeda, armed with leftover US and USSR equipment, and unless the politicians in DC and in Kabul decide to WIN this war, we will once again win every battle and LOSE the war.
And once again, our warriors will go from heroes to villains, because of the media.
I never got MY parade; if the media screw the returning heroes out of theirs, then it’s time to take the media down.

It sounds like our military in Iraq/Afgan may be getting into another Vietnam. If the history of the Vietnam war is correctly depicted in Dereliction Of Duty — fought based on political poll numbers and restrictions on effective engagement of the enemy — I’m afraid we’re headed that direction. The press seems to want our men and women on the front lines to fight a “nice” war. There’s no such thing. If we truly plan to stay in Afganistan, then remove the imbedded press and get on with cleaning house. It isn’t fair to our forces to restrict their fighting ability by keeping their actions under a microscope while dodging bullets and IEDs. If the US isn’t willing to go that direction, then I agree with George Will: bring the soldiers home and fight with technology.

I couldn’t agree more. Damn the suits and any media slime that refuses to report things as they are without their twists and bias added to it. Our soldiers deserve far better than that, as does the American public!

I do not think the US government should be responcible for the saftey and well being of reporters. I honestly believe thier presence put the military personnel they are covering in more danger. I also believe that thier companies and not the taxpayers should be responsible for any injuries, treatment , and transportation necessary to get them where ever they want to go.

In 50 years or less, the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are going to be chronicled in American History books. Hopefully the input of veterans of both wars will be sought before the books go to press. In this day of technology(i.e. the internet, e-mail, etc.) no purpose is served by sugarcoating war. Lives get lost, individuals get maimed. Do not forget the munitions makers, manufacturing the guns, bullets and armored vests help put food on their tables. World War II on television was referenced with McHales’ Navy, 12 O’ Clock High, Combat and Garrison’s Guerrillas. Not to mention the wartime comic books (Fighting Army, Fighting Navy, Fighting Marines, Easy Company with Sgt. Rock and the Haunted Tank) The Korean War was referenced with M.A.S.H. which my grandfather( a veteran of World War II) hated because he felt it made fun of the Army. Will there be any dramas or sitcoms about Iraq or Afghanistan? That will probably depend on the market forces and how receptive the public would be. Unlike the 20th century, movie companies don’t fall all over themselves to make war films. No epics like “The Longest Day”. Then again they don’t exactly make movies based on novels anymore.

Well stated, my friend, the politicians can never seem to get it straight and learn from past experience.…“You fight the war to WIN it ‚or you get out and dont fight!” You cant ‘play ‘the game of politics’ and fight a war at the same time! Since the 50’s, we’ve tried, and failed, TWICE, to fight a ‘war’ and play politics !! The only ones who suffer the consequences are our brave members of our military, NOT the weak politicians! We should take lessons from the Israelis…they fight to Win and do not care what the World opinion is. They do what they have to for survival. Our ‘politically correct’ ELECTED leaders cannot figure out that simple concept…“Fight to win or dont fight at all”. Peace comes from Strength, not political minded weakness.
Ken ‚Scarborough, Maine

The Thunder Run has linked to this post in the blog post From the Front: 09/09/2009 News and Personal dispatches from the front and the home front.

I whole heartedly agree. The media either twists or omits what is really happening, and our elected officials would rather be viewed by the foreign press as “world friendly.” We are not part of a one world government and would do well to follow Israel’s example. Political correctness and twisting the news doesn’t win wars it wins elections. Fight to win or don’t fight at all!

I’m with you there brother. I served with the First Marine Division in 69. I have a step-son who just
got back from Iraq from his 2nd tour. He clearly see’s the difference in respect for veterans of
both wars.

I concur, and WELCOME HOME, BROTHER!

Like Viet Nam the politicians are fighting to lose… A Marine General in Afghanistan states it is not his job to kill Taliban… The Air Force General in charge of the airwar in Iraq and Afghanistan now has the Air Force do flyovers of enemy combatants to “scare them away” instead of bombing them… Soldiers in Iraq are not allowed to use the 40mm grenade and are not even issued the rounds for the weapons any longer but still required to carry the now useless weapon on their M-4… A sure recipe for continued loss of American lives and an emboldening of our sworn enemies…

C SMI TH

I AGREE IF WE GO IN TO FIGHT W E SHOULD GO IN TO WIN I MEAN GO IN AND KICK BUT AND TAKE NAMES NOT SCRATCH YOUR BUTT AND WIND YOUR WATCH . HU RAH FOR THE 366TH TFW 4TH TFS GUNFIGHTERS DANANG A.B. RVN 1969–1970

I would like to buy the documentary about vietnam veterans “The haunted heroes”, someboy can help me?
my mail is jacaranda0@hotmail.com , thanks and best regards.
Julio Vidal.

no help?

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement