On Thu, Mar 14, 2002 at 03:40:56AM +0100, Iggy Drougge wrote:

> Whatever they may have fought for, the Iwojima picture is a propaganda
> photo.  

No, it isn't.  Propaganda is created specifically to influence via
mass media.

The Iwo Jima photo is historical, snapped by a war correspondent on
the scene.

Put the picture with some kind of caption, and then it can be propaganda.
There is a world of difference here.

> We could use that famous picture of the Vietnamese girl running
> naked from napalm bombings, that, too, is a picture of soldiers fighting to
> preserve liberty and democracy, though not a fitting propaganda picture.

There is no symbolism that matches NetBSD there.  

The world recognizes that Vietnam, which was originally crapped upon by
the French BTW, was a mistake all around.  Neither side can be sainted.
The world also recognizes that Vietnam was different from WWII.  Why keep
comparing things which are not the same.

I mean for God's sake--oh the irony--we have Satan as a mascot!

> As for the revolution, I thought most people agreed that it was a good
> thing. I associate it with the enlightenment and democracy, a people's
> reign.

The result of Iwo Jima was that Japan was rebuilt into a nation more
powerful than it had ever been, or likely would have become.  That isn't
what happened in the revolution mentioned.  It might have been the
intent, but at least acknowledge that this is just as controversial,
perhaps moreso.

Like someone else said, there are double standards at work here.

I personally like the liberty idea, because I don't fault people for
failure when they had the right idea (just as I honor soldiers who fought
with honor, even the enemy).

> > I'm quite sure that I don't understand your thought process here...
> 
> War bad. Democracy good.

Peace without democracy bad.  War with Democracy good.

Don't you see how this has no end?

-- 
UNIX/Perl/C/Pizza__________________________________shannon@widomaker.com