RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 135,890
Posts: 5,222,749
Members: 24,234
Currently online: 524
Newest member: evtclub

TrekToday headlines

De Lancie Joins Mind Puppets
By: T'Bonz on Apr 24

Cumberbatch One Of Time Magazine’s Most Influential
By: T'Bonz on Apr 24

Trek Actor Smithsonian Magazine Cover First
By: T'Bonz on Apr 24

Takei To Receive Award
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

Yelchin In New Comedy
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

U.S. Rights For Pegg Comedy Secured
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

Shatner: Aging and Work
By: T'Bonz on Apr 23

Kurtzman And Orci Go Solo
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Star Trek #32 Preview
By: T'Bonz on Apr 22

Voyager Bridge Via The Oculus Rift
By: T'Bonz on Apr 21


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Lounges & General Chat > Miscellaneous

Miscellaneous Discussion of non-Trek topics.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old April 10 2013, 02:27 PM   #1
starsailorjane
Ensign
 
Censorship and War

Since after the Vietnam War, the main stream media has shied away from showing graphic images of war. A lot of this has moved to the internet, where the option to view is available. However, most people tend to avoid this and they do not get exposed to the graphic images that those during the Vietnam era were exposed to. Even some of the so called liberal message boards ban graphic images of this kind.

Is this a positive?

I think so. I ultimately think war should be viewed from as aseptic a point of view as possible. Soldiers are ultimately pawns in the global chessboard of geopolitics. Sometimes the widespread deaths of soldiers is necessary for the greater good. The more suffering and death that can be desensitized with the general public, the the more a leader can maintain public support for a bloody war. The more abstract these concepts become to the general public, the better it is for national security and the human psyche. Otherwise, you increase the likelihood of public discontent with the war, like what happened with Vietnam. We could've still won that war.

Last edited by starsailorjane; April 10 2013 at 02:42 PM.
starsailorjane is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 02:32 PM   #2
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Censorship and War

Odd sub-forum for such a thread...
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 03:29 PM   #3
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Censorship and War

So you're saying Picard should've led us during the Vietnam war?
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 06:23 PM   #4
T'Girl
Vice Admiral
 
T'Girl's Avatar
 
Re: Censorship and War

Both LBJ and Nixon watched "A Private Little War" and quietly nodded their heads.


T'Girl is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 06:31 PM   #5
Ensign_Redshirt
Commodore
 
Re: Censorship and War

BillJ wrote: View Post
Odd sub-forum for such a thread...
Not to mention that it makes a pretty bizarre thread on itself...
Ensign_Redshirt is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 06:33 PM   #6
Rhaven
Captain
 
Rhaven's Avatar
 
Location: Rhaven in Boston
Re: Censorship and War

starsailorjane wrote: View Post
Since after the Vietnam War, the main stream media has shied away from showing graphic images of war. A lot of this has moved to the internet, where the option to view is available. However, most people tend to avoid this and they do not get exposed to the graphic images that those during the Vietnam era were exposed to. Even some of the so called liberal message boards ban graphic images of this kind.

Is this a positive?

I think so. I ultimately think war should be viewed from as aseptic a point of view as possible. Soldiers are ultimately pawns in the global chessboard of geopolitics. Sometimes the widespread deaths of soldiers is necessary for the greater good. The more suffering and death that can be desensitized with the general public, the the more a leader can maintain public support for a bloody war. The more abstract these concepts become to the general public, the better it is for national security and the human psyche. Otherwise, you increase the likelihood of public discontent with the war, like what happened with Vietnam. We could've still won that war.
"Sometimes the widespread deaths of soldiers is necessary for the greater good"
Which side are you speaking of? Our soldiers? Theirs?
Speaking as the mother of a deployed soldier, one loss is one too many.
__________________
I'm not a geek, I'm an aficionado.
Rhaven is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 06:39 PM   #7
BillJ
Admiral
 
Location: In the 23rd Century...
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Censorship and War

Rhaven wrote: View Post
...one loss is one too many.
This.
__________________
I'm not popular enough to be different! - Homer Simpson
BillJ is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 07:13 PM   #8
Use of Time
Commodore
 
Use of Time's Avatar
 
Location: Va. Beach, VA
Re: Censorship and War

starsailorjane wrote: View Post
Since after the Vietnam War, the main stream media has shied away from showing graphic images of war. A lot of this has moved to the internet, where the option to view is available. However, most people tend to avoid this and they do not get exposed to the graphic images that those during the Vietnam era were exposed to. Even some of the so called liberal message boards ban graphic images of this kind.

Is this a positive?

I think so. I ultimately think war should be viewed from as aseptic a point of view as possible. Soldiers are ultimately pawns in the global chessboard of geopolitics. Sometimes the widespread deaths of soldiers is necessary for the greater good. The more suffering and death that can be desensitized with the general public, the the more a leader can maintain public support for a bloody war. The more abstract these concepts become to the general public, the better it is for national security and the human psyche. Otherwise, you increase the likelihood of public discontent with the war, like what happened with Vietnam. We could've still won that war.
Saying phrases like "sometimes the widespread deaths of Soldiers is necessary for the greater good" and "we could have won the Vietnam War" in the same paragraph would be hilariously ironic if it weren't so God damned sad.
__________________
Searching for something, a million miles and a ways to go.
Use of Time is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 07:17 PM   #9
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: Censorship and War

er, so you're saying that in the TNG era, Starfleet should censor images and reports of war?
sonak is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 07:26 PM   #10
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Censorship and War

sonak wrote: View Post
er, so you're saying that in the TNG era, Starfleet should censor images and reports of war?
"What about freedom of the press?"
"Please tell me you're not that naive."
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 08:22 PM   #11
matthunter
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Censorship and War

The OP is a sockpuppet account that has been banned twice now from TNZ for starting political troll threads. I'm assuming from their level of cunning displayed thus far that they simply got the wrong subforum, along with forgetting to tie their shoelaces.
__________________
If you're frustrated with a smug, arrogant right-wing nutjob poster who never backs up their arguments and twists out of answering straight questions, try the Ignore feature! Now with raspberry filling.
matthunter is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 08:24 PM   #12
R. Star
Rear Admiral
 
R. Star's Avatar
 
Location: Shangri-La
Re: Censorship and War

Considering the level of hateful posting as the norm in TNZ... I'm almost morbidly curious what you have to do there to get banned.
__________________
"I was never a Star Trek fan." J.J. Abrams
R. Star is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 08:35 PM   #13
matthunter
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Censorship and War

R. Star wrote: View Post
Considering the level of hateful posting as the norm in TNZ... I'm almost morbidly curious what you have to do there to get banned.
Be so blatantly trolling as to have posted the exact same topic, just phrased from different sides of political aisle, on multiple boards including one devoted to rape fetishism (known to us due to another poster's patronage of said site which has - quite aside from his utter lack of wit, charm or indeed evidence of basic synaptic function - earned him almost universal derision).
__________________
If you're frustrated with a smug, arrogant right-wing nutjob poster who never backs up their arguments and twists out of answering straight questions, try the Ignore feature! Now with raspberry filling.
matthunter is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 08:37 PM   #14
Avon
Fleet Captain
 
Avon's Avatar
 
Location: Space Wales
Re: Censorship and War

well the OP started another Admiral Cain thread in BSG, agreeing with the last crazy thread, so i cant imagine they'll last long
__________________

Hello to Jason Isaacs!
Avon is offline  
Old April 10 2013, 08:39 PM   #15
Rhaven
Captain
 
Rhaven's Avatar
 
Location: Rhaven in Boston
Re: Censorship and War

matthunter wrote: View Post
R. Star wrote: View Post
Considering the level of hateful posting as the norm in TNZ... I'm almost morbidly curious what you have to do there to get banned.
Be so blatantly trolling as to have posted the exact same topic, just phrased from different sides of political aisle, on multiple boards including one devoted to rape fetishism (known to us due to another poster's patronage of said site which has - quite aside from his utter lack of wit, charm or indeed evidence of basic synaptic function - earned him almost universal derision).
Good to know. Thanks.
__________________
I'm not a geek, I'm an aficionado.
Rhaven is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Tags
censorship war

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:45 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.