Bush administration ships bodies of dead soldiers home as Freight

Today's Neil Lisst political cartoon is anything but funny. It's about the despicable practice the Bush administration has of shipping deceased soldiers' bodies by commercial freight, instead of treating them with the honors they have traditionally been given. It's one more thing that shows how uncaring the Bush administration really is about the young men and women who sacrifice their lives fighting this ill-conceived war.

http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst/

Before planes, it was in trains.

beaten to death for the last week. It is not a new practice.

Maybe this thread will help you appreciate the problem. It's not about whether you think it's been done before.

as you said it would me? A very divided issue here on DU.:dilemma:

... because they are not veterans or not connected to any veterans.

It's sort of like the people here who think soldiers signed up voluntarily, so they deserve whatever happens to them in war.

The lack of concern of Bush for soldiers is real, and the shipping thing is just a small part of that, used to demonstrate the way money is saved when it comes to "honoring our fallen heroes."

for its purposes, like backdrops for speeches, but fails to come through for soldiers, dead or alive. It's one thing that happens which tells the soldier he's expendable and there is a dollar figure attached to him, even in death.

not bulk freight

How else would they?

It's more respectful of their sacrifice than throwing them in the luggage compartment.

And, as we have pointed out before, in many threads over many days, there is nothing new about this. Even the grieving father who started the outcry has been on TV admitting that he has found out it is SOP and has been for decades.

The whole issue is sad, but it is really a displacement of emotions such as denial, anger and all the other steps of the grieving process. A parent loses an offspring. Perhaps supportive of the invasion in the beginning and/or even a supporter of bush, the loss creates a schism; need to believe the war was right and nobel in order to make the loss have meaning and the deep gut knowledge that the war was not necessary, but a war of choice based on lies. To square those two things and find a vent for anger, people can project a lot of raw emotion on an issue which is not the root of what they are feeling.

It is not the first time people have projected their rage onto something they think they can change/control in some way, rather than break through the delusions which make life more comfortable. It is hard to conclude the country is led by evil people and so much more comfortable to hopefully cling to the notion that leaders are kind fathers who will love and protect us.

So much less threatening to focus uneasiness and anger at some side issue when the truth would destroy comfortable illusion. It happens to most of us and for much less serious issues.

The problem is the criminal invasion, the loss of life, the horrible things done by average people under orders of criminal leaders. It creates huge clefts in some peoples' lives when they try to avoid acknowledging the fact that their loved ones served/died in a cause which was not noble. Their rage will eat them until they can face the real cause down.

I have the utmost sympathy for these people. Truth is a very bitter pill and many just cannot swallow it.

The dishonor done to these fallen soldiers is not the manner in which they must be brought to the area where they will be buried. The dishonor is that their lives were thrown away by criminals America calls leaders and thrown away for profit.

There is something to rage against.

Let the fallen come home in peace. Work on preventing more losses for nothing but the profits of a few. Honor them by facing reality and helping those who have trouble seeing truth for their pain.

Honor them by saving their brothers and sisters from the same pointless fate.

Your arguments really beg the question. You look at the cartoon, and you see all the threads you read at DU. That's YOU. You're one person, one of about 8000 who will likely read it today. Each one has some response, and some will be like yours. Many won't.

You seem to think that your arguments somehow make the practice acceptable to all who hear it. Not true.

Besides, have you noticed yet it's a political cartoon? It's not an essay, it's not intended to thoroughly discuss the topic. It's a snapshot of a thought, MY THOUGHT. It's a thought some agree with, and some hate. I know where you come down. So now we know your opinion. Great.

From there, the fallen have to go their separate ways to where their families will lay them to rest.

A military plane full of fallen comrades? What are they gonna do, drop them off locally like school kids at bus stops? To do that, the military would have to hold bodies until they got a full load. Is that kinder than getting some fallen hero home to loved ones ASAP?

To get the fallen home as soon as possible usually means via regularly scheduled flights and THAT means commercial airlines. As they cannot transport the dead in the passenger compartment, how else but in the cargo hold?

Practical matters loom large in the matter of transporting the deceased.

You're entirely too literal.

someday, we will talk loss and the 60s

... what the connection is to your comment.

Seriously, what did you have in mind? I love talking about the 60s.

It appears that it's been the military's normal procedure, and at least in this case was handled pretty respectfully.

http://www.blackfive.net/main/2004/04/taking_chance.html

therefore less

only that they get there.

How do you know whether the dead care?

Two choices.

1. Use military aircraft and fly them home with military honors

or

2. Pay someone like a Halliburton subsidiary obscene money to ship the body however they can?

The first one is the one I'd like to see used.

Unattended. That's just poor form. And dishonorable.

The military has the aircraft and all the things needed to do it. If the Bush admin does not have the military doing it, the reason is MONEY.

They can find another place to save a few dollars.

It's always been this way, nothing to do with B**h or money. My husband commanded a mortuary affairs unit in the Army years ago. The soldier's remains are always shipped in the hold. Accompanying honour guards fly in the same plane in the cabin. They usually carry the flag till arrival, then drape it for family's acceptance of the body.

My Grandfather died in WWII and was sent back by ship and train. He came without honour guard because troops couldn't be spared.

Last Christmas, my sister in law died while visiting; she was flown back in baggage hold. Do you think we should have sat her up in first class?

If so ...

This is at least the 10th thread about this. You might want to do a search and read some of the others. As much as we would like to blame this administration, this is standard procedure and has been for many years. You are being closed-minded and I doubt seriously you are reading the sources provided.

We have enough battles to fight without picking one we will lose.

I am sure you won't bother to read it, since your mind is made up, but here is an excellent New Yorker article about how military casualties are handled.
http://www.newyorker.com/fact/content/articles/040809fa_fact1#top

“They asked us if we wanted a general funeral, and I said, ‘Sure,’ thinking, you know, a general funeral, like a regular funeral,” Jack said. “They sent a general.” Since September 11th, any service member killed in action is entitled to have a general preside over his or her funeral.

This thread is about a cartoon which expresses an opinion. That's what editorial cartoons do. You responded, much like a letter to the editor, with YOUR opinion. Thanks for sharing it. Doesn't mean I have to agree with your opinion any more than you agree with mine.

If you think any part of it is inaccurate, then what part is that?

http://www.webcomicsnation.com/neillisst

Don't tell me someone on some thread told you. Don't tell me you read an article and that convinced you.

Tell me what it is about this cartoon that you think is inaccurate.

Soldiers' bodies have been shipped as freight since the Civil War.

I'd hope that they could be met by honor guards, but that's a separate issue.

Better luck next time.

Promotion is great, but you need something good to promote.

The cartoon is being published at least once a week on the Op-Ed pages of Cox Newspapers, and has gotten circulation readerships of 16,000 to 500,000 each of the past 8 weeks. The cartoon is three months old.

It's had 60,000 pageviews already this week.

I'm a professional who makes a good living doing what I do. This cartoon is simply one of my many projects. I'm doing the Neil Lisst political cartoon for fun and to impact political discourse and therefore impact the body politic.

Know of it? Like it?

http://govegantexas.org/upcomingshow.php

Just thought I'd mention it, since they're good folks and they picked up one of my cartoons and rebroadcast it. They have it up now.

I don't know who submitted it, but I thank them.

For those who don't know, Pacifica is OUR radio station in Houston.

and I was under the mistaken impression that you were a bit disdainful of vegetarians?