Your Turn: Rites Of Passage

He looks sad. She looks as though she has no emotion whatsoever. The photograph made me feel a combination of sad and OH-MY-GOD, WHAT HAVE WE DONE!

I was struck by the sense of futile bravery. Ty gazes at his bride with almost a puppy-like tenderness, as if certain he will lose her eventually. She, for her part, seems resigned to a show of braveness. Her faraway gaze and air of detachment speak volumes.
One cannot look at this and not have grave reservations about the couple’s future. The forces they face are huge, and they will not always have the poignancy of this wedding photo, with the groom dressed in the psychologically salving military uniform, to draw strength upon.

My first reaction was repulsion — embarrassed as I am to say it, wounded humans provoke a visceral and fearful reaction in me. A “there but for the grace of Cheney go I.” The politics follow — the anger and sadness.
But these are all my own context. The photos provide their own — and its great. They could be candids from any photo album — and the seriousness in the BAG-chosen picture could be the soul-freezing nervousness that comes with any oh-my-god-this-is-happening wedding photo shoot.
I’ve always been amused by the fantasy world of weddings — they’re so rich in nothing-else-like-it symbolism, of royal accoutrements and expensive one-time-only purchases that the photos are, in many ways the most important thing. If you are spending on these dresses, those suits, you better have perfect representation for the future.
The man’s wounds shouldn’t stand out so much when I look at the photos under that context. It’s all out-of-time. Out-of-place. Whatever suffering he went through — whatever challeneges they’ll go through, should be as absent there as they are in any fantasy world wedding photo.
And yet, obviously, they can’t.

Some of the pictures make you think that the couple were just fufilling an obligation. In a couple of pictures Renee looks quite detached and distant. These initial impressions are overtaken by the rest of the portfolio where you start seeing the love between the two. Then you realize that they were in love before Ty’s injuries and that underneath the wounds is the man who was there before, different but probably possessing the humor, warmth, hopes and aspirations he has developed through his life’s journey, and what helped forged the bonds of attraction between the couple. I wish them the best.
It’s hard to contemplate how many Ty and Renees there are as a result of this war. Quite enough of a reason to stop.

I immediately thought of the photo as depicting an archtype: beauty and the beast, hunchback of notre dame, the elephant man,etc. Our society seems to be creating a lot of these archtypes lately.

My first reaction was to think a critic of the war had Photoshopped the image. Then I remembered what site I was on.
Second reaction was to think how brave these young people are—and what love they must share.
My most lasting reaction will be outrage and determination that Americans face the horror of what our leaders…no, strike that. Not “leaders,” but elected representatives are inflicting, not just on Iraqs, but on our own people.

eh. it’s deliberate chosen for shock value…and to tell a story about how monstrous and unlovable a disabled or disfigured person is.
it’s bigotry.
anti-war, sure. but you really want to sink that low to make the point?

My first reaction is not what I want to say, but what I want to do to those truly responsible. It is also my second and third.

War and the products of war are shocking. No one ever needs to create anti-war images. They create themselves…but we never learn.
This couple has a long hard road ahead. I weep for them. I hope they find many happy times.

I am struck by the expression on Bride’s face. She looks so sad and lost. All through the photo album there are only couple of times where she was smiling. The groom was smiling more times than she did. Especially image 33, where almost everyone seems to be smiling at some joke except her.
Although she seems brave enough to carry on, she still seems to be grieving for what happened to him, more for his sake.

I could look at the one picture at the top of this post. I don’t think anything of it. I think a lot of things about it. I don’t know.
It hurts.
I also don’t understand why the personal was made political in this way. Photos for their wedding are normal. Submitting them for a photo competition is something different. If someone wishes to make a political statement, okay, sure. Does the family want to do this? I feel like it is a cheap shot for some reason, including actual wedding photos in a competition. I mean, it could be an interesting piece of art, for some. But it doesn’t feel right for it to be both.
Would the picture be submitted if a man was similarly burned, but in a house fire? What about the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, killed?

As a Civil War re-enactor, my research has gone to the early days of photography. I learned that many soldiers, despite their grieveous wounds and diseases, welcomed the photography in that their experiences, and the scientific recording of it, would allow doctors of the future to develop treatments.
I think the present-day Americans, folks in the United States, live too much of their lives inundated with entertainment and so their first reaction to extraordinary things, is to say, “It was just like a movie!”
It makes me think of my reaction to Murderball and it’s theme of: the art of healing is giving someone the will to live!

I hope they have a very long, happy and properous life together. After what he has endured, and what he will endure–it isn’t as if burn wounds of that degree just heal up forever–he will be very grateful to be alive and, I hope, a very doting husband.
That’s about my seventh reaction. I have always found burn wounds the most painful of all injuries to observe, so my first reaction was to recoil. But that’s because I know nothing about him. My father in law was blinded and terribly scarred on the right side of his face from a horrific accident with acid when he was a toddler. The first time you met him you were shocked. But we who knew him didn’t really notice. I imagine Renee sees the Ty she always loved and that she is very, very thankful that he is alive. The hardest times will be when outside eyes are on him, gawking. My second reaction was to feel awe at their courage. They are so young.

Funny how nobody here expresses any anger towards the person who actually maimed this guy, isn’t it? Was this soldier murdering people? I highly doubt it. No, he was there to protect Iraqis and whoever maimed him is repsonsible for his injuries. But just ignore that because most of you suffer from very transparent Bush Derangewment Syndrome. Did GWB force “insurgments” (random murderers is what I call them) to maim this guy? No, plain and simple. Did the person who maimed this guy want peace for all Iraqis like he did? No fickin’ way – he was killing someone who was there putting his life on the line TO PROTECT IRAQIS. So, make up your minds, either this guy deserved to be attacked or he didn’t. But it sure as heck isn’t Bush’s fault that some crazed fanatic tried to blowe this guy up. Step away from your irrational hatred and look at the facts. I wish this gentleman and his wife a long and prosperous life. I doubt he wants your pity – he certainly doesn’t need it.

Of course sir you forget who put him on that battlefield to begin with. So yes somebody else fired the shot, but the real question is, what was he doing there in the first place? And the answer has nothing to do with the safety of Iraqis, or democracy or WMDs or honor or duty. But then you don’t want see that, you just want more war…and the insurgents are anything if not organized, those injuries are rarely cause by “randomness”.
This sir is the price for the lies, misdirection, ambition and greed. And it is a heavy price indeed.

Donna-
I’m not a cynic about them. i’m a cynic about y’all.
That particular image, out of the portfolio was selected to pander to popular misconceptions and prejudices about disabled people. You choose the one picture where she looks disoriented, and it tells a story about how unlovable that man is and how it’s a heroic sacrifice and isn’t it damn sad.
And that’s bigotry. I’m anti-war as they come. I’m also care about disabilities activism. And this…this picture winning an award scores a cheap shot on Bush at the pain of making the disabled less than human.

I’ve seen this photo making the rounds, and I find myself frustrated by the comments inevitably posted in reaction to it and the rest of the series. More often than not, individuals pratter on about how “brave” this couple is, calling them “heroes” over and over again. It strikes me as a tiresome, dishonest, cliched, trite sentiment. It’s the equivalent of a yellow ribbon magnet purchased at the gas station and stuck to one’s car.
It’s my nature to suspect that such is the very same sentiment, held by family, friends, and fellow church-goers, that has compelled these two to get married. I don’t know the actual motivations for this event, but I am horrified by the possibility that this marriage is the result of someone’s hackneyed ideas of “duty,” “honor,” and even “romance.”
The girl in the wedding photo looks terribly young and terribly lost. The young man in that photo looks like a prop–his personality, perhaps even much of his humanity, is left totally unrevealed by his pose and posture. Couldn’t the photographer understand the mistakes they were making with this photo? The couple are stiff and uncomfortable, and they don’t relate to one-another one little bit.
I really have to question the appropriateness of a traditional formal wedding photo, given the circumstances.
If these two truly are marrying of their own volition and confidence, motivated by love, affection, and caring, it seems like something better captured by extemporaneous photos. Let the photographer capture them in the act of loving. From my point of view, that’s probably true of any wedding photos.
I don’t see heroes in this particular photo. I see two people who have been stripped of their dignity to satisfy someone else’s expectations. It seems perversely exploitative.

I think the sober face of the bride reflects her realistic view of their future together, a future very changed from the one she imagined when they first fell in love. She had obviously committed to him completely before they were married, and since he’s basically the same kind of person inside, the marriage went forward. Who can say if his changed appearance, or his changed personality from his wounds, will doom this marriage.
I understand dws’s wish to halt his thinking at the vicious people who are directly responsible for the burns, but urge him to think beyond that moment to how this soldier came to be in harm’s way in the first place.
Like any other catastrophy that hits you in life (divorce, illness, poverty) it is a good idea to take a look at what your part in it was. Nobody involved gets away without taking some part of the responsibiity for what happened. The American part in creating the terrible wars in the Middle East must be addressed, or we will never work our way out of it, dws.

To the person who authored this: “George Bush is directly personally responsible for this man’s pain…”
Thank you for proving my point that you have Bush Derangement Syndrome. Case closed.

dws–Speaking of Bush derangement syndrome, are you arguing that George W. Bush, the Commander in Chief, bears no responsibility for what happens to American soldiers in Iraq? None at all?
You prefer a “The Buck Stops with Those Little People Over There” model of leadership?

The real story here, as aptly framed by the BAG, is the matter of what makes this particular portrait the World Press Photo winner — given the extraordinary human depth of the photo essay from which it was drawn, why is this the one that “clicks” in their particular sense? Seems to me that this picture is the easy one, the stand-alone, the gut punch. The stunned, decentered look of the bride mirrors the anticipated visceral reaction of the viewer. It’s arranged as the most banal of all wedding photo setups, a straight bride-and-groom shot with lots of dress and lots of backdrop, the initial composition is immediately familiar. The flash of pale, scarred skin pulls our attention immediately, we have that flash of awareness of the incomprehensible suffering of the burn victim — we see the groom’s expression, resolute, downcast, noble, eyes turned toward his bride, and then her gaze off to the distance. It confirms the anticipated reaction to the scenario presented so directly: the survivor of the horrors of war comes home, the vulnerable young bride stands by her man, and, what now?
But to look at the other photos in this series — now, that is photojournalism! There’s little of that “archetype of human suffering” feeling in the rest of the pictures. The particular character of these two individuals, their devotion, humor, nerve and vulnerability, their youthfulness and solid network of friends and family — all of this would just be too complicated to allow into a single WPP winner. My favorite alternative is number 33 of the series, a wedding group portrait, where the group is arranged for the camera but caught in an unguarded moment. The bride seems to be listening to someone to our right, while the groom shares a laugh with a couple of attendants on our left. He has an actual facial expression; she’s not trying to impress anybody; they’re not posing as symbols of anything, they’re living their lives. That’s the one I’d like to keep.
The World Press Photo jury has a distinct history of focusing on the physical damage inflicted by war and other forms of violence.

My first reaction was one of shock, I thought it a Hollywood set up, some scene out of a horror movie a la Friday 13th. Then upon reading it, I was saddened and yes repulsed. In this day of ALL the news devoted to Anna Nicole Smith and none to senseless pointless tragedies such as this, I feel my heart and soul hurt.
And another thought, not unfamiliar to me at all. Would we ever see a broken and destroyed bride on the arm of her intact groom? I don’t think so. It is only the beautiful compassionate (and possibly stunned, coerced and frightened)young women who do the stoic. I truly believe that a man would have run a thousand miles from his crippled soldier fiancee.

My first reaction was one of shock, I thought it a Hollywood set up, some scene out of a horror movie a la Friday 13th. Then upon reading it, I was saddened and yes repulsed. In this day of ALL the news devoted to Anna Nicole Smith and none to senseless pointless tragedies such as this, I feel my heart and soul hurt.
And another thought, not unfamiliar to me at all. Would we ever see a broken and destroyed bride on the arm of her intact groom? I don’t think so. It is only the beautiful compassionate (and possibly stunned, coerced and frightened)young women who do the stoic. I truly believe that a man would have run a thousand miles from his crippled soldier fiancee.

RTBAG, if I were to be completely honest, if I were the bride, I would probably have called off the wedding.
The only factor that would make me go through with promising to be the life partner of a wounded soldier was whether or not I had it in me to forgive and forget.
I don’t think I would be able to and I would never be able to look at my husband as anything other than a victim. I would want to look at my husband as the other person in this world who makes me fully complete including his completeness; would his spirit be enough to fulfill this desire? Maybe; I don’t know this young man and maybe his own will is sufficient for this young woman to look beyond the physical to who he really is.
I don’t know that I would have been able to. I had begun to post earlier wondering if they were going to explore reconstructive surgery and decided not to because it made me look so shallow. But that question remains and so I must be honest and ask it.
I think I would be too preoccupied with the terrible after affects of what happened to be able to ever get beyond my intended’s appearance and be a spouse.
That’s just me. I pray the young woman is more solid than I and that he is the type of person for whom being dealt a terrible hand is not the end of the poker game. Best of all to them both.

This is one of those situations that is really tough to spin. It won’t get better.
I’m searching for the positive, the inspiration, the silver lining, but finding none.
Congrats to the young couple for sticking this out thus far. It seems an impossible circumstance.
How the hell do we get to a place like this?

When it’s all over, how will we live with ourselves?
We’ll need to do what Peruvians did: establish a Truth Comission to bring out the nightmares we caused.

This is the first thing I thought when I saw the photo: still in his uniform? Perverse.
Then I thought some people will think this person is a hero. I think it would have been heroic to refuse to put himself where chickenhawk, chickenshit, sociopathically criminal war planners very illegally wanted him to be.
There are no heroes in this story. It makes losers and anti-heroes out of all of us.

I found my way here via The Agonist, after being referred there by Wikipedia’s entry on ‘dog whistle politics’!
I too originally thought it had been photoshopped (or set up and photographed) by a war opponent, with the look on the bride’s face seeming to say ‘What am I doing?’
But looking at the rest of the pictures of them together, I now see that James Agee was right – that the saying ‘The camera never lies’ is foolish, and indeed the camera can be a very slippery liar indeed. The expression on her face? How do we know she’s not just thinking, ‘My hair looks terrible’? No-one is relaxed on their wedding day.
Some of the comments above reveal an ugly attitude – those who think they’re being fearlessly honest (you’re just posting on a blog, for God’s sake) in saying she’s just doing it out of duty, their marriage will be a disaster.
And by all means, be angry at GWB & Co for blowing the world-wide support America had in the wake of 9/11 – and for following the Lee Atwater strategy at home of ‘We’ll tear the country in two, but pick up the bigger piece’. That piece has shrunk considerably.
But where (apart from dws above, who’s an example of the Lee Atwater problem) is the anger at those who actually did this to Ty Ziegel? It’s not as though they had no choice in the matter. Someone blew himself up, someone provided the bomber with the means to do it, someone indoctrinated the bomber that it was the right thing to do. And most of their victms are Iraqis.
Be angry at W’s ineptitude – but where’s the anger at the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of Muslim political culture? Or is that acceptable? It’s a problem that existed long before Bush, and something his successors will have to deal with for a long time after he’s gone. It’s not ALL the West’s fault. But apparently it’s bad taste to say that.

HAL 9000 wonders: “But where . . . is the anger at those who actually *did this* to Ty Ziegel?”
As if Ty Ziegel had been standing on Baghdad street corners, handing out bunnies to all the little Iraqi children.
All’s fair in love and war.

This is one of the saddest pictures of the war that I’ve seen. Most of all because it hits home. I hope that the couple can overcome this horrible tragedy and build a happy and fulfilling marriage together.
Ultimately we citizens of the world are repsonsible for letting this happen to ourselves. War and starvation are tragedies that we inflict upon ourselves. Are we powerless to stop it or do resign ourselves to the notion that that’s the way life is? We are stuck on this planet with each other and nowhere else to go. Ultimately there are no winners in any war. What’s it going to take for us to realize this?
Just wondering.

My first reaction has them sharing the same thought balloon: Oh, SHIT!

First reaction: those two kids have a hell of a burden, and it’s not going to get any easier. I may not pray enough, but I pray that they have comfort and happiness.
Second reaction: That young Marine’s external scars are similar to the internal scars of the ~25,000 US casualties and their families. One of my neighbors lost his son in Baghdad, and like he says, he never has a good day.
… not to mention the hundreds of thousands of Iraqis. I can’t wrap my mind around it.

For those looking for answers with deeper meaning, I came across an interesting paper on the sacrifice of nations. http://www.asc.upenn.edu/USR/fcm/jaar.htm

All soldiers had equal access to the information the intelligent in this country had and knew this war was unjustified going into it, so my comment?
You wanna play? You pay.
Good thing you found a hottie before your injury, because American women aren’t gracious to the disfigured in their country.
Ty, I love that picture of you holding up the dynamite. I’m just glad you’re alive to guzzle the irony.
A goddamn waste – your loss didn’t do anyone a damn bit of good. You killed innocents to prove NOTHING. As you’re living the rest of your life, your landmines will keep injuring child after child for the next decade. Where are all their pictures? Instead, we are showered with images of how brave you and your ilk are supposed to be.
I wonder if you’ll have any speck of regret for what you did? Or will you think they got what they deserved because you were injured? I would guess the answer depends on what you were taught at Boot Camp…
Fellow liberals – stop blaming George Bush, Jr. so much and attribute some blame where it belongs, on those who signed up to kill the innocent.

“DWS — mind closed. I feel sorry for you. Life cannot be wrapped up in a convenient, thought-preventing catchphrase. Your thought process is simplistic and juvenile; and you appear to prefer it that way.”
MY mind is closed? Ha! It’s very open. So open in fact that I’m the only person who has posted here who has the intellectual integrity to see that the person who maimed this guy is an evil person. Many of the rest somehow blame GWB and compeletely ignore the fact that MURDEROUS RELGIOUS FANATICS are the people who tried to kill the Marine – while he was there RISKING HIS LIFE to PROTECT IRAQI CITIZENS.
How on God’s green earth other people follow some distorted path of logic that this is 100% GWB’s fault is a sign of serious delusion and, as pointed out by me, perople who cast aside any form of objective reasoning simply becuase they hate GWB.
Me, I think GWB has totally scrwed up in Iraq – but that doesn’t cripple my brain cells enough to ignore the REALITY that this Marine was wounded by sick murderous freaks.
I suppose you support the cause and methods of the murderous sickos that did this? If so, I truly pity because you lack basic humanity. Do you even have a shred of commion sense left? Enough to actually condemn these murderers and their religous/political leaders who support and promote this murderous behavior? And these people don’t just target Marines either – they target the basic foundations of individual liberty Iraq. WTF is wrong with you people?

For better and for worse, in sickness and in health…

he’s a bald dickhead n she’s ugly fuck who cant smile, get over it.

my first reaction is what the hell does it matter how anyone reactes–other than those two people?
And now my second reaction, after reading the comments, is I’m ashamed to be the same species as tubby.

Hell with ‘im, another redneck mercenary that should be home guarding his Kansas cornfield not out killing innocent people to steal their oil – the sorrows of empire.

I guess your logic is that since bad things happened in Abu Graib and other places that ANY US soldier is fair game – whether they committed any bad acts or not. — dws
My logic is that once an American is in a war zone, the other side won’t make distinctions about individuals and their actions.
That’s the point of my earlier M*A*S*H reference.
This is as natural a consequence of War as the sun rising in the east. Do you–dws–think this war has been worth causing this picture?
I don’t.

This is both tragic and inspiring. I am opposed to war, but these injuries could have come from something other than war. I see this as two people committed to each other, and I wish them the best.

Not first impression, but after reading both this post and related on HuffPo, and hitting Ms. Berman’s site:
I am struck by the use of color. The whites and the reds.
The purity of white in the field of blood-red flowers.
The blood-red welling up out the pure white of the wedding gown.
Also, the puffs of what, explosives?, in the background.
That, and the incongruous — to other wedding pix — drained numbness.
Bush’s folly has robbed them — and many tens of thousands of others –of a lifetime of joy. And still the chimp smirks on, just today making jokes about the the difficulty in assessing Iraq from the “beautiful” White House. Paint the damn thing red.
It’s Valentines Day. I have to kiss my wife and kids. And try not to cry.

dws, how do you know he wasn’t injured through friendly fire?

dws,
Your post of dws | Feb 14, 2007 at 01:59 PM holds little validity in the things you write but, I do not believe anyone here is trying to convince you of anything. Believe what you wish but, look more closely at the facts. You seem to be struggling with the reality on the ground in Iraq and the subsequent turn of events there more than any other poster here. Why is that? Events not to your liking or could it be that you are resistant or openly hostile to discover that you were sold a bill of good and hoodwinked by the neocons and GWB?
GWB does not make Iraqi’s ‘blow each other up’ however, he did ignite the firestorm of sectarian violence as his mistakes multiplied and compounded such as Rumsfeld’s failure to commit enough troops to manage the invasion as requested by Shinseki, failure to secure the country and borders after the initial fall of Baghdad, forced disband of the Iraqi Army without disarming, securing ammo depots or even gaining a signed surrender, outlawing the Baath Party, failure to understand the internal dynamics of the true religious/political/economic/cultural players or negotiate with these power brokers. Did you know the name Maqtada al-Sadr before the 2003 invasion? Neither did GWB nor the CIA for that matter. GWB’s boy was Chalabi. Remember him? Then squandering the reconstruction opportunity under Bremer’s stewardship, losing $12B US, allowing contractors to run amuck and basically ordering our military to stand down within the blast walls of the Green Zone or secure bases as anarchy gained a foothold. This was just in the first 24 months mind you.
That Saddam was a murderous thug who cares? This is a neocon talking point that holds no water and is so tired that not even Kristol or Kagan trumpet this messy tune any longer over at the Weekly Standard. The planet is loaded with dozens of worse tyrants and we are not invading Sudan to topple al-Bashir or Zimbabwe for Magabe or our allies Uzbekistan to get Karimov, Turkmenistan to depose Niyazov or Allah forbid toss Saudi King Abdullah under the bus. Saddam was our friend remember? Rumsfeld gave him matching pistols and kissed his ring. Saddam was the enemy because he was beating the piss out of the Gulf War I sanctions/Oil for Food program with the help of Kofi ‘the Crook’ Annan and our good friends the French and gobbling up Euros instead of dollars. Exxon Mobile was mightily upset at Saddam for this trick. That Saddam ignored the UN resolutions on WMD’s has been thoroughly debunked. Blix and RItter told us as much before the invasion as did the Italians and the British in the Downing Street Memo in following when the war began to go south. Read the Duelfer Report and you’ll see that WMD’s was a ruse. Oil for Euros was the root cause of Saddam’s woes and required his elimination.
As for Iraqi’s killing US civilians other, than occupation force contractors, when has this occurred especially, on US soil? Detroit has a large Iraqi population yet, there have no reports of any maiming. Beside the US there are Iraqi expats all over the world living in close proximity to Americans such as in Europe. Do you know of any revenge killings or attacks? Al-Qaeda is a Saudi Arabian group now based in Waziristan, Pakistan. No 911 hijacker are from Iraq and Saddam’s Iraq was void of madrases schools. I think this talking point is bunk and culled from listening to too much Hannity, Limbaugh or Hewitt. Again, not even Kristol wears this ill fitted suit.
That some Iraqi’s may not fit the ‘freedom fighter’ mold as ruthless killers or are even in it strictly for profit is understandable. It is part and parcel of all wars. When this war is over maybe Blackwater or CACI could recruit mercenaries from the streets of Sadr City for adventures in some future far flung hell hole. These guys would fit in well with the ‘ruthless murderer’ model so desired by a respected company like Dyncorp don’t you think? Beside, your ‘their not worthy to be called freedom fighters’ line reminds me as being all to quickly culled from the ranting of Hannity who tosses out this gem whenever his frustrations with those ungrateful Iraq’s unwilling to bow down and kiss the feet of the perceived grantors of liberty strike back at their new masters.
War is far too complicated and important a matter to be conducted by politicians as was so succinctly pointed out by the fictitious Colonel Jack Ripper in the movie ‘Dr. Strangelove’. Life imitates art we see as the incompetent amateurs Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Feith. Perle, Rice, Bremer and the neocon mouthpieces Kristol, Kagan, Krauthammer along with the think tank druids have proven this point in the most bloodiest of failed experiments under the guise of ‘bringing democracy’ to Iraq. You go on, keep drinking their kool-aid. In fact you can have mine as I passed by these snake oil salesmen wagons over five years ago.

dws,
One thing to be said for you is that you are extremely honest and stand by your convictions. A very admirable trait and one that is respected from this end of the wire along, with your high degree of intelligence. To even admit that GWB has done a poor job shows a great deal of realism and academic honesty but, you place your talking points within the most simplistic of terms imaginable like blaming Saddam for the current violence when we all know that the realpolitic of the situation is steeped in complications far greater than tagging this loon.
GWB technically or, more precisely literally, is not causing the sectarian violence in Iraq but, it is on his watch and as a direct result of his policies therefore, within the contexts of say Kepner-Tregoe ATS or similar models for root cause identification and analysis, GWB’s policy is the basis from which all violence now emanates and the number one sole cause of the instability in Iraq as the common thread/denominator. You can parse it anyway you like but, as chief architect of all things Iraq his is in the lonely role at the top of the realm of responsibility for the present circumstances and resultant outcomes.
Taking Saddam out of power certainly did not unleash the current wave of violence in Iraq. The country was relatively quiet following the initial downfall of Baghdad except, for the immediate post invasion period when Rumsfeld/ Franks failed miserably to understand the need in securing the country allowing for the gross ransacking of priceless antiquities and museum valuables. That Iraq was fairly stable in the weeks and months afterward is well documented as to be seen in US casualty figures however, missteps in US policy and priorities like inability to provide clean water, electricity, food, jobs or convertible currency, allowing the nincompoop Bremer free reign, failure to eliminate/ secure arms stockpiles, continually backing the wrong Iraqi’s for leadership roles such as pushing Chalabi even through the 2005 elections, successfully isolating/ degrading the Sunni over a period of months or successfully allowing the Kurds to split and form an autonomous quasi-government are just a few of Bush’s actions in tossing gasoline on smoldering embers to ignite the five alarm blaze we now fight. Bush has continued to fail heed to sage advise of Iraq experts or the likes of the Baker Group report and we see the results. No, the current violence is Bush’s alone to shoulder the burden and solve.
Iraqi’s are not a bunch of ‘crazy brown people’ who need a despot to hold them together. Read your history. Iraq was never a nation. For 4000 years it was greater Baghdad surrounded by Bedouin tribes traipsed across by the armies of the day to change hands tens of times. From Darius to Hussein. Iraq, as we understand, wasn’t formed until 1932 having been forcibly cobbled together by none other than Winston Churchill. Iraq is an artificial country. A poorly constructed creation of the west that failed as a nation and will do the same as a US protectorate. Allow the region to spilt up into autonomous/ tribal/ ethno-religious zones as is the natural desire for any FREE peoples. Iraqi’s do not prefer to kill each other. Read the ‘Baghdad Burning’ blog by Riverbend for real on the ground opinion as to what is happening. Seek out the writings of Brit Patrick Cockburn and military analyst William Lind. You’ll get a better picture of real-time events. Also, get you war news here but, close the subscription window as this is not a pay site http://strategypage.com/
The real issue here is that the invasion was long overdue and should have been carried out in 1991 after the 100 Hours War but, Daddy Bush and General Powell were overly cautious to pull the trigger and Clinton was weak opting for the crushingly slow death of sanctions to bleed the Iraqi’s while enriching Saddam. GWB had the right idea just the most awful of execution. This is evident by the recent sacking of Rumsfeld and the distance Powell has maintained from the administration. Have you ever wondered why General Norman Schwartzkopf has never been interviewed as to his thoughts on these events? What do you think he’d say? The US needs to either commit more forces as 21,500 is JEL (Just Enough to Lose) as initially requested by Shinseki or redeploy as suggested by Jack Murtha. Bush’s stay the course strategy will produce more of the same and continue to fuel strife. This being the case how will you argue that Bush is not the root cause of the sectarian violence?

Sorrow.
For lost youth, lost innocence.
For them.
For us.
For the world.
Just sorrow.

I spent 5 years in the Marine Corps; Cuban Missile Crises Veteran (Guantanamo) and 9th MEB Vietnam Aug ‘64.
I was just banned by an administrator from a quasi Marine Corps Community whom I am a paid member of,
Leatherneck.com for [Quote] You have been banned for the following reason:
Posting Disgusting Photos Publically [Un-quote]
http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6
In my opinion, the reason I was banned, picture was not suitable for ‘poolies’ [young future Marines] to see.
Maybe after the ‘poolies’ quit their Pizza Hut jobs and get 12 weeks of drill instructors beating the crap out of them, they’ll be men enough ?
[snippet]
“The Plot to Seize the White House” Jules Archer
http://www.amazon.com/Plot-Seize-White-House-Conspiracy/dp/1602390363
“See that our Congress writes into law a command that no American soldier, sailor or Marine be used for any purpose except to protect the coastline of the United States, and protect his home-and I mean, his home-not an oil well in Iraq – in short, not an American investment anywhere except at home! . . . Let Congress say to all foreign investors: “Come on home or let your money stay out of the country-we will not defend it.” ~ General Smedley D. Butler USMC CMOH (2)

If you think this picture is bad, this will make it look like a walk in the park.
Bill Shea (above), literally, if you and others want to see Iraq War Casualty Pictures of the wounded, maimed and dead:
http://mindprod.com/politics/iraqwarpix.html#IRAQWARPIX
While you’re at it, check the link/s for Abu Ghraib Torture Pictures, the ones they never showed us !
There are brutal dictators throughout the world, many supported over the years by Washington, whose people need “liberation” from their leaders. This is not a persuasive argument since for Iraq, it’s about oil. In fact, the occupation of Iraq by the United States is a magnet for increasing violence, anarchy and insurrection.

I don’t have a right to comment or to feel bad for ether one. I don’t know these people. I have never heard there voices or seen the way they move. I have no right to think about what they might feel.I dont thinks its right for them the be subjucted to this. like there dead like this is a funeral. I think this shouldn’t be here.

…and recognizing that the precipitating event for this war, 9/11 itself, was an obvious hoax and an inside job deepens the poignancy of this photo. the outrage recorded by many others on this post doesn’t begin to reach that deeper deception.

He’s a bald dickhead n she’s ugly fuck who cant smile, get over it. — tubby
**************
The next time YOU need compassion for any reason, schmuck, I hope that you get as much as you’ve shown these people, — which is to say NONE, because people who have no compassion don’t deserve any.

What a tragedy. This is George Bush’s legacy.
And even more depressing is that for every Ty there are 1,000 Iraqi’s who have been injured as badly but without any health care.
I wish Ty would camp out outside the White House and demand a meeting with Bush.

Sweet jesus is she gonna have sex with that monster?

Time ravages all of us. This is not to minimize the groom’s sacrifice or the challenges they face, but to emphasize that youth and beauty ARE fleeting, but love endures.
By the time we’re eighty, if we’re lucky enough to live that long, we will not appear “beautiful” to people fifty and sixty years younger than us. If beauty were the measure of marriage, we’d all divorce in our forties.
The photo elicits many feelings, from rage at the needlessness of his injuries to pride and respect for his service, to admiration for their courage and love.
This couple did not marry for looks. They did not ask anyone’s approval. This couple married for love, and they have as good a chance of making it as any couple.
While the war in which he was wounded was a fraud push upon the world by sick, evil people, his service was genuine, his loyalty was genuine, he courage was genuine, and their love is genuine.
There are worse things than being disfigured. One can be hale and healthy, and yet stupid and without a conscience. One can be wealthy, and yet lack compassion or a sense of justice. One can be powerful, and yet sick and twisted through and through.
But there is a force that can overcome all these challenges, and it is in this photo.

“Sweet jesus is she gonna have sex with that monster?
“Posted by: Jerrold Daniels | Feb 28, 2007 at 01:32 PM”
Yes Jerrold, she will. But she would probably refuse to have sex with you. That should tell you something.

JEROLD.
First you exclaim “Sweet Jesus”, then you call this terribly disfigured Marine a MONSTER. Jesus would know better, as would most ten year olds. That pictiure is of a man and his wife.
Since they are getting married i’ll assume there will be sex but you’ll have to have your mommy explain that part to you Jerold.

War is hell.
Especially if the person who led us there lied about why we needed to go there.
Oh by the way, we are now being told getting Osama bin Laden is no big deal and not on the agenda.
I was under the impression he masterminded 9/11.
Yes I’m angry. We should not be in in raq and cheney and bush should be impeached for lying!

That’s fucked up

“The fellas from 121 started showing up the other day. It’s starting to sink in… I’ll have to go home, the opportunities to kill these fuckers is rapidly coming to an end. Like a hobby I’ll never get to practice again. It’s not a great war, but it‚s the only one we’ve got. God, I do love killing these bastards. … Morale is high, the Marines can smell the barn. It’s hard to keep them focused. I still have 20 days of kill these motherfuckers, so I don’t wanna take even one day off. ” — letter home from an unnamed Marine F/A -18 pilot in Iraq.
Why Can’t We Talk about Peace in Public?
By Matt Taibbi, RollingStone.com. Posted February 28, 2007.

dws is just an immature idiot. of all the sincere and honest reactions, he finds some way to twist natural human outrage at the inevitable results of war and come up with partisan asshattery.
i think this photo is the best of the lot. it obviously lets people project a fair amount of their own emotions about the situation onto this couple. and yet it’s damn near impossible for the rest of us to know what these two are really thinking and feeling at that moment.
but it’s a real disgrace and an insult to our wounded soldiers when some loser like dws can’t see anything of them past their status as pawns in dws’s conquer-the-world fantasies.
real people who’ve really been to war and really understood what it is generally express, um, astonishment and dismay at what a horrible and generally senseless thing it is. the wounded often hold on to their “cause” in an attempt to make their own situation make sense to themselves. and then there’s the odd japanese soldier fighting the war 30 years after it ended. and then there are those who, like dws, trivialize everything in life and understand none of it.
/obviously he suffers from CDS – clinton derangement syndrome

beautiful
this is modern american gothic — a picture of our times

The bride looks as if she’s been caught in a split-second of barely suppressed panic. What makes the picture interesting to me is that the groom’s tenderness is evident in his body language, but you can’t tell how well he can actually see her face. In fact, he seems a little out of touch with her body language, despite his unabashed adoration. It seems as if the bride and the photographer might be exchanging looks that the groom isn’t picking up on.
That makes you wonder what else might be wrong with the guy. Brain damage, PTSD, etc. Maybe he has been damaged in some more fundamental way. Maybe he’s literally not the same person she got engaged to.
The assumption is that the bride has some apprehensions about marrying this guy because he’s so disfigured.
If I had to imagine a story to go with the picture, I’d guess that the two fell in love before the groom suffered these terrible injuries.
I can only imagine how hard it is to go through with a wedding to someone who’s literally unrecognizable, no matter how much you love them.
This is a great photo because it seems to capture a fleeting and forbidden emotion. A bride isn’t supposed to feel dread or horror towards her husband-to-be, but that’s how it looks in the picture. Those feelings don’t make her a bad person, or suggest that she doesn’t love him.

It’s a shocking picture. The bride looks dazed. And that kiss; she leaning away, isn’t she? What will that couple’s future be? what will the man’s future be?

DWS said “They’re all just a bunch of crazy brown people…”
And you can stop reading his rant right there, as he reveals the cause of his one-sided thinking.

I am the very ugly and very handicapped husband of a beautiful woman.
I was ten days old when polio struck, so we have no memories of ‘life before’, and I was not maimed and disfigured by others.
Yet I do not pity this couple.
She is not a deer caught in the headlights.
She shows no fear and is not cold.
She is firm and solemn: this is her wedding day.
He is both tender and proud.
He wears his uniform, perhaps telling us that he chose to be a soldier and would still do so: but there is no exhibitionism, no bravado.
All his attention is focused on her.
War is a hideous beast, always useless, always evil.
This bride and groom put themselves in harm’s way under our voyeur stare to remind us of the forgotten truth: love conquers all.
May the state of their union always be strong.

i feel fortunate and blessed that it isnt me, i feel lucky and that i have no room to bitch about the fact i am loosing my hair or am gaining wieght or dont have the lasted techno gadet, i feel sad that these pictures are not on the mainstream media outlets, i feel happy that this man hasnt taken his life, i feel a bit sad because the young lady has been though alot to and will be, i am angry that we only see our wounded and not those of a country far off that have not done anything to us to provoke an invasion that has left hundreds of thousands dead and wounded and not as fortunate to have our doctors to help make them presentable to life, i feel anger that while this is going on still with my tax money kids in this country are going out and killing for 20 dollars just to get a kick out of it, and that gangs are rapidly taking over our country again and this isnt being taken serious so the sacrifices of these kids is they come home to another war zone, i am pissed that this kid had to be put in the damn position anyways, and that right now someone in our custody is being tortured, after years of being held for information he may or maynot have that is obsolet now anyways, i am angry that politicains have all, ALL lost their way and are letting my country be divided fragmented and abused by religon, money, arms dealing, contracts, low wages and violence while these men and woman who are a hell of alot stronger than me have to live a life in pain, i served during the first bush attack it wasnt anything like this. If this country had any balls the citizens would say enough all of you politicians are fired and start anew. to anyone that has been injured in war be it us or them i say i am sorry and my deepest respect goes out to all humans who are put in terrible positions that they have now power over, due to someone else who sits behind desks.

I wanted to reply to two of the above remarks. They engage in breath-taking revision of history, and demonize “the enemy.” Hmm, come to think of it, isn’t the former required to sustain the latter?
The first remark:
“Be angry at W’s ineptitude – but where’s the anger at the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of Muslim political culture? Or is that acceptable? It’s a problem that existed long before Bush, and something his successors will have to deal with for a long time after he’s gone. It’s not ALL the West’s fault. But apparently it’s bad taste to say that.”
If anything, the historical record, at least for the past 50 years, is one in which the calculating depravity of the United States is on display. Mosadeq, anyone? Who funded the Madrasas? Who propped up the Shah, and trained Savak? Who paid for Hussein’s epaulets? The US, of course. Is the US in the Middle East for the love of humanity? That’s almost an obscene argument to make. Yet some do it. After all of the lies, it even has become the final justification of the Bush Administration.
“Do you get it yet? The people who engage in these acts are not helpless victims or freedom fighters who are seeking world peace – they’re ruthless murderers who are doing everything in their power to make life in Iraq living hell for their enemies whether they be American troops or their own countrymen of a different religious persuasion – apparently with your full support. Sleep well. … Put your hatred of GWB aside mong enough to see these people for who they are.”
‘Ruthless murderers’? Again? What planet have you been living on? Whose country is occupied by whom, once more, remind us? And for what reason? Just a brief refresher: when oil production in the US began to decline exponentially in 1970, that could have been a clue. Did the US change land-use policy? Did the US embark on a crash course to develop energy alternatives? Is the US approaching 10% wind energy generation, or 80% nuclear generation, as some countries are? No — quite the opposite: it embarked on the biggest suburban building spree in history, gobbling up arable land and fossil fuels with wanton disregard for the planet’s population. It is a brazen act of rapacity that history will not judge favorably. Weave yourself all of the Disney-fied, suburban, Leave it to Beaver, Judeo-Christian fantasies you want, but the truth remains. That, Marie, is why the mob is coming for your head.
The young couple in the picture: collateral damage, ‘the sorrows of empire.’

It looks like he’s put on some weight.

The comments so far are telling. This brave soldier wouldn’t want your weeping pity, he’d want your respect for doing his duty to help cleanse this world of bad actors and spread the American way of life. It’s you opportunistic traitors here, using this man’s injury as a prop to libel our President, that should have your faces melted, not this soldier.

My first response was, “Oh, my God.” I then felt so sorry for this young man, this couple, and what they will have to live through.
It takes guts to have your picture taken when you have an infirmity. I think those two have a lot of courage. I wish them the best of luck.

“odanny said: “He’s a brave man, and they have been on the Oprah Winfrey show . . . ”
Fabulous. So in other words, *they* are opportunists.”
What are you babbling about fuckface?
I see the worst of both sides of the aisle have popped in to comment. One one side of the aisle we are called “traitors” for disparaging the illegal military agression that resulted in a war with thousands of maimed soldiers and over a hundred thousand dead civilians, and on the other we see the soldiers who signed on to defend their country, only to be used like cannon fodder to enrich Halliburton, disparaged for their selfless sacrifice.
To both sides who perpetuate these insults I’d like to shout a hearty “fuck you” for not having any compassion or mercy for those who suffer, be they Iraqi civilians, American soldiers, or the families of our volunteer military, who follow orders and do their best under incredibly bad circumstances of the Bush Administrations making.
Thankfully you bottom feeding scum are only few in number in comparsion to the rest of us.

odanny, I’m not talking about *YOU* or about Bush or about either “side” of the “aisle.” I’m talking about this pro-military couple. The fact that they went on Oprah is something I find sickeningly opportunistic. Why did they go on the show? Not to make an anti-war statement. They went on to garner sympathy from millions of Americans by exploiting Ty’s grotesque injuries. That kind of manipulation disgusts me. Why, because I’m heartless? It disgusts me that *they* are treating *themselves* like a Coney Island freak show act in return for fame and adulation. (Don’t be surprised when you learn they are in negotiations with movie studios.)
I don’t think they deserve the label of “brave” just because they are enduring hardship (by the way, it doesn’t take bravery to go on Oprah). We don’t know much of anything about them (nor do they know much of anything about themselves, from what I’ve read about them) to give them a free pass. They could be assholes for all we know. We just *project* onto them a bunch of useless bullshit notions, the very notions (about freedom, bravery, patriotism) that our government manipulates us with. Lots of people endure hardship in this country, people who did not *get paid* to put themselves in harm’s way for a *thrill* and who will remain invisible and struggling in obscurity.
Meanwhile, Ty and Renee remain completely fucking IGNORANT about what their government is doing in Iraq and the rest of the Middle East. Latest news flash: U.S. Funds Being Secretly Funneled To Violent Al Qaeda-Linked Groups
http://thinkprogress.org/2007/02/25/hersh-qaeda/
I don’t give a shit what you think of *me* or my views that differ from yours, odanny. I don’t support this or any war, and I won’t support ignorance, either.

first:
oh my! what happened to this guy? so much suffering!
second:
the bride seems so sad her beautiful loved one is now phisically and psychologically destroyed.
third:
he joined the armed forces because he wanted, there is no draft in the u.s.. i’m not sure he ever wondered something like this could happen, but he knew his country would eventually engage in war, he knew bad stuff happens at wars.

Salon has posted a good interview between photographer Tina Berman and Lindsay Beyerstein (Majikthise).

JT, I’ve also read that they were “high school sweethearts” and that the first time they dated was just before he left for boot camp. Not that it matters to me, but I’m curious… Maybe she was still in high school, so technically they’re both true?

When I first saw this photo, I actually thought it was an artistic anti-war piece. But after I did some research and came to the realization that this was indeed a real photo and that these were indeed a real married couple, my gut reaction was to pity the young bride.
Honesty isn’t very pretty.

I can’t really add much to this waterfall of comments but to say thank you BAGNews for publishing and bearing real-life photographic witness to this horrible tragedy.
Thanks as well to the photographer for showing us the costs.
I can’t really describe, in public, my feelings about the photograph. I cannot stop crying.

“And so before their first wedding anniversary Ty and Renee decided to separate.”
- Sonja Gupta, CNN: ‘Broken Government – Waging War on The VA. Nov 17 2007

thibaud, when I consider…
1. US history in Afghanistan,
2. refusal to produce evidence of Bin Laden’s involvement in 9/11
3. highly questionable UN authorization
4. the arrogance, contempt and ignorance of GWB not tolerating a week or a word of discussion with ones accused enemy (Taliban)speaks volumes about this character challenged man who has led his country from one catastrophe to another.
” Afghanistan, the CIA, bin Laden, and the Taliban President Jimmy Carter immediately declared that the invasion jeopardized vital U.S. interests, because the Persian Gulf area was “now threatened by Soviet troops in Afghanistan. But the Carter administration’s public outrage at Russian intervention in Afghanistan was doubly duplicitous. Not only was it used as an excuse for a program of increased military expenditure that had in fact already begun, but the U.S. had in fact been aiding the mujahideen for at least the previous six months, with precisely the hope of provoking a Soviet response. Former CIA director Robert Gates later admitted in his memoirs that aid to the rebels began in June 1979. In a candid 1998 interview, Zbigniew Brezinski, Carter’s national security adviser, confirmed that U.S. aid to the rebels began before the invasion..” http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Afghanistan/Afghanistan_CIA_Taliban.html
UN authorization for attack on Afghanistan ? http://www.ejil.org/forum_WTC/ny-stahn-01.html#TopOfPage
Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over http://www.guardian.co.uk/waronterror/story/0,1361,573975,00.html
” Who is it that is controlling the media message, and how is it that the U.S. media has indicted Usama Bin Laden for the events of September 11, 2001, but the U.S. government has not? How is it that the FBI has no “hard evidence” connecting Usama Bin Laden to the events of September 11, 2001, while the U.S. media has played the Bin Laden – 9/11 connection story for five years now as if it has conclusive evidence that Bin Laden is responsible for the collapse of the twin towers, the Pentagon attack, and the demise of United Flight 93? No hard evidence connecting Usama Bin Laden to 9/11… Think about it http://www.teamliberty.net/id267.html
…the above brief historical sketches I must conclude that there is little difference between the recklessness of the Afghanistan war Iraq and the desire to go after the next bandit Iran. Since Pat Tillman there are many who are figuring out this so called “world wide (bullshit) war on terrorism”
thus this topic does not get complicated for me outside the blogs

He will blow his brains out one day. He is a professional killer, and no decent human has an atom of sympathy for him. It does mean, however, that 99% of Americans will have sympathy for him for only one out of a hundred Americans are decent humans. I say this with certainty, for I have lived this shithole country for 62 years. The girl is pretty, but she is a stupid, whorelike monster of a pretty girl, or she wouldn’t be going with a US Marine. God is great! God is good, and the wrath of God is also good. Anyway, I think the guy was probably pretty ugly before he was blasted. Repentence is the next step for this guy, if he has any chance for hope and salvation.