In response to...

In response to the argument that all wars are barbaric, and the only difference between the heinousness of this war, and others, is how quickly the news spreads...

Agreed, to some extent, but I do think that the technological revolution, creation of video games, and concept of "virtual death," as well as the dope smoking napalm bombers of Vietnam war era certainly contributed to the desensitization of officers, and infantrymen alike.

Those who say there's nothing new about the powerful trying to cover their tracks are right, but what has changed is the extent to which the "enemy" has been objectivized such that it no longer matters if he, or she has a name, gender, or national identity. This grab-all attitude towards warfare now comes under the sorry heading of a "war on terror." When we declare war on an intangible, it follows that mortality, too, becomes intangible. And, should you have a question about whether mortality has an odor, taste, and smell, just ask any parent who has lost a child to the battlefield.

In the previous World Wars, there was a clearly defined target. In this one, the target is amorphous, protean and, for the most part, along with the war itself, used as a camouflage for an abortive coup. Nobody wants to talk about what happened back in 2000, as a Republican party coup, when the popular vote was overturned, and a president was appointed by the Supreme Court, but this is what it was, plain and simple, and future history books will record it as such