PDA

View Full Version : Would this flyer be too morbid to hand out?




Mortikhi
11-10-2007, 06:29 AM
Is this too morbid to use?

If it isn't, are there any suggestions for the text other than or in place of what I have?

[Edit: Removed Ron Paul sentence]

http://www.scriptstudios.com/images/political/flyer.jpg

noxagol
11-10-2007, 06:31 AM
This is morbid, probably too much so, but it is a reality that some people need to face I think. I don't think that some people who support the war really think about what happens to the people who don't die and what they have to live with for the rest of their life.

This is a tough call on whether I would recommend this or not.

Roxi
11-10-2007, 06:34 AM
maybe, but it would definitely be a wake up call for most people.... i wanted to get the famous pic of the 100,000 Iraqi childrens bodies to carry around with me for when people were adamant that we were SAVING these people, and doing good there.

Ozwest
11-10-2007, 06:34 AM
It is the unpalatable truth. Yes. Will it gain converts? Probably not.

LibertyEagle
11-10-2007, 06:38 AM
I especially love your first sentence about the war not being a football game. Because, that to me seems like what some people are acting like.

That said, I wouldn't use those pictures. It's the truth, but it almost seems opportunistic to me.

Nefertiti
11-10-2007, 06:39 AM
You might want to use it to convince people why we should be out of Iraq, but not why they should vote for Ron Paul.

jrich4rpaul
11-10-2007, 06:41 AM
Best adjective I can think of:

Real

If people get offended, they should do something to end the f'n cause of it.

Mortikhi
11-10-2007, 06:43 AM
So lose the Ron Paul stuff, but leave the 'other candidates' wanting more war in there? I think I'm in agreement with that

lynnf
11-10-2007, 06:45 AM
Is this too morbid to use?

If it isn't, are there any suggestions for the text other than or in place of what I have?




I think it might be appropriate only if it were on the inside of a folded flyer, with
a warning on the outside, something like "Contains graphic material: do not open if you are easily shocked by the truth!"

lynn

CelestialRender
11-10-2007, 06:52 AM
Yeah, a bit morbid. True, but morbid. I don't think it's the way to gain converts, but I may be wrong.

Shink
11-10-2007, 06:55 AM
Yep, don't circulate it with Ron's name on it, but do circulate. I recommend removing pics that make Bush look good, and try to find the pic Roxic mentioned and toss in a blurb on blowback. To nail the candidates, QUOTE DIRECTLY Hillary and whoever else. Days later, circulate Ron Paul stuff.

PredatorOC
11-10-2007, 07:02 AM
WWRPD?

I seriously advice to at least remove Paul's name from that. People should see the reality of war, but not to the profit of anyone. And the association could bring more animosity than converts.

Mortikhi
11-10-2007, 07:12 AM
Ok, anyone have links to some other candidate's quotes on their warmongering?

If there are different pics out there to use, let me know.

Ron LOL
11-10-2007, 07:16 AM
I understand where you're trying to go with the flyer, but the simple fact is that it's way over the top.

Hope
11-10-2007, 07:20 AM
Even without mention of RP, I don't think it's that convincing. You're not arguing from a logical and reasonable standpoint, you're just pulling on heartstrings. Soldiers are wounded and killed in every war, and someone who supports the war in Iraq would counter this by saying that they don't want those things to happen to women and children here in the U.S. and that's why the soldiers are voluntarily giving that sacrifice for our country. They might also point out that there were severe casualties in World War II, but that wasn't a reason to give up the fight. For people who support the war, these images will only instill a greater hatred in them of the people who did this to them and will make them even more convinced that we need to step up our tactics in the Middle East.

Ron LOL
11-10-2007, 07:22 AM
Even without mention of RP, I don't think it's that convincing. You're not arguing from a logical and reasonable standpoint, you're just pulling on heartstrings. Soldiers are wounded and killed in every war, and someone who supports the war in Iraq would counter this by saying that they don't want those things to happen to women and children here in the U.S. and that's why the soldiers are voluntarily giving that sacrifice for our country. They might also point out that there were severe casualties in World War II, but that wasn't a reason to give up the fight. For people who support the war, these images will only instill a greater hatred in them of the people who did this to them and will make them even more convinced that we need to step up our tactics in the Middle East.

This is a point very well taken considering the point I just made in the sign bomb thread.

lucius
11-10-2007, 07:28 AM
Even without mention of RP, I don't think it's that convincing. You're not arguing from a logical and reasonable standpoint, you're just pulling on heartstrings. Soldiers are wounded and killed in every war, and someone who supports the war in Iraq would counter this by saying that they don't want those things to happen to women and children here in the U.S. and that's why the soldiers are voluntarily giving that sacrifice for our country. They might also point out that there were severe casualties in World War II, but that wasn't a reason to give up the fight. For people who support the war, these images will only instill a greater hatred in them of the people who did this to them and will make them even more convinced that we need to step up our tactics in the Middle East.

Serious business, back to a vote by congress, these policing actions exact great toll are designed to stagnate for decades or so: foment war to create inextinguishable debt. Just come home...

tsetsefly
11-10-2007, 07:40 AM
its morbid and wont help get anyone's vote...

Drknows
11-10-2007, 07:43 AM
Please dont use wounded solders for political gain. Its one thing to mention the number wounded but using images of them standing next to bush is just bad taste. something the left would do. Thats why they get so much hate from the right

evadmurd
11-10-2007, 07:48 AM
To talk of the horrors of war, no. In a political campaign, yes. I wouldn't use it.

Mortikhi
11-10-2007, 07:49 AM
I think this flyer would be good to show the results of the war and candidates' positions that want to continue it. I'm of the belief that far too many people just think of the war as 'over there' and doesn't affect them in the least. The only time I see any sort of reaction is when one of these soldiers are a neighbor or family member. Such an example is my local small town paper: rarely a mention of the war, yet it's headline central when one of the local boys came home in a coffin.

To those that are for the war and want to keep it going, whether or not this emboldens them to stay the course, is not my concern because those people are beyond reproach.

Corydoras
11-10-2007, 08:37 AM
I don't think it's wise to use identifiable veterans' images for a political campaign without their permission.

Jwaksman
11-10-2007, 08:42 AM
I don't think it's wise to use identifiable veterans' images for a political campaign without their permission.



That's another issue. One of those veterans might be backing another candidate and won't want his image used to promote Paul.



And, yes, too "real" for the campaign. You have to use a little bit of tact when trying to convince most people - that flyer will probably scare off a lot of people who won't want to get close enough to even read the words or learn anything about the issue.


As far as anti-war images go, I personally prefer the image of the exhausted soldier, covered in filth and parched. It honors our soldiers for the heroes they are and reminds everyone how overworked they are and how much of a tragedy it is what they have to go through in Iraq. And at the same time, it won't scare anybody off by being too graphic.

Corydoras
11-10-2007, 08:49 AM
Not to mention, there ARE going to be people who will be moved favorably toward Bush for being so "compassionate" and "brave" as to visit the hospital and praise the wounded vets, etc. "Can't say he doesn't know the costs of war," etc.

Adamsa
11-10-2007, 08:58 AM
I think it's too morbid for a Ron Paul flyer, maybe as just an anti-war flyer.

rfbz
11-10-2007, 09:09 AM
I wouldn't send that out. There are other ways to communicate that we need to get out of Iraq without having to shock them. People are sensitive to when others are trying to persuade them with emotion and it turns them off. Think about when those anti-abortion organizations show pictures of killed fetuses. I honestly think that's counterproductive.

TheDuke
11-10-2007, 09:12 AM
It's disrespectful to those brave men on that flyer, it's wrong to use their misery for political gain. :(

The message on that flyer is true, but I really hope nobody uses it in that way.

0zzy
11-10-2007, 09:13 AM
I don't think those soldiers would appreciate you using that.

sparebulb
11-10-2007, 09:16 AM
Do not use this for all of the previously mentioned reasons. The injuries are always the same with every war. You can produce the same impression in peoples' minds with an appropriately written flier without anyone accusing you of being morbid or using a soldier's misfortune for political gain.

I think that it would be useful to get an accurate number of how many arms, legs, feet, etc have been lost in this debacle. Not to mention the number of divorces and lost jobs.

I think that it worthwhile to mention the US track record of success when we engage in undeclared wars. JMO

ksuguy
11-10-2007, 09:16 AM
No, do not hand that out.

Meatwasp
11-10-2007, 09:46 AM
I almost lost my breakfast after seeing that. Don't use it please

WillInMiami
11-10-2007, 10:34 AM
NEGATIVE! As a veteran of the Army, I believe that exploting these soldiers is WRONG!

Say what you will about others exploiting them. However, unless you have explicit permission to use the pictures of a soldier for an exact purpose, if you do so, you are VERY WRONG!

I sincerely hope that you do not proceed as intended. If you are not a soldier of vet, you cannot possibly understand what kind of effect you will have on these soldiers if you use those pictures for your own purposes for a cause that you have NO idea if they even support.

schmeisser
11-10-2007, 10:35 AM
NEGATIVE! As a veteran of the Army, I believe that exploting these soldiers is WRONG!

Say what you will about others exploiting them. However, unless you have explicit permission to use the pictures of a soldier for an exact purpose, if you do so, you are VERY WRONG!

I sincerely hope that you do not proceed as intended. If you are not a soldier of vet, you cannot possibly understand what kind of effect you will have on these soldiers if you use those pictures for your own purposes for a cause that you have NO idea if they even support.

Ditto

SWATH
11-10-2007, 10:45 AM
Yeah don't use it, especially without the soldiers express permission. Michael Moore used some video of wounded soldiers and they were outraged.

Naraku
11-10-2007, 10:49 AM
I think this kind of thing would only work is if they were Ron Paul supporters and actually were voicing support for Ron Paul in there somehow, then it would be a little more sentimental. You know, something like "Wounded Iraq Veterans for Ron Paul".

This, however, is just way too messed up, especially with the burn victim in it. I also certainly think using their image without their permission is doing a disservice.

ckhagen
11-10-2007, 11:08 AM
Coming solely from a professional perspective in he design/advertising industry...

It's exploitative and because you do not have signed permission to use their likeness, it could get you in a lot of trouble.

If you had their personal release and they agreed with the content (or even supplied it), it would be *powerful*. But you don't and that just makes it totally wrong on too many levels.

Naraku
11-10-2007, 11:18 AM
Like I said if you can find any wounded vets who'd want to show support for Ron Paul for such a flier and could have them smiling or something like that it would probably be way better.

This is just dark and dreary and aside from legal issues it would be seen in rather bad taste. If you're going to have images of wounded people it's better to use them in a more sympathy-evoking way with positive images of them that are going to be more emotional than these kind.

qsecofr
11-10-2007, 11:46 AM
I would not look favorably on someone who handed me that. :(

It is a cold hard reality but people seeking that reality will already have found it. Exploitation of our servicemen is something we fight against, to use it as a political tool is justifying a "means" to an "end" that ultimately lead us here.

Cindy
11-10-2007, 11:57 AM
So lose the Ron Paul stuff, but leave the 'other candidates' wanting more war in there? I think I'm in agreement with that

I agree with that too.

It is the truth and people in support of the War need to face it and have it on their conscious.

Loose the RP stuff. Leave all the rest and get it out there!!!!!!!!!!

Maybe add something about how Al Queda took 5,000 (forgot the official number) lives on 9/11 and as a result of our need to invade Iraq over it, we let them take over 3,000 more of our soliders and permanently injure tens of thousands more, not to mention kill over 100,000 Iraqi civilians. Our Foriegn policy is horrific and assinine!


While I am here, there is a new slogan floating around to replace Support Our Troops that makes how to do that more clear-


IMPORT OUR TROOPS NOW!!!!!

Goldwater Conservative
11-10-2007, 12:24 PM
I don't know how Bush sleeps at night. I don't say that in a political way, I just really wonder as a fellow human being.

ronpaulyourmom
11-10-2007, 12:27 PM
I wouldn't use it.