She was fired for violating her companies policies. I don't think the military picked this as a "battle". Plus, she made $1,400 off of that picture. Why doesn't it surprise me that the Seattle Times left that out. Some martyr.

I don't think stability that comes with a premature absence of conflict between US forces and the Baathists and their terror allies serves the long-term interests of the Iraqi's or the US. The current battle in Iraq must occur. We must rid the country of these elements. Unfortunately, it will not be without US casualties and it will not take place over a short period of time. If we show resolve, make effective use of on the ground intelligence and pick our fights, we will succeed.

We have to have this fight. This fight is likely a direct function of the ease of major combat operations when our military crushed the opposition with lightening speed and without significant enemy casualties. A little more blood spilled earlier may have meant a little less blood spilled later.

As far as the adequacy of our current tactics, it's better to have an understanding of our current short-term and long-term goals before we undertake change for the sake of change. Unfortunately, I don't have an adequate understanding of these realities.

I do, however, place a great trust in our military. They have proven to be quite adapt at changing tactics as the situation demands. Unless the Bush Administration begins to micromanage battle plans (and it is not), we will prevail.

Waaah! I got fired because I violated the company rules. I am a victim of the illegitimate president who wants to hide the real facts of the imperialist war. Waaah! I didn't make a dime, but now I have an agent. I promise to give the money I make to the families of the dead.

Give me a freaking break! The military has the rule in place FOR THE FAMILIES OF THE DEAD. And contrary to the repeated assertions by the media that "the military bans photographs of the dead," the actual rule is what Matt pointed out:
"official policy barring pictures of remains UNTIL they reach their FINAL destination" (caps mine).

I must disgree with Matt (that's a first). The military did not pick this "battle." A woman made a very bad decision, got fired, and now the leftie media is using it as a tool to attack the administration as if she is a real martyr. The real victims are those families and the dead soldiers who were photographed without permission of the military and the families of the dead.

Whether the photograph is "poignant" or not is frankly irrelevant. Shame on the Times for publishing an ill-gotten photograph.

Pictures of the flag-drapped coffins awaiting transport upset many people for reasons that go beyond bitter reminders of the cost of war. Death without an individual story lacks dignity; it is like a random production of the Moloch of war.

How different is our reaction to the terrible news of the loss of Pat Tillman. The death of this young man, whom we all knew to have been given so much, and who willingly sacrificed so much, transcends comment.

One hardly knows whether to weep or to exult for a nation and a family that could produce a man capable of teaching such lessons about how to live and how to die, in so brief a span.

Perhaps we would feel that way about all the coffins if we but knew each story.

Tom, I still support the airing of the photo, but what you say is very well put. I was really struck by how Pat Tillman gave up an easy life to do what he thought was right, and paid the ultimate price.

Likewise, there are compelling stories behind each of those flag-draped coffins in the picture. It WOULD be good to hear some of those stories. As I mentioned in my original post, part of what bugs me about coverage of the Iraq war dead, is the smug liberal presumption that each death is an indictment of the Bush administration, the war, and the U.S. These men and women were doing something they believed in, and were fully aware of the risks they faced. To assert otherwise is Marxist claptrap.

My name is Tami Silicio and I just want to comment about the policy of the flag drapped coffins. Before my wonderful sweet handsome healthy kind, son passed away he was at a war fighting for his life for several years from a sudden brain tumor growing in his head a rare type. His main goal was to stay alive, play professional baseball and to graduate with his class from high school. Alot of people saw this effort from not only his community but surrounding ones as well. this is similar to what is going on with our service members overseas different circumstances but the similar agendas. well when he graduated with a standing ovation from everyone in the gym.for reaching his goal. three months later at age 19 he passed away. And others knew what he accomplished and that he stood for something important and that made them feel like he was a part of their lives. He unselfishly brought a community together by his ordeal. this is what the service members do. And for this they should have our unselfish support no politics just support especially when they don't make it home alive.When my son passed on what helped me was the community support I got through cards and letters of support. as a parent it is so imprtant to know that our children are alive in this world but when they pass on we want others to know they lived and stood for something and we were proud of them. America is a hugh community we can't share this behind the ban. This is why we need to stand by the parents of our fallen when they die in Iraq. this is what we do as Americans we stand by each other and this makes us strong as a nation. it builds unity by giving us all a common bond. right now we are so divided in this country something as easy as compassion could mend alot of turmoil in this country.The ban on the coffin issue is for the wrong reasons polls show this that more military people want the ban lifted than those who oppose it. My photo was about compassion not politics. this administration is pitting people against people by their policys why are they doing this? sincerly Tami Silicio tamisilicio@yahoo.com

Ms. Silicio:

With all due respect to your loss (which, I am sorry to say, is irrelevant to the topic at hand), who made you the moral guardian of the military administrative policy?

Which family gave you the permission to photograph its dead son?

Furthermore, if you goal was to merely support the military families and help them cope with the loss, why did you not simply share the photographs with the families only?

I am sorry to say that what you did smacks of a publicity stunt especially when your apology is that you did it for "compassion not for politics" immediately followed by "this administration is..." That sounds suspiciously like politics to me.

I do not know if your claim of poll numbers regarding the photograph policy is true or not. As an analogy, if a majority of Americans is against abortion rights, would you then consider banning abortions a moral and political imperative?

Furthermore, if your action was not for personal or political gain, may I ask why you retained an agent? Are you, too, attempting to lengthen your 15 minutes of fame?

Lastly, contrary to your assertion that your action would "mend" the polarization of our society, I am afraid your action only exacerbated it.

Mr Ken J I sure could use that 1400 dollars right now, since you are so smart could you tell me where its at? tami silicio