Is the Truth Worth a Life?

Many war correspondents and photographers go into war zones to document what really happens on the frontlines. They put their lives at risk in hopes of bringing back the truth behind the curtains of war. Are the truths of war worth the lives of war correspondents’? I do not think they should put their lives on the line to exploit the truth. They have loved ones back home who wish they would stay and not put their lives in danger.

I came across an example of this in an article I read for a group project in my English 101 class. The Taliban abducted a French photographer named Pierre Borghi on November 27, 2012. He was looking for work in the humanitarian or urban sectors. Pierre Borghi was given a piece of paper on which to write down his information for a background check to be given to the Taliban Cabinet then passed down to the French authorities. Since the French authorities were not meeting the Taliban’s demands, they said Pierre’s execution would be within the next few days. As a result, Pierre did not wait when he noticed his chains were loosed he escaped back to a military base.

Two more examples of war correspondents putting their lives in danger are Sebastian Junger and Tim Hetherington  the war correspondents for the Korengal Valley and creators of Restrepo. Sebastian and Hetherington put their lives in danger in order to document what the soldiers of Battle Company, 2nd Battalion, 503rd Infantry Regiment of the 173rd Airborne Brigade did while in the Korengal Valley. They were caught in the middle of many firefights between the soldiers and the Taliban and their  lives were constantly in danger. Sadly, on April 20, 2011 Tim Hetherington was killed in Misurata, Libya while on another war correspondent assignment.

War correspondents have dangerous jobs that require them to put their lives at risk for footage of frontline warfare and how soldiers live while at war. Are these assignments worth the war correspondent’s lives? , should they be given security and boundaries to where they can film? I believe if they are going into a war zone, they should be protected and given boundaries that they should not cross. If these conditions are not met then war correspondents should not go to that war zone, its just way too dangerous for them to be out in the field.

 

Americas Negative Impact

Why does the United States interfere in wars overseas? Do the natives appreciate the help we give? Many natives of countries at war feel that the United States causes the situations to become worse. Some natives do not want help from American soldiers; they just want to deal with the problem themselves or hope that it will resolve itself. Many Middle East and African countries do not want help from American soldiers.

During the battle of Mogadishu, many civilians lost their lives and their much degraded city’s condition became worse. Homes, markets, and other buildings were destroyed in this battle. Families were driven from their homes and forced to live somewhere else, and all of the natives point their fingers towards the American soldiers for the cause of the destruction. They did not want the United States’ help in the first place and feel their presence made the situation worse. An example of this can be seen from looking at the story of a Somali woman, Hawo Hussein Adan, also known as the “Helicopter Woman.” She lost her home when an American black hawk helicopter crashed and her home became engulfed in flames. She  lost two of her children  from the falling debris which is a direct result of the negative impact the American soldier brought upon the civilians.

           In the Korengal Valley, the natives never allowed any country or group to come in their homeland and control them. They fought off every attempt to do so, even by the Taliban in the 1990’s. The Korengalis rely on each other for help and have become somewhat self-sufficient in their own eyes. They have their own timber industry greasing the ground causing trees to fall and transporting the timber through trails in the valley. They have made their land fertile for farming and built their homes to be able to withstand bombings and earthquakes. In the documentary Restrepo, the American soldiers’ defense wires happen to kill a Korengalis man’s cow; he was angry and wanted reparations for his cow’s death. The man wanted money but the soldiers could not give him money, so he left angry and unsatisfied. When the fire fights started in the Korengal Valley, many of the natives were killed in the cross fires and they became angry with the American soldiers and started to question their presence.

Do the natives of these countries have the right to be angry and upset with the United States? I believe natives of countries like Afghanistan and Somalia have a right to be angry with the American soldiers. In their eyes, the American soldiers did more harm than good for the situation. If the United States was plunged into war and other countries came to help and did more harm than good we would be angry with them. Not having the support of the natives can make a victory in a war longer and harder to achieve.