Conclusion

Each image presents the Six-Day War through a specific point of view, shaping how the war is understood by the public. Some offer insights into diplomatic relations at the time, while others touch on consequences of the war that are still prevalent today. However, all of them shape how the conflict is understood by emphasizing certain ideas, such as Cold War competition, criticism of leadership, and post war attitudes. Through exaggeration and symbolism, they direct viewers toward specific judgments about who was responsible and what the war meant. By framing the conflict a certain way, each image reflects the priorities of the people that published them. 

Just like the political cartoons, even the photograph of the refugees pushes an intended interpretation of the war. It does not argue a position as openly as the cartoons, but it still directs attention to the human impact with the intention of invoking empathy toward refugees. All of these images show how the war was communicated through both persuasion and different perspectives. Public understanding was shaped not only by what happened, but by how those events were presented, often in ways that encouraged a particular perspective rather than a neutral stance.