Now there are small articles in the back pages about Jessica's wedding for those still searching for every tidbit of news. Like it or not people are interested. I am. The over-reaction ~here~ to the story, and each appearance of her name and face in the paper is unseemly treatment of one of our own troops. I would be personally embarrassed to be considered a FReeper if I knew she had read the threads about her here. 'nough said.
I support women in all the military roles they can qualify for... And I think there are many roles we can do. I know that you and I disagree on that... You probably think this makes me a feminazi too... if so, then I hope you don't mind me calling you a caveman. I don't. That major distinction, whether or not her mere enlistment in the military is a threat, is probably why our eyes see such starkly different things when we see the stories. And the threads.
That's strange...I guess you don't read/listen to/watch Fox, CNN, ABC, NBC, CBS, MS-NBC, USA Radio Network, USA Today, Associated Press, Reuters, etc? All of these media carried the lie wall to wall...that she held off wave after wave of Iraqi attacks, fired 'til she ran out of ammo, killed numerous enemies, sustained gunshot and stab wounds, etc. What do you think made her famous in the first place? Just because she's a cute little blonde that got captured? No, it was the story of her heroic last stand that in reality never happened. But I have no reason to doubt your word...maybe you get your news from media other than those I mentioned above.
"I think our points of view are so different on just that fact that you see news stories that accept and respect her mere presence in a war zone as liberal propaganda."
Wrong. I see reports that make her out to be a she-Rambo, and give her credit for the heroic acts of others as liberal propoganda. Women can do, and do well, many jobs in all branches of the armed forces. If they can do a job, then I am all for them doing it. I'm not wild about the thought of single mothers being deployed, and for this reason I think single women should not be allowed to enlist, and be discharged if they're already on active duty. But I digress.
"You seem to see it as dangerous liberal bias if her picture has any other caption than "she never should have been there".
Point out to me where I said anything close to that. What I have gone on record as saying, with you and many times on FReep, is that women shouldn't be in combat arms MOSs, or Military Occupational Specialities, or in combat units. I never said women shouldn't be sent into combat theaters.
"Now there are small articles in the back pages about Jessica's wedding for those still searching for every tidbit of news. Like it or not people are interested. I am. The over-reaction ~here~ to the story, and each appearance of her name and face in the paper is unseemly treatment of one of our own troops."
If you're interested in Jessica Lynch's wedding, that's fine...more power to ya. But what over-reaction to her wedding story are you referring to? I mentioned it as an example of how she's been turned into a national icon, based on the initial lie about what she did the night of the ambush. If she doesn't want to be in the spotlight, she could easily avoid it...the Army is great at shielding it's soldiers from media attention. But I get the feeling she revels in the attention, as it will help sell more books and TV commercials. As for the threads on FReep about her, I admit I haven't read every post on every thread. But I personally have not read anything calling her a coward, a shirker, or anything else besmirching her duty with the 507th, or anything outside her control. Some of us have problems with her not coming out and denying the lie spread about her in the media, the lie which made her the icon she is today. Again, maybe the Army is telling her to keep quiet, and if that's the case, it's not her fault. But if she's keeping quiet so as to perpetuate the lie, and therefore sell more books and TV commercials, then I do have a problem with that.
"I support women in all the military roles they can qualify for... And I think there are many roles we can do. I know that you and I disagree on that..."
And again, you are wrong. Again, I ask you to point out anywhere that I have said women shouldn't serve in the military. I served 11 years in the Army, and in that time I even had women in my chain of command. Women fill many vital roles in all branches, but they do not serve in combat MOSs for a reason...they physically can't. That is just a fact of nature. However, there are many non-combat roles women can and do fill, and on that point you and I agree.
"You probably think this makes me a feminazi too..."
No, I don't. Again, I know you from your posts on other threads, and 80% of the time I agree with you. The feminazis I refer to here are the ones on DACOWITS, who likely conceived of the lie to begin with, and the ones in the media who spread the lie, reveled in it, then failed to do any investigating when Lynch's own doctor called it a lie. All of these feminazis, and their emascualted male lap-dogs in the media, are scumbags who couldn't care less about the truth, and about national security.
"That major distinction, whether or not her mere enlistment in the military is a threat, is probably why our eyes see such starkly different things when we see the stories."
Her enlistment isn't a threat. Lynch being in the theater isn't a threat. Her even being in that convoy that night isn't a threat. However, when you have an inept, incompetent chain of command like she had, "leaders" who couldn't read a map, road guards who left their posts early, radios that weren't on the right frequencies, weapons that malfunctioned because they hadn't been properly maintained and cleaned, and soldiers who didn't have the wepons they needed to fight their way out of the ambush (only one 50-cal MG for the company, no grenades or anti-tank rockets, etc.), then things get out of hand very quickly, and women who shouldn't be in combat find themselves there. I think the reason you and I see this issue differently, is that I'm a veteran, and therefore see things from the perspective of a soldier. If you've never served, then it's easy to buy into the stories the media tell. Then again, I do seem to detect a chip on your shoulder when it comes to women in the military.
The American Sheeple, and their short attention spans, need to know the truth about that night. Not just the truth about Lynch and that of Miller, but about the disgraceful bumbling that lead to the ambush on the 507th. Heads need to roll, but as long as we the Sheeple remain fat, dumb and happy, it'll never happen. The worst case scenario would be that the lie continues to take root in our national psyche, and that it would lead to the introduction of women into our combat arms ranks. This is but one reason the Lynch lie needs to be disspelled.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!