Posted on 11/29/2006 8:36:31 AM PST by XR7
HAVRE DE GRACE, Md. — When they called her name, she could not move. Sgt. Leana Nishimura intended to walk up proudly, shake the dignitaries' hands and accept their honors for her service in Iraq — a special coin, a lapel pin, a glass-encased U.S. flag.
But her son clung to her leg. He cried and held tight...T.J. was 9, her oldest child, and although eight months had passed since she had returned from the war zone, he was still upset by anything that reminded him of her deployment...
The faraway move to live with his grandmother. The months that went by without his mother's kisses or hugs, without her scrutiny of homework, her teasing humor, her familiar bedtime songs.
Nishimura was a single mother — with no spouse to take over, to preserve her children's routines, to keep up the family apartment.
Of her three children, T.J. seemed to worry most... "He went from having one parent to having no parents, basically," Nishimura said, reflecting. "People have said, 'Thank you so much for your sacrifice.' But it's the children who have had more of a sacrifice."
When war started in Iraq, a generation of U.S. women became involved as never before — in a wider-than-ever array of jobs, for long deployments, in a conflict with daily bloodshed. More than 155,000 women have served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Among their ranks are more than 16,000 single mothers, according to the Pentagon, a number that military experts say is unprecedented.
How these women have coped and how their children are managing have gone little noticed as the war stretches across a fourth year...
"I tell [the children] that if God needs Mommy to go ... then Mommy's going to have to go again and they're going to have to let me."
(Excerpt) Read more at archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com ...
You give me the creeps.
************
Let me guess-First Amendment fan?
If it has been established that he's affiliated with the terrorists and reasonably likely to have useful information, after having had a fair opportunity to make a case that he's just an innocent bystander grabbed by mistake, I simply don't see the problem with that.
*************
Then she's a widow.
Maybe because "dad" shouldn't be trusted to watch anything more sentient than a goldfish, and that's why he's no longer in the picture?
Absolutley, but there was a story in Army Times the other day where the Army's head of diversity (or some such-a bird colonel) called for allowing more women in the combat arms so that more minorities would be promoted to higher officer rank.
Frankly, females will find themselves assigned to combat units a lor more often thanks to the "plug and play" concept of transformation. Many maneuver units are losing combat support elements-like the support and maintenance platoons. Those needs will be filled by randomly assigning support and maintenance units that are not "organic" to the combat units. Since those units can have females assigned, more females will end up in combat units.
The woman in question is a mother who is divorced.
For all we know, she is divorced for no fault of her own, but because her husband left her for another woman or some other reason.
She volunteered to serve her country. She served honorably.
Have you served in the military? Do you really believe that people who volunteer for military service are selfish people?
BTW, I know a woman who is a single mother who has never been married and she has one child. She served in Iraq for a tour while her daughter stayed with her parents.
The woman in question is a God-fearing patriot who has raised a wonderful little girl who is fiercely proud of her mother's service.
And I am proud to call her a friend.
Just an observer of what slanted language does to an argument. I was merely calling attention to the language the poster was usingh and calling him on it.
You got a problem with that?
Ahh yes. "Transformation."
Not a good thing IMO and one of Rummy's biggest failings.
Her National Guard duty, with the 129th Signal Battalion, brought in extra money. Her ex-husband paid child support. Still, she only scraped by, with the help of public assistance.
You got a problem with that?
************
"Slanted language" is an interesting term. It's you who has a problem with the speech of others, not me. Curious that you would begrudge others their speech, then defend your own right to it.
Just to clarify ... you're simply trying to say that many people (wrongly) consider single mothers to be "selfish whores" -- not that you personally consider the two terms to be interchangeable, right?
No, because you're so nasty and spiteful and rude and seem to have such a very large chip on your shoulder.
You should seek professional help. Seriously.
Without knowing more about her situation, such as her financial situation and that of her grandparents, and the reasons that went into her signing up, I don't think you can make such a sweeping statement such as "a mother's first responsibility should be to her minor children."
Maybe her signing up to get the pay and health benefits for her family IS fulfilling her "first responsibility. It just so happens that her job calls for deployment every so often.
I'd rather she be serving her country instead of a ward of the state, wouldn't you?
I bet she didn't. She just saw a free ride on the backs of taxpayers.
Soldiers, on occasion, are sent away to WAR. Like it or not, being a Soldier is what she signed up for. If she did not like doing the WORK for the money, she should have stayed on public assistance and kept her LEGS CLOSED!
you prefer the less flattering names? How bout the kids? Wanta call them less flattering names?
I don't quite get how that is "abandonment." Maybe you could break out the Crayola's and help me out, eh?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.