Posted on 09/13/2003 9:25:15 AM PDT by John Jorsett
Have the Rules changed?? Is getting on TV automatic immunity from being held responsible??
The "They've Suffered Enough Already" Syndrome rears it's ugly head again. The good, bleeding heart American sheeple can't stand to see someone punished for using bad judgement, even if that bad judgement caused Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen or marines to die.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/977687/posts
snip:
We've become too specialized," said General Byrnes, the head of Training and Doctrine Command here. "Ask a junior enlisted who they are, and they'll tell you, `I´m a mechanic,´ not I´m a soldier. We need to change that culturally in the Army."
So beginning next year for soldiers and in three years for officers, the Army plans to formally inculcate what it calls a "warrior ethos" throughout the ranks.
Army officials are not worried about the battle-readiness of their front-line fighting ranks, like infantry and armor troops. But for support troops, many of whom rarely handle a weapon or drill for combat after basic training, the strategy will probably mean more marksmanship practice, tougher physical training and, for officers, more small-unit leadership skills in the field.
So, starting in 1 year for soldiers and 3 years for officers, maybe there is hope?
You seem to have access to more detailed reports than have been provided previously. Are they available to ordinary mortals or just an exalted few such as yourself? I see no scenario such as you descibe in the Army's official report of the ambush.
So, I'd like to see that change take place within the entire REMF world. For this to work, CPT I.B. Supply and SSG Linguist D. Coffeedrinker at Ft. Meade are going to have to develop a close and personal relationship with the dirt, the cold, the heat, the rain, and the range. That way, they can maintain the warrior ethos the Army has taken pains to instill in young soldiers, after they've left Basic and AIT, and gone on to their first duty station.
Scouts Out! Cavalry Ho!
Ha, ha, hah...it seems that you have not learned how to fully interpret "Official" Army Reports yet. Some, who have had certain experiences, know why certain things are put in them, taken out of them, or just not covered. This brings me to my major gripe with Lynch and "her story." I don't have any problem with Lynch telling a true story of what happened during the ambush and making money off of it to help support herself with the injuries she's sustained. My problem is with the agenda of those that are pushing her "hero" story. I believe this story illustrates how the media looks at itself as the de facto ultimate political power in the country, one who's mission is not to inform but to control opinion. All stories are now designed to support a political agenda, so I ask myself who's political agenda are they trying to support by trumpeting up Jessie's Story? The answer, whether people admit it or not, is the liberal feminist agenda -which permeates its hateful and harmful messages so noticeably without challenge throughout all forms of the media establishment.
In other words, the version of events that you laid out with such authority, as if you had new facts, was actually your interpretation of the same old facts.
As for the agenda of the media, I don't dispute that, but why would the Army itself present a distorted report?
At your urging, I decided to review the Army's official report of the Attack on the 507th Maintenance Company, 23 March 2003, An Nasiriyah, Iraq. My previous post on this event was not based on this report, but it was based on loose interpretations of various stories of this event that pre-dated the release of this report. I never meant for my previous post to be the official record of the event -it was meant to capture the essence of what occurred. Now having read the report, I am even more troubled about this Lynch book deal. I think it's the media's backhanded attempt to mock, demoralize, and dispirit the fighting men there in Iraq. I also think it's being designed to promote feminist propaganda, and is being driven by those who harbor mean-spirited contempt for men. The story was fascinating, sad, and tragic, yet it was very enlightening. It tells the story of some real heroes and goats of the 507th. All the men of the 507th fought and performed valiantly during the ambush, but none stand out like the 1SG Dowdy. This report only goes into brief detail about how these men were killed, captured, or escaped, but the account it does give very closely resembles my original post on this subject. So why have I not mentioned what Lynch did, what actions she took during the entire ambush? You implied that I did know the factual story of what occurred during the ambush of this element, and indeed I needed refresh and update my account of what happened during this event. I now urge you to now do the same, and I think it will become quite evident why I have chosen to say "nothing" of Lynch.
All the men of the 507th fought and performed valiantly during the ambush, but none stand out like the 1SG Dowdy. This report only goes into brief detail about how these men were killed, captured, or escaped, but the account it does give very closely resembles my original post on this subject. So why have I not mentioned what Lynch did, what actions she took during the entire ambush? You implied that I did know the factual story of what occurred during the ambush of this element, and indeed I needed refresh and update my account of what happened during this event. I now urge you to now do the same, and I think it will become quite evident why I have chosen to say "nothing" of Lynch.
Your original post seemed to imply that Lynch was the key to the 507th disiaster and that if only she had done her part, the outcome would have been avoided. I'll take a look at your original post again to see if I could have misinterpreted it and I'll recheck the Army's report as you suggest.
Most of the 507ths weapons jammed...
Almost all of the 507th's weapons jammed...
Adversity on the battlefield is to be expected. A real soldier accounts for the unexpected and has contingencies planned for such events. Ms. Lynch is a soldier in name only. While the others who were attacked with her attempted to take defensive positions and fight in an effort to execute a proper retreat, she did nothing but freeze. They needed her to lay down some fire and to hold off some of the enemy for a while so that they could get situated, and she was actually in a good position to do this from the back seat of the Cut V in which she was riding, but she did nothing but panic and freeze -just like you'd expect a girl to do in such a situation.
A reread of the Army's report on the ambush reveals that the 507th was plagued by widespread malfunction of their weapons. It says nothing about Lynch 'freezing' as you claimed. She was in a good position to lay down some fire and hold off the enemy from the back seat of the Cut V, while it was hurtling at high speed, attempting to escape? Maybe on TV or in the movies you'd see someone shooting out of the back of a speeding vehicle, but in reality? Really?
Again, it still seems to me that you lay most of the blame for the 507th disaster on Lynch. If only she really was the female Rambo that the Wash. Post made her out to be, then she could have saved the day. But the fact that she was used by those reporters and whoever leaked the misinfo to them to try to promote their women in combat agenda doesn't make it right for you to use her again to counter that agenda.
That we are putting women in the position that Jessica Lynch. Shoshanna Johnson and Lori Ann Piestewa were put in makes me sick. That the tragic event was used so shamefully also makes me sick. That some would focus blame on Lynch and otherwise use her in a distorted way to point out that women shouldn't be in war zones also makes me sick. The pro women in combat gang need to use deception to promote their agenda because the facts don't support their position. The arguments against women in combat or high risk areas near combat have their own legs and don't need to be propped this way.
507th weapon records gone
Laura Cruz
El Paso Times
The U.S. Army on Tuesday revealed that all records and documents about the weapons that jammed during the March 23 ambush that led to the death of nine Fort Bliss soldiers were destroyed in the Iraqi attack and that there is no way to trace the weapons' histories. The Army, responding to an El Paso Times request under the Freedom of Information Act, said any official information about the weapons used by Fort Bliss' 507th Maintenance Company was lost on a supply truck taken into combat.
An official report on the ambush near Nasiriyah said that several weapons, including M-16s, M249 Squad Automatic Weapons and a .50-caliber machine gun, jammed or failed to operate properly during the firefight. The disclosure that the records were lost shocked, bewildered and further angered relatives of soldiers who were killed in the early morning ambush, which is among the worst losses for the U.S. military during Operation Iraqi Freedom. In addition to the nine Fort Bliss soldiers killed, two from the 3rd Forward Support Battalion were killed, five soldiers were wounded, and seven soldiers were taken prisoner. "Capt. Troy King (507th commander) stated that he does not have any historical data on weapons involved in the enemy contact," June Bates, Fort Bliss freedom of information officer, said in a written response. "He lost his motorpool truck and all documentation." Bates said King's records, which were kept in the motor pool, were stored in his supply truck, which was also "involved in the enemy contact."
The official 507th report, which was released by the Army on July 17, suggests that the "malfunctions may have resulted from inadequate individual maintenance in a desert environment." Nancili Mata, the widow of Chief Warrant Officer 2 Johnny Villareal Mata, who was killed in the ambush, said she was shocked to learn that no duplicate records were kept on the weapons. "They should have copies here. It doesn't sound right," she said. "They are blaming the soldiers for not keeping their weapons clean, but my husband knew better than that. He did everything right." Arlene Walters, mother of Sgt. Donald R. Walters, who died in the attack and would have celebrated his 34th birthday Tuesday, said her son was dedicated to his job and to details. She said she finds it hard to believe that her son's weapon wasn't kept clean. "He kept his guns as clean as can be," she said. "He even talked to his dad about it."
Because the circumstances surrounding the death of Walters are unclear, his parents continue to ask questions about anything involving their son, including the history of his weapon. "Nothing surprises me anymore, but what I don't understand is why would you carry that kind of information into a battlefield," Arlene Walters asked. "It seems to me that if those weapons were issued out at Fort Bliss, then the records should have stayed at Fort Bliss." Ruben Estrella, father of 18-year-old Pvt. Ruben Estrella-Soto, from El Paso, said he no longer believes anything the Army tells him. "They told me that my son was shot in the head, and now they are saying that he was struck by a tank," he said. "I think the Army or the government is hiding something, but sooner or later the truth will be told."
It goes on with more details here: http://www.borderlandnews.com/stories/borderland/20030917-22426.shtml
I wonder if this is beurocratic bungling or a cover up of something. "They told me that my son was shot in the head, and now they are saying that he was struck by a tank." Something stinks, just a hunch.
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.