First Girl Lost in War

The Sun ^ | 24 March 2003 | Will Barker

[Plainsman]

A PRETTY 19-year-old country girl who joined the US Army to escape unemployment was feared to be the first woman soldier to die yesterday.

Blonde Jessica Lynch was among 12 soldiers in a US supply convoy ambushed by Iraqi troops. Her parents were left weeping like others in America and Britain as more Coalition victims of the war were identified.

Supply clerk Jessica was feared dead after five survivors from the ambush were paraded before Iraqi TV cameras in sickening footage beamed around the world on Sunday.

Also shown were the bodies of the other seven members of the 507th Maintenance Co convoy, but Jessica’s parents could not identify her among them.

Her father Greg Lynch said: “The only thing they can tell us is she’s missing.

“I just want them to bring her back safely — her and all the rest of the kids.”

Private Jessica — known as Jessie — only joined up because she could not find a job in her farming community home town of Palestine, West Virginia.

Lorene Cumbridge, a 62-year-old cousin, said: “She’s just a West Virginia country girl. Warm-hearted. Outgoing. I really thought growing up she would become an elementary school teacher.

Missing ... supply clerk Jessica

But for West Virginia children in some of the more rural areas, the military is the one good chance of getting an education and making something of themselves.”

Lack of jobs and the military service of her older brother, Gregory Lynch Jr., led Jessica into the Army, her father said.

She signed up before graduating from Wirt County High School in Elizabeth, where she played basketball and softball.

Greg said: “The Army offered a good deal.” Jessica’s brother is stationed at Fort Bragg in North Carolina.

Locals have been supporting Greg, Jessica’s mother Deidre, and her 17-year-old sister, Brandi Renee.

A yellow ribbon was tied to a tree near the family’s mailbox and two others were attached to posts on the front porch.

[Joe Hadenuf]

I agree. I find it offensive that our government allows our women to be so close to the front that they can be captured and raped until dead, or killed.....

Most women can't even qualify to become fire fighters, yet we are putting them on a hostile war front with Arab fanatics? Jezzzzz.

What a shame.....

[Mr. Mojo]

Our cultural degradation made this tragedy possible. Both the feminazis and the politicos who caved in to feminazi blackmail have blood on their hands.

[Anamensis]

Wow, you scream at us for being sexist and then turn around and say "they rape the men too, they're Arabs!" LOL...

[CommandoFrank]

I *let* the male soldiers open doors for me

And if we ever meet, I will allow you to 'let' me open your door... (grinning)

[oprahstheantichrist]

"A peace activist on a radio program is unable to answer a question posed to her by an Iraqi caller."

That was awesome! I wish that call could be broadcast to every home in America. He called her a "chirping little bird! Mohammed wasn't just angry, he was indignant. How I wish that the voices of the Iraqi immigrants could be heard, but so far they've gotten very little attention, other than on talk radio.

[Capriole]

A combat area is no place for women, in any capacity, at any time.

I agree. I'm a woman and am accounted a fairly tough one, but I have the sense to realize that my delicate bones and muscles can never stand up to the punishment a man's can take. Much as some might wish otherwise, women are simply not as strong, fast, and tough as men. We aren't naturally as aggressive (in fact, our form of aggressiveness can be just humorous to a man). As long as we have vaginas we are vulnerable in ways men aren't. The army has a kajillion tasks women can do to help their country without having to be in forward positions. NOW be damned.

[Age of Reason]

The difference is that women get impregnated, to later give birth the children of tribal enemies.

Starting in prehistory, a people not averse to sending its women to war would likely be exterminated by a people who were averse to sending women to war through natural selection . . .

Even if only one man survived tribal warfare, he could theoretically impregnate all the women of his tribe, and thereby ensure the survival of his tribe, his culture, and tribal genes.

But if many women perished in warfare or women returned impregnated by the enemy, then the tribal genes would be diluted, eventually to be all but rendered extinct.

And since prehisoric people did not think about genes, it must have been evolution that favored people with the gene(s) that favored stay-at-home women.

That some women today, some women, wish members of their gender to go to war, is a measure of cultural insanity, born of corrupted teachings and an artificial experience of life (civilization).

It would also be a favorable adaptation for men to prefer taking as mates those women who wanted to stay home to raise a family--men who were willing to risk their investment in their progeny by sending their children's mother off to war, would have had less of a chance to pass their genes to the next generation.

Women would also evolve to favor men who favored stay at home wifes--for the descendants of women who mated with such men, whould likely inherit the same behavior.

And so the woman would be teaming her genes with those of a man whose own genes are winners.

Therefore, it is against evolved human nature to send women to war.

[goodnesswins]

NOOOOO....It's "too hot for TV" because some people in this country do NOT NEED to see every atrocity....we don't need to be convinced....if we want to go and look at it we can...and we don't want our Children to see it. (AND, I did not need your description, either.)

[Johnny Crab]

Perhaps the other side should meet this female sodier:

The most kills achieved my a female sniper was by Lyudmila M. Pavlichenko, a Russian sniper in WWII. She is credited with killing 309 enemy soldiers.

http://www.crusaderbooks.com.au/trade12.htm

In 1942, Lyudmila Pavlichenko, a famous sniper, was invited by Eleanor Roosevelt to tour the United States and was the first Soviet citizen to be received at the White House. She visited Canada, too; a Winchester rifle with an optical sight, now on display at the Central Museum of the Armed Forces in Moscow, was presented to her in Toronto.

[FITZ]

Hear, hear, it makes me sick that "girls" are in harms way overthere. It's pathetic.

Not "girls". But even "moms".

A mom of 2 small children, now taken as a POW, it's hard to believe that it's better for her to be in Iraq than home with her kids.

N.M. woman among those killed in U.S. helicopter crash in Afghanistan
http://www.borderlandnews.com/war/stories/0324-belen.html

Archuleta was engaged to be married in June and leaves a 3-year-old boy from a previous marriage, Armstrong said.

I know these are brave women, but what kind of society sends it's young mothers off to fight?

[Mr. Mojo]

Femibolsheviks. That's what they are.

Very good point. I'll use that term from now on.

[Joe Hadenuf]

Not all women want to stay home and breed.

Oh boy.....LOL!

[Joe Hadenuf]

I know these are brave women, but what kind of society sends it's young mothers off to fight?

Pretty pathetic aint it?

[FirstTomato]

A combat area is no place for women, in any capacity, at any time.

Agreed.

What really pee-o's me is that these supply lines were not protected. The front lines are rushing ahead. What is Rummy in such a hurry for? And we are losing more troops because we are too concerned with "civilian" casualties (some of whom are really Iraqi Republican Guard).

The way this war is being run "politically correct" is a big big worry to me.

[norcalvet]

There's a reason why she wasn't among the five shown alive, or among the seven bodies. And I don't even want to say it. Some Iraqis are gonna hang.

I'll say it. Her looks are probably keeping her alive, although not in a good way. She is probably being hidden as a private trophy by whoever commands that particular group of barbarians. I used to be open-minded about women in the military. Then I served 4 years in the Marines. The women I worked with were generally good people. Hard working, good character, highly motivated. However, they just weren't on the same level as the males when it came to physical demands. We regularly had to load ammo cans from 25 lbs. to 120 lbs. into the backs of 5-tons. I never once saw a WM (Woman Marine) load anything larger than the smallest can. It was pitiful. More than half of them got pregnant and were useless for anything other than administrative jobs for several months before and after birth. These were great gals, but they did not and do not belong in combat. Another question to think about. As a civilized society, do we really want our mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters to be combat hardened warriors, even if the physical demands weren't an issue?

[DaughterOfAnIwoJimaVet]

Guy's have an unreal urge to protect women.

How I wish that were true. (I'm sure it is in some cases, but certainly not all.)

[norcalvet]

Guys (at least in the Marines) do go out of their way to protect the women. Maybe not in peacetime, off-duty situations, but on the job, or out in harm's way, you bet. The smart females would work that, and be well taken care of. I saw plenty of that in 4 years, and most of the time I didn't even mind (did some of the taking care of/looking out for myself).