Pvt Lynch - Shut up or contradict

[flywithastick]

http://www.drudgereport.com/

Should she just go with the story, or contradict the military reports?

She admits she can't remember much of the ordeal. Is there any thing to be gained by contradicting the story?

Personally, I don't think she should have been there in the first place. This is *exactly* what happens when women see combat. Either the guys on our side are distracted, or as in this case, the commanders in the Pentagon/politicians see some perverted PR opportunity coming from this serious mishap.

Special handling or consideration will happen. Others may die as a result. The US military will not be as effective as it could be with women in (or near) combat roles.

 

[WrightAvia]

"Send more blonde chicks!" Iraqi Republican Guard.

 

[Snakum]

I remember this topic being hot when I was grunting for Uncle Sam. The Israeli Defense Forces have women in combat roles, and IIRC they have performed admirably. Also, in the late 80s the Canadians were experimenting with females in combat arms units. I never heard much about the results though.

As a former US Infantryman, and as someone who has been shot at in armed conflict, I say ... let's try it. Why shouldn't women be allowed to serve in a rifle company? The Israeli troops have certainly become accustomed to females, shouldn't we also, in time?

I'll share a foxhole with ANY chick who can make it thru OSUT in Benning. If they can pass muster ... ruck-the-phuk-up! But lets not make the same mistake the Navy made and lower our standards, and thus screw up our manpower requirements. Two soldiers to a litter please and if you can't hump your own stuff ... off to the Maintenance Battalion you go!

Minh

 

[flywithastick]

I'll share a foxhole with ANY chick who can make it thru OSUT in Benning. If they can pass muster ... ruck-the-phuk-up! But lets not make the same mistake the Navy made and lower our standards, and thus screw up our manpower requirements. Two soldiers to a litter please and if you can't hump your own stuff ... off to the Maintenance Battalion you go!

Unfortunately, the standards are lower in *many* instances.

 

[A Squared]

Unfortunately, the standards are lower in *many* instances.

As nearly as I can tell, the standards are lower in *all* instances related to physical ability, and many not related.


As for the Canadian Army experiences, here's what the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces had to say about it, based on thier review of the Canadian Government report:

"After extensive research, Canada has found little evidence to support the integration of women into ground units. Of 103 Canadian women who volunteered to joint infantry units, only one graduated the initial training course. The Canadian experience corroborates the testimony of LTC Gregor, who said the odds of selecting a woman matching the physical size and strength of the average male are more than 130-to-1."

Here's some interesting reading on the subject:

http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilMed.shtml

http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilWomen.shtml

http://www.fredoneverything.net/MoreWomenLetters.shtml

http://www.fredoneverything.net/MilWomenII.shtml

http://www.fredoneverything.net/WomenInCombat.shtml



Even if you dismiss his opinions and sexist ranting, and assume that all his testimonials are fabrications, the facts and statistics he quotes from official reports tell the story by themselves

 

[CitationLover]

women in combat solved

have 4 divisions of only women live together. we know when women live together they "cycle" together (are a great biological trick). no we have each week of the month covered. whoever is ragging that week send them into combat. they will DESTROY (or nag) anything in their path.

i can imagine the scene outside Tikrit. thousands of pms-ing ladies searching for poor saddam. he would be found in an instant.

 

[Stifler's Mom]

Canadian Army

Now that's the funniest thing I've heard all day long.

 

[wingnutt]

well, i for one am against it. i just dont think females belong in a place where they can ostensibly be taken and tortured in every way her male counterpart can...and then some.

this is not to say females cant do the job, as when i got out of the military, our unit was one of the first that brought women into the combat specialties. day-to-day life wasnt all that bad, besides for the unaccounted for pregnancies that popped up every few months.

but when the sh!t hits the fan, and shes been captured, stripped naked, and hung upside down by her ankles...im sure the perspective changes a bit.

...and if i recall correctly, JL was in that "safe" maintenance batallion at the time of her capture

 

[Timebuilder]

Personally, I don't think she should have been there in the first place. This is *exactly* what happens when women see combat. Either the guys on our side are distracted, or as in this case, the commanders in the Pentagon/politicians see some perverted PR opportunity coming from this serious mishap.

I have to tell you that even when I was a child, and saw pictures of Chinese women as soldiers, I knew in my gut it was just plain wrong.

Unless you are talking about a highly trained female athlete who has unusual upper body strength, women cannot meet the traditional standards used to judge men for soldiering. While we are moving in the direction of warfare that does not always require the abilities of the old standards, it does not allow for instantaneous decisions about deployment of troops where those standards would come into play.

The other thing that bothers me in this situation is the circumstances and the reaction. I grant you, all of our troops are "heroes" in the general sense of the word.

However, I think that to toss this word around in a flippant manner detracts from recognizing true acts of heroism.

Here's my understanding: Jessica Lynch was in a supporrt group. They make a wrong turn, and have an accident. They are overrun, many are killed and some are captured, to be killed later. Jessica was mistreated, and was rescued.

Now, does this make her story in any way unique in the annals of war, and worthy of the attention she has received? From a military standpoint, the answer is NO. In my analysis, the ONLY reason there is this interest in her is the same reason that we are supposed to ignore when viewing her as a soldier. It's because she is a female.

I don't think a case of being in a situation where you shouldn't be in the first place, then getting lost and captured, and causing serveral others to be killed or injured in the process is worthy of the title of "hero", or of the attention she has received.

Please, if you think I have gotten something wrong here, help me out and show me where I am wrong. I am eager to listen, but what I have heard so far leaves me unconvinced.

 

[WrightAvia]

Hey, as long as they keep women away from service on nuclear missile submarines, I'll sleep better at night. As far as them swinging M-249's around in the bush...more power to you Baby!

 

[A Squared]

Timebuilder,

I tend to agree about the hero thing. It was the same with Scott Grady (?) the F-16 pilot who got shot down over Bosnia. His picture was on the cover of every magazine and he was being hailed as a hero for months it seems. I didn't get it. He got shot down, he hid under a bush for a couple of days and someone went and rescued him. I missed the hero bit, where exactly was it?

Getting shot down doesn't make a hero. I'm not going to criticize him for getting shot down, but it certainly isn't heroism.


Hiding under a bush? That doesn't seem like the stuff heros are made of. Smart? probably, you can't argue with sucess, and that was probably exactly what his E & E training told him to do ... but it wasn't heroic.


Getting rescued? A good thing, definately, especially if you're hiding under a bush. Ususally though, in a combat rescue, it's the rescuers who are the heros, not the rescuee.

Maybe the word hero just has a different meaning than the meaning I'm familliar with

 

[Whirlwind]

Here's my understanding: Jessica Lynch was in a supporrt group. They make a wrong turn, and have an accident. They are overrun, many are killed and some are captured, to be killed later. Jessica was mistreated, and was rescued.

Your understanding is correct.

Now, does this make her story in any way unique in the annals of war, and worthy of the attention she has received? From a military standpoint, the answer is NO. In my analysis, the ONLY reason there is this interest in her is the same reason that we are supposed to ignore when viewing her as a soldier. It's because she is a female.

No, you're slightly mistaken here. It is because she's an attractive white female and the press had a good picture to publish.

Same thing with the Elisabeth Smart situation.

Sad, but that's the reality of the situation.

Fly Safe!

 

[Snakum]

she's an attractive white female

After her recent celeb make-over ... I agree. Before? Looks like a different person.

About the Canadian Army ... I worked with them alot in Graf and in Hoenfelds. Their average line monkey left much to be desired IMHO. But the Queens Rifles battalions were pretty squared away, and every single one I met was well over six feet tall and around 190 pounds. I always wondered of they had a height-weight requirement for those guys? Those QR guys were HUGE.

Minh

 

[Timebuilder]

Same thing with the Elisabeth Smart situation.

I agree about that. "America's Girl?" Really? Marie Osmond, maybe. But a 14 year old who can't get up at night to pee and keep on walking?

Maybe I'm missing something.

 

[WrightAvia]

Heros don't let a jammed gun stop the fun. What is the immediate action drill for an M-16? Let me guess. Pull the charging handle back, while simultaneously turning the gun towards the ejection port. Let the charging handle slam forward, then use the forward assist if need be. I'll accept a jam in an M-16 as an excuse for not firing on an enemy, if the extractor has pulled the case rim off of the cartridge and the rest of the cartridge is still left in the chamber.

 

[Timebuilder]

I missed the M-16 years.

Is there a rod that you can slide down the barrel to poke out the cartridge if this happens?

 

[Typhoon1244]

Should she just go with the story, or contradict the military reports?

She'd have done well to keep her mouth shut and go with the flow. There's nothing to be gained by fighting it.

I am sick, however, of people like Jessica being lifted to the levels of heroism. It's like the O'Grady thing all over again.

 

[WrightAvia]

Is there a rod that you can slide down the barrel to poke out the cartridge if this happens?

You'd be hosed if this happened out in the field and it can happen to any of the weapons that use a rimmed cartridge, pistol on up to a .50 Cal.

Odds are IF she had a simple stove pipe type jam, she could have cleared it using the immediate action drill.

I wasn't there. If she had a mechanical malfunction...fine. If she froze and just cluster f@cked up...maybe she just saved her own life? Who is to say.

But to say you didn't fight, cause your gun jammed? Say what? Admit you were surrounded and fighting was futile...but don't blame the gun. Them things have been around since the late fifties. They work fine. Vietnam era problems were powder that was not good around humidity and bores that were not chromed. That has all been cured way since then. If her gun "JAMMED" it was because of lack of user knowledge on her part or lack or reasonable care of the weapon on her part, lack of training...or a mechanical malfunction. And looking at how little our military spends on letting the troops fire those guns...how could it be worn out?

I think the government is pulling our leg here.

 

[Timebuilder]

When I was at the academy, a lot of the older guys who came back to visit after a tour or two in Nam (tours during the 1966-67 years) complained about the jamming history of the M-14 and the M-16. Are the problems you mentioned common to both weapons?

 

[WrightAvia]

I really don't know about jamming problems with M-14. I do know they had growing pains with the M-16, but that is old history. I will post a question on a bbs about the M-14...since you got my curiosity up.

I thought the M-14 was a pretty reliable weapon. Special forces sniper teams still use it. The Navy still uses it. The Jefferson Co. SWAT team still uses it. Full auto fire with a .308 caliber rifle would have to be inaccurate and painfull besides.

I just bought a 1,000 round lot of .308 Austrailian ammo. It was made in 1983. It shoots fine and the guys that have .308 machineguns say it works good for them also...so go figure?

I'll go ask the experts and let you know...

I do know one thing...the military doesn't train their troops as much as they should on their rifles anymore. I have talked to a few reservists and they said I spend more time behind an AR-15 than they do an M-16. I guess riflemen in this day and age are not needed in the Army.