Blogcritics: Comments on Lynch Talks

Comment by Dan

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 15:52:35 EST

I doubt if the gun jammed. Thats just what you say when you're crapping your pants and you can't find the trigger.

Comment by Eric Olsen

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 14:11:48 EST

War has always been almost comically frought with error, screw ups, human and mechanical failure, disloyalty, fratricide, and the like. What is remarkable is how efficient the current U.S. military has become in eliminating these age-old problems. The astonishingly effective military campaign in Iraq (the one that ended with the taking of Bagdhad, not the current follow up) has put the U.S. military in an entirely different quantum from any previous military, even our own of ten years ago. This is both deeply satisfying and a little bit chilling. They'll get that gun-jamming thing worked out too.

Comment by JR

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:59:14 EST

That's what I was afraid of. It seems to me that the military ought to be worried more about reliability than features on their standard issue rifles. Pfc. Lynch wasn't a sharp-shooter, she just needed the weapon that worked when her life was in danger. Imagine the army puts people through basic training, ships them around the world, supplies them with all manner of survival gear, comes up with elaborate battle plans, sends them into enemy territory in expensive all-terrain vehicles, and what happens when they come under fire? The damn gun doesn't shoot!

Comment by Perry Perdis

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 12:00:45 EST

J.R. As in Vietnam, weapons jammed all the time,especially early in the war. Apparently the tolerances on the M-16 were too close together. This would cause a jam by the mere introduction of some dirt,a common occurance in battle. In the desert some sand will do the same thing and i believe much easier during the sand storms that were broad cast during the war. The same thing happened during the first Gulf War.

Comment by Al Barger

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 06:32:02 EST

Hmm, I may have missed your target in this case, Ms. Diva. My bad. On the other hand, almost ALL of the tearing down of Lynch has definitely come from left wingers. Savage is simply a jackass, regardless of his political affiliation. I doubt very many self-described conservatives- much less libertarians- would claim Savage for one of their own. I haven't heard him speak about Ms. Lynch, but he's such a hater generally that it doesn't much surprise me.

Comment by Mac Diva

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 06:22:05 EST

Who called Pfc. Lynch a name? I was referring to the Iraqi who claims to have rescued her. His story does not make sense. He appears to be an opportunist who talks a good game. Read closer, Barger. According to a reliable commenter, Pfc.'s biggest critic has been a Right Winger, Michael Savage. You are barking up the wrong tree.

Comment by Al Barger

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 06:15:53 EST

Diva, you need to back off of calling Ms. Lynch names. I'm trying to make nice with you, and I don't even mind you calling me dumb names. Ms. Lynch, however, got shot up and probably raped while defending the country, including YOU. She acted like an "opportunist" by taking the opportunity to go defend the freedom of ingrates. It does annoy me when smug liberal dipshits who have done nothing to help the country except to look for every opportunity to run interference for our enemies look for opportunities to claim some cheap moral superiority over the people who are trying to do the job. Particularly, I'd like to slap the taste out of the mouths of all the jackasses who have been so anxious to tear down this brave soldier. It may be somewhat obnoxious to see her situation being used for PR by the military, but at least this does not involve cutting a soldier down. She was obviously a brave soldier even without being able to empty a gun into her oncoming attackers to give a proper Hollywood touch to the story. Since then, she seems to have been very careful to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. What more do you want? She's been through this horrible ordeal, and will probably be at least somewhat physically impaired for the rest of her life. You would begrudge her a simple book deal to get her story out straight for the record and try to get a few bucks to take care of herself?

Comment by Mac Diva

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 05:03:31 EST

Erin, the opportunist's story was dubious from the beginning. (I wrote a blog item mocking it some influential blogs picked up back then.) Pfc. Lynch says she has no memory of him being around at all, though she recalls the people who took care of her in the hospital.

Comment by Steve Rhodes

Sat, 8 Nov 2003 04:13:28 EST

The person I heard vilify Lynch the most was Michael Savage who went on day after day about how she wasn't a hero and shouldn't get so much attention (he has a habit of giving lots of attention to things he thinks shouldn't attention). I only listened to him a few minutes this week, so I haven't heard his reaction to the latest news. The "anti-war crowd" was critical of the pentagon propaganda, not Lynch.

Comment by TDavid

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:15:28 EST

Put me in the crowd that isn't particularly interested in seeing this story come out. I'm grateful that Ms. Lynch was returned home but saddened by her capture and treatment. It is clear to me that American's POW treatment follows the Geneva Convention and some of these other countries do not play by the same rules (Vietnam, anyone?). I'm not so naive to think that all our soldiers treat POWs by the Geneva Convention, but I think by and large they are treated much better when captured by Americans than by some of these other nations.

Comment by ErinK

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 22:05:24 EST

I have to say I was a little surprised that Jessica Lynch actually made any comment about being wrongly used as a symbol. This shows a level of honesty you just don't expect to hear anymore. I read somewhere that the Iraqi that helped rescue her came to visit her in her hometown and was turned away because she was too busy with her book deal. I wonder if she mentioned him as one of her heroes or if anyone even told her what this man did for her. I'm guessing she doesn't even know the full story of what happened to her.

Comment by Dawn

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 19:53:11 EST

While I feel complete sympathy and sadness for any civilian, of all ages and genders (but of course children above all) I save a special place in my heart for citizens of this country, as they are my relatives, neighbors, and friends. That may seem globally biased, but somethings I can't help.

Comment by Mac Diva

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 19:35:08 EST

Gerry, Atrios and I were the first bloggers to cut through the Washington Post's B.S. because we both were familiar with the journalists there. (I worked with some of them as a reporter.) But, I think it is important to distinguish between the WaPo/Pentagon propaganda and Pfc. Lynch's suffering, which was real, though misreported. She deserves sympathy for what she really did go through, as do all troops who are injured. Does she deserve more sympathy than other soldiers? No. That is where the image making, which I agree has a racial and sexual bias to it, comes in. My deepest empathy is still for the chlldren and civilians injured and killed in Iraq. I expect the picture of the boy will no arms because of American bombs to stay in my mind as the picture of the girl burned by napalm in Vietnam has.

Comment by Natalie Davis

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 18:58:02 EST

lol

Comment by gerrard

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 18:19:28 EST

Oh come on she is a hero! She was the only american soldier kept hostage by the Iraqi's right? Or at least the only white all-american young lady...which is the same thing I guess.

Comment by Dan

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:52:49 EST

I guess war IS hell.

Comment by Dawn

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:36:52 EST

That just makes me want to throw up. How could a human being do that to severly incapcitated individual regardless of his or her country of origin. My God, as though humans are vessels for the perversion of animals. I really don't like people today.

Comment by Mac Diva

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:08:34 EST

Thanks for the additional info, peeps! I'm following the links.

Comment by Bill Wallo

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 16:06:23 EST

Mac Diva: The report is that Jessica Lynch herself has no recollection of being raped. She cannot remember - at all - a period of several hours after she was captured. Apparently, physicians who treated her after her rescue diagnosed her as having been violently raped/sodomized. CNN has an article about the book here.

Comment by Rodney Welch

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:43:32 EST

Not in the fucking desert.

Comment by JR

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:41:00 EST

I'm curious about her weapon jamming. Does this happen a lot? You'd think we would know how to make reliable guns of all things.

Comment by Rodney Welch

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:33:53 EST

Good point, Mac -- she isn't definitely saying she was raped, because she cannot remember. But her own published account suggests she does believe such a possibility is credible. According to today's Times, Lynch's book I Am a Soldier, Too "reports that Ms. Lynch's military doctors found injuries consistent with sexual assault and unlikely to have resulted from the Humvee crash that caused her other wounds, suggesting that she was raped after her capture. Ms. Lynch, who was unconscious immediately after the crash, does not remember any such assault, according to people who have talked to her and read the book. Those details of the book's contents were reported yesterday in The New York Daily News."

Comment by Dawn

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:30:30 EST

Mac, Yeah, I am skeptical of some of the "facts" as they have been laid out because of posturing on both sides. What I believe they said was that there were a few hours that Jessica was "missing" do to excruciating pain and that it is believed that she was raped. I was merely asserting that if she says she was would know damn well if my body's been violated whether or not I was awake to witness it (which in her case I hope she wasn't). I am going by her testimony and no one else's.

Comment by Mac Diva

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:20:30 EST

Dawn, I'm not sure she is saying she was raped. My understanding is that someone somewhere made such a diagnoses. That is why I want to know more. Remember they also claimed she had all kinds of other injuries and had been tortured in the hospital.

Comment by Rodney Welch

Fri, 7 Nov 2003 15:18:58 EST

I agree with Dawn. I cannot fathom this particular young woman making up such a claim for any purpose.