Propaganda at its finest
Links April 18th, 2003 |Remember the heroic rescue of Private Jessica Lynch? I’m sure you do, it was practically the only story coming out of Iraq for close to a week.
How heroic is it, really, when US forces storm into an unguarded hospital, terrorize the staff and patients, and handcuff four doctors and two patients — one of whom was paralyzed and on an IV drip — before leaving with Private Lynch?
Another shining example of the US propaganda machine in full swing.
(via Alan Moult)
[See also: Pvt. Lynch refutes military rescue claims | Firing blanks? | Drip Drip Drip Goes the Water | MTV VJ Pvt. Jessica Lynch | Mulholland Drive ]
9 Responses to “Propaganda at its finest”
Leave a Reply
Pythoner
jan
spunkycomics
Michael Hanscom
Ryan Waddell
April 18th, 2003 at 12:47 pm
Because the bedridden are DANGEROUS!
Our shining rescue of POW Jessica Lynch involved the cuffing of doctors, patients (one of whom was paralyzed with an…
April 19th, 2003 at 2:21 pm
You and I are usally on the same page, but I beg to differ. If I had been captured and become POW, I would have wanted our SAR (Search and Rescue) people to take whatever measures to find me, so I could come home to you and Berta. I was trained in escape and evasion, and how to act as a POW. However, in this situation, it is not always possible. It was not for my friend Hank in the “Hanoi Hilton.” I also know the chaos which ensues. In this case, the latter POWs were dirty and dressed ain Iraqi pajamas, and the rescuers had to ask who were the Americans, then sort out the three or four who tagged along in hopes of escape.
I believe the POWs acted admirably. I believe the rescuers did what they had to do in a confusing situation. This is one of the “You kinda had to be there!” situations.
This is one area where Monday Morning Quarterbacking may not be called for.
I hope that Pvts. Lynch and Johson are awarded Purple Hearts and all are awarded at least the Silver Star.
You all know I think this is a stupid war, but, having been in my own stupid war twice, it is not the fault of the ones sent to fight, and they should not be penalized.
Love
Dad
April 19th, 2003 at 7:52 pm
First off, feel free to disagree with me — you’ve got far more experience in matters such as these than I do. Besides, it’s not like there isn’t a precedence for us disagreeing…
As far as the rescue of Pvt. Lynch goes, my (admittedly hastily-posted) disgruntlement stems mostly from the disparity between the two accounts of the rescue, and not all of the actions undertaken by the rescuers (though some of the actions related in the linked article do concern me). I certainly don’t want to appear as if I’m demonizing Lynch, or any of the other POW’s for that matter.
At the time of the rescue, the media was flooded with stories of Lynch’s heroic last stand, “firing her weapon until she ran out of ammunition,” even after being shot and stabbed by Iraqi forces. For the rest of the week, we were treated to endless repetitions of the same basic story — US soldiers storming an Iraqi-held compound to rescue Pvt. Lynch — time and time again. Meanwhile, seemingly as an afterthought, there would occasionally be a mention of seven other POWs also rescued at around the same time.
At the time all this was going on, I had two thoughts that kept popping up.
First off, regarding the reports of Lynch’s capture — wouldn’t just about any decently trained soldier in a combat situation keep fighting until they were unable to? It seems to me that that is the point of the training they all go through, and yet the constant harping of this point in the reports seemed to say that for some reason, this was an entirely unexpected act, to be repeatedly praised. Why? Because Pvt. Lynch was a woman, and not normally expected to be invovled in ground combat (I believe that that is still the practice, from the reports that I’ve read, though I could be wrong)?
Secondly, why weren’t those other seven rescued POWs similarly canonized? Within just a few days, we rescued eight soldiers from Iraqi forces, and yet it was only Pvt. Lynch that we ever heard much about.
The overall impression I received was that of the US propaganda machine at work. At a time when we’d suddenly gone from being assured of a “quick and easy” victory to reports that the war “could last months,” when reports of more casualties and captures were popping up, suddenly we were gifted with a real-life story seemingly straight out of Hollywood. The heroic last stand and capture of a young and attractive woman — perfect for raising the morale of the troops and of people here at home, who were in the midst of adjusting their mindset from that of the promised quick, simple, nearly painless war to a real war, complete with setbacks, unexpected consequences, and even casualties.
Then, the article that I linked to in my post appeared, painting an entirely different picture of the rescue. One of US troops entering an unguarded hospital entirely unopposed, terrorizing the doctors and patients, cuffing and restraining both doctors and two patients (one who, according to the report, was already immobilized due to paralysis), and destroying a special high-tech medical bed in the process.
Admittedly, the “truth” is probably somewhere in between the two extremes — not a rare occurrence in normal times, let alone combat situations. As you pointed out, it’s entirely possible (even likely) that the rescue team did not know ahead of time what kind of situation they would be moving into, and took a more aggressive approach. What to our troops would seem to be erring on the side of caution would very likely appear to anyone in the hospital as unnecessary force.
I’m still concerned about a couple of the details mentioned in the above linked article — specifically, why it was necessary to restrain a paralyzed patient on an IV drip (Devil’s advocate moment — how would the soldiers know that the patient was paralyzed? If the patient was mobile, an IV wouldn’t be all that much of an impediment to movement.), and why they destroyed the bed that Pvt. Lynch was lying on.
However, even given those questions, I probably should have worded my post in a different manner. Propaganda and selective truth-telling can be used just as effectively by other media sources as it is in our own, and I should know better than to take any report entirely at face value, especially at times like these.
April 19th, 2003 at 7:55 pm
Incidentally — the Washinton Post would also like a few more answers regarding Pvt. Lynch’s rescue.
April 20th, 2003 at 10:29 pm
What sort of gets me on the entire situation is not that the POWs were rescued (who could be upset over that?) or that the soldiers took some of the measures they did to ensure their own and Lynch’s safety during the rescue.
What gets me is that we hear all about her trials and how she prevailed - but we do not even shine a faint light on why she survived, which is very much because of the doctors who cared for her and attempted to bring her to safety, despite the risks they knew they would face if discovered. We do not honor those who kept her safe in the darkest moments - we don’t even tell the whole story! Is this because someone thought she might appear less heroic if the Iraqi doctors were helping her to survive? Is it because she’s a female soldier and we want to capitalize on that (which would explain why the other POWs have been given less glory)? Is it because we don’t want Iraqis to have heroic moments on our american television sets?
Lynch deserves a medal, yes. But the hospital, doctors, and nurses deserve our gratitude - and hey, maybe even a new bed for the one we ripped up to make sure there wasn’t anything harmful inside. And that gratitude should happen NOW - because it’s appropriate now, and because our country should be shown the kind, caring people of Iraq as well as the looters, arsonists, and suicide bombers - and because it would say something to the people of both our countries. That we can care for one another, and come out better for it, through trust and good faith in each other.
April 21st, 2003 at 7:08 pm
I agree with everything which has been said, now that I understand.
Part of the problem with the actions of the rescuers - and I am not excusing anything they did - most persons in any branch of the service serve only one tour of enlistment or, if an officer, one fixed period of time. This means, for enlisted personnel, the average age is 18-22, and for officers 22-26. Pvt. Lynch was 19. What I am trying to say is one thing which causes some of these things to occur is this is all being done by persons on the average much younger than you are.
I am appalled by the media coverage, in both directions. There are some so in one direction that, if we had done all without firing a shot, fault would have been found, and others which would excuse the most blatently evil actions. I think the “embedded” reporters often over-identified with the persons they covered.
I don’t have a clue why the other seven were treated differently, and they were, though I can guess. The cynic in me says they were none as “cute” as Pvt. Lynch, who, in the most famous picture (there are others which show a more mature individual, if 19 and mature can go together) looks like a 12-year-old playing dress up in her daddy’s fatigues. Newspapers want to sell, and she had a high “sell” factor. She was more “sexy,” if you will. Not only was she a woman, but a “cute” one, at that. And, the cynic in me says, caucasian. Pvt. Johnson is black. I certainly agree there was a higher propaganda factor in her than in the others.
The fact they did what they were trained to do does not negate the circiumstances under which it was done. Some combat missions are “milk runs,” some are not. In some of the missions I flew, I did what I was trained to do without event, in others I did what I was trained to do under very adverse circumstances. There is an “above and beyond the call of duty” factor which must be recognized. I would like to think I earned at least some of the Air Medals I received.
I think Kirsten’s comments are very apt and should be heeded. Were it not, for example, for the nurse and her husband, ironically named Muhammed, we would not have known where she was.
April 21st, 2003 at 10:06 pm
Mr. Hanscom - I wonder what you thought of President Bush’s warning to the Iraqi army before the war began - that ‘following orders’ would not be considered an excuse for war crimes against our forces.
I understand war is a petty thing - the winner takes the spoils and the heroism while the loser gets to pay reparations and be charged with war crimes. Should we permit ‘following orders’ and training procedures to serve as justification for the losers’ atrocities against the winners?
I don’t mean to sound preachy or rude; it’s just a thought that popped into my head. You’ve been an intelligent, well-spoken commentor around here, and I’d like your perspective. I also wonder (in relation) about your thoughts on our refusal to be a member of (and held accountable by) the world court, and about Rumsfeld’s decision to override the TPFDL in favor of a swift, light set of forces.
April 22nd, 2003 at 6:00 pm
The Devil, as always, is in the details, Kirsten.
The basic idea is fine, and has been upheld in “Just War Theory” and in international court. The problem is my lack of trust of President Bush, who seems to want to define things as he wants them to be, rather than as they are.
I would like to think that, if I had been ordered to do something truly an atrocity, I would have had the ego-strength to say, “No.” I would hope not to be another Lt. William Calley.
At the same time, there must be some consideration of the intent of the actor. I , for example, am a very petty “war criminal.” I took part in what is now called “the illegal bombing of the Plain of Jars” (in Laos). No one told us it was illegal. We got our flight orders, as we did daily, flew the mission, as we did daily, and came home, as most of us did daily.
Following orders is one thing; atrocity is another.
I personally think it a huge mistake not for us to submit ourselves to the UN, the World Court, etc. I think “Rummy” is rummy. I think the “Bush Doctrine” of possible preemptive strike the worst idea I have ever heard.
If there is ever going to be Peace on Earth, all individuals and groups will have to submit themselves to a higher law of some sort, in the same manner it became clear the Confederation of States did not work and we had to become a United States under an overriding Constitution. I think the UN and the World Court, with all their weaknesses, is the best we have. As our Supreme Court has worked out what rights belong to the Federal Government and what to States, the World Court should be given an opportunity to work out what rights belong to member countries and what to the greater group.
I also feel nations should be accountable as well as individuals. If this does not become so, we will always have the “To the victor…” system you described.
November 7th, 2003 at 12:15 pm
Pvt. Lynch refutes military rescue claims
Private Jessica Lynch, in her first public statements since her heavily reported capture and rescue, has expressed her discomfort with the military using her for propaganda purposes.