It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
I get tired of hearing the arguements you use, Jethro, because Ive heard them a million times.
Bottom line, IF a woman is physically and mentally qualified for combat, they should be allowed to do so, period.
This bull# that Americans will go nuts by women getting abused as POWs is bull#, pure and simple.
America has no problem with women getting raped and murdered en masse within thier own borders.
When the lies first published that Jessica Lynch was raped by her captors, did people freak out? there was more inbterest in seeing and buying naked pics of her on Ebay!
So, no, your "gentlemens" mentality does not exist within America. The American public needs to shake off the idiot mentality that consumes it where war is regarded.
Women have fought in quite a few wars in histoey and suffered greatly. But no where near the type of suffering that is inflicted on them within thier own borders. By thier own countrymen.
If they are qualified, then they should do it. If they aint, then they should stick to something they can hack.
Originally posted by curme
Actually jsobecky, the majority of Americans are outraged over this and want to find out who is responsible, where the break-down occured.
But do we reflect the media? Or does the media reflect us? I think the latter.
Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Lyndie England was not sexually assaulted, Jethro, she was taking pictures of naked Iraqis and pointing at thier genitals. Whats this got to do with Women in combat?
Her MOS was a desk clerk, not a combat job at all, far from the front lines. Her position has nothing to do with combat.
Her position has more to do with the quality of soldiers allowed in the military, and commanders regulating combat behavior.
It has to do with her fitness as a soldier, not her gender. She is simply a worthless person with no real moral or ethical standards of her station, and should be expelled.
The reason all the attention is focused on her is because she is pretty much the onlyone featured in those photos. I only saw one other with a male present. Since the photos she posed in were the only ones that could be fit to be posted on public tv, the others too graphic and sick, theres your answer.
Originally posted by marg6043
The only reason we are still interested on Lyddie England is because the media keep feeding us the pictures that is the only reason. The media have psycologial control over us.
TextThis is half of my point.
TextThat the media feeds off of our society as well. It's a mutual parasitic relationship we have going on.
Originally posted by Drew321
This is a fine example of the problems with the youth of America. They are taught from day 1 that they are not responsible for their actions. How many counties are out there that say if your kid breaks a law, the parents are responsible? What message is that sending?
Then the kids grow up somewhat and join the military that isn’t allowed to belittle them, demoralize them, or physically touch them during basic training, (which if I remember right, is supposed to tear you down as an individual, and bring you back up as a team, while also testing your limits, if you can’t survive basic training, you can’t make it in a war situation.) because they might be offended. So they get shipped out to war, knowing there are not responsible for their actions, perform this stupid act, with a camera no less ( I still can’t get over that one) and when caught, they were following orders. In other words they are not responsible. Then the country is in an uproar over this and wants to blame the people in charge, because the ones that did it are not responsible, is this ever going to end? But then how can parents teach responsibility, if I look at my kid wrong, I can be reported to child services. I think we have just defined Irony. I can’t discipline my kid, but when my kid does wrong it’s my fault.
Originally posted by jsobecky
I see your point, but if you look at what it is intended to accomplish, it does make some kind of sense: Underage kids get into trouble and get off the hook because of their age. The parents shrug it off and say "He's out of control, what can I do?"
Answer: Well, what you can do is start being a parent. If you don't want to do that, well you'll still be responsible for the damage that this kid, who you brought into the world, has done to society because he is an undisciplined brat. To me, it's along the same lines of keeping your dog on a leash.
The best solution, IMO, is to stop coddling them and start punishing them and the parents. Fines, community service, mandatory "Start being a good kid" classes that the parents have to attend. Not every kid can be rehabilitated...that same brat that is tipping over the trashcans today will be causing road rage or worse when he drives, if not taught how to act responsibly while still a kid.
And boy, do I hear you about the military thing! There actually was a thread in here a while back where somebody wanted to know what the military could do to him if he wanted to sleep in instead of getting up at 5AM. "Can they touch me?" Needless to say, my responses were not what they wanted to hear.