Saving Pvt. Lynch

[Pop N Wood]

Trying to make out this woman as an American folk hero. That's humorous. What makes you think Americans can identify with such an arrogant simpleton?

 

Why do you suppose this woman actually thought she was any more capable of stopping the Israeli actions than the Palestinians? Was is just her over inflated sense of self worth or her lack of respect for the Palestinian people?

 

Yeah, maybe she died fighting for something she believed in. Or if not in Palestine maybe she would have died by chaining herself to a tree protesting food additives. Noble causes? Maybe. Or maybe she is just one more almond rattling around in the bottom of the Planters can. Her death has done nothing more than to further prove Darwin right.

 

This thread has turned rather pointless. Proving once again that some people only see what they want to see. You are not going to sway many peoples opinions by insulting all Americans and accusing us of causing the problems in the middle east. People have been killing each other in the middle east for over 2000 years while the American government you so disdain has only existed for just over 200.

[Heavy Z]

You are not going to sway many peoples opinions by insulting all Americans and accusing us of causing the problems in the middle east...while the American government you so disdain...

 

Who, me? You're reaching REALLY far on that one based on what I just wrote, Jim. I love my home and need offer no defence. I seriously doubt you know enough about me to make such a statement without looking kind of silly in doing so. It'd be about same as if I concluded you were a member of Al-Quaeda based on what you just wrote.

 

I thought my response was a good attempt to shine light around some of the things bluex_v1 pointed out. Maybe you're not the sort that appreciates hearing differring opinions, lets the anger get to them, and then makes cheap shots since you don't have much else to go on. I doubt that Jim, as I've read many of your posts and know you're a standup guy.

 

I'll happily discuss whatever (and I can't find any damning opinions in what I said earlier, so please help me out), as long as you don't ruin something friendly with sandbox antics. Compassion, my friend, seems to be a precious commodity these days...BTW, how's the Z?

[Pop N Wood]

Heavy Z

 

Looking back you are correct, the anti American statements were made by others and not you. Since the rest of my rant was directed at your statements I must apologize. But I still think you are way off base on this.

 

Getting back to the original post, I don’t see how anyone can fault Lynch for much of anything. All that woman did was what this country asked of her. She has no more control over the media than you or I. My wife and I followed that story from the day I first read of the capture. Her return alive after all the chaos in that country is truly a story of timeless interest, regardless of the details. And if any one thinks that this 19 year old, lowly private was commanding that convoy (she was a cook for God’s sake), then they should be even more impressed that someone so young was trusted enough to lead a lightly armed convoy through an active battle zone. And who can blame her family for not wanting to talk about this? Who would want their life destroyed by excessive media attention? And as for the “Hollywood†assessment, that statement itself is a media sound bite of the worst kind. If you read many posts from that war you will realize our troops fired at pretty much anything that came towards them. That is how wars are won so quickly. While in hindsight it sure looks like they could have accomplished the mission with much less “dramaâ€, the troops were not operating “in hindsightâ€. There is no question in my mind that they did the right thing by not taking any chances. Remember, even Amnesty International was condemning the Iraqi violations of the Geneva convention by dressing up as surrendering civilians to ambush soldiers, and for this very reason. Finally, when you get right down to it, the news article in the original post was making fun of the TV execs more than anyone else. All of those made for TV movies are grandiose garbage anyway.

 

But I stand by my comments concerning that activist, however callous they are. Your original post attempting to glorify her actions with flowery prose is just as blatant as any Fox or Rush Limbaugh article. I suppose you think we should post pictures of the kid who joined the Taliban on the “wall of heroes� Wasn’t he an American citizen fighting for what he believed in? If you cannot find the distinction between Lynch and this activist then you are simply not being honest. And I don’t mean in terms of loyalty to their countries or beliefs either.

 

And what makes people think that every bulldozer in Israel was “bought with US tax dollars� You have to put these things in context. People conveniently seem to forget that the US gives more financial aid to Egypt than Israel, and that the early Arab-Israeli wars were all fought with French and Russian weapons. We were one of the few countries in the world that refused to sell weapons to them. And yet somehow they survived.

 

Face it, the situation in the middle east is infinitely more complicated than the recent string of current events. To blame us for the problem is incomprehensible.

[Moridin]

I was never trying to put Pvt. Lynch at fault for anything. I was more trying to say that her being stuck in the middle of this is extremely unfortunate.

 

To say that the world is only governed by captilism would be ignorant. I apologize for what that comment appeared to be. I rather meant that the world we live in is ruled by world captilism more often than not. More of the situations on the international level involve captilistic ideals than otherwise. I didn't mean that as the sole theory to cling to.

 

I was not trying to "glamorize" Rachel's story either. I was merely trying to point out the control our media exhibits over US ideals. I, for one, never knew of Rachel's story, because our media never mentioned a word of it. From what I've read, Rachel did some very heroic things for an oppressed people (by the Isreal government or other Arabs, it doesn't matter). We never saw a word of it, because what she was doing what against our government's agenda.

 

When you talk about free will and such, I have to cringe a little bit. Tell that to some of the people in Africa, or even the Palistinians and they will probably laugh. We can say this, because we have the luxury of freedoms that many will never know. We imagine these people being able to just fight another day, just a little harder, because that is the American way. Unfortunately, I take a much more pessimistic approach to this. Many will try their whole lives to escape, to be free, or even just to feed themselves, yet they will never fully realize that. That's just the reality of life. Make what you will of this, but I'm beginning to read some things that will sure destroy any notions everyone having free will.

 

I do want to clarify why I criticize my country so much. I love the United States for all it has given me, and I want it to be everything it can. That requires taking critical views -from all sides, pro or against- and weighing out what you think is right. Unfortunately, many times I don't get to see the damning side of things many times. As a result, I cannot make a proper decision, by voting, for which direction I want my country in terms of leaders, laws, etc...

[Moridin]

Oh, and that bull dozer, as I understand it, was an American made bull dozer. To say that it was bought with US tax dollars though, is a little presumptious, and I apologize. You are right, we do give a ton of money to Egypt, which is one of the more corrupt governments in the middle east. The middle east is one of the most complicated subjects in international relations, and will probably plague academics for years to come.

[Heavy Z]

Thank you Jim for the response, I don't think you and I are as far from each other in our views as might appear. I agree 100% with what you said about private Lynch, she is unfortunately in a precarious position due to how her story has been handled. I don't think anyone here even for a second put the blame on her shoulders, most comments seem to revolve around the media.

 

My intent with regard to Rachel Corrie is where our lines blur a bit, as maybe you interpreted my lengthy comparison differently than anticipated. I wasn't trying to kick Rachel upstairs, but wanted to offer a paired example in order to point out a media bias. I went heavy on the description to make this point, but in doing so I guess I made it sound to you like I was giving a hard-sell. Beliefs aside, these two American girls have a lot in common. I honestly thought the news would at least bash her for a while. Hell, when Americans die abroad (especially under bizzarre circumstances) it's usually newsworthy. That was my point, although when bluex_v1 chimed in I did have to regress back into the story a bit to clarify things. Speaking of which...

 

And what makes people think that every bulldozer in Israel was “bought with US tax dollars�

 

I don't think they meant all of them, just these giants made by caterpillar:

 

People conveniently seem to forget that the US gives more financial aid to Egypt than Israel

 

Nothing's been conveniently forgotten because this is untrue. We began paying Egypt only since 1979 in a deal prez Carter cut with them, in essence, to keep them from attacking Israel. Egypt(pop 66.7 mil): $2bn/yr, Israel(pop 6.5 mil): $3bn/yr.

 

We were one of the few countries in the world that refused to sell weapons to them. And yet somehow they survived.

 

C'mon, more credit is due than that. Israel, a country only 55 years old, 1/20th the size of California, has the world's 3rd most powerful military. Impressive by any standards.

 

What do we do? Keep building our cars, and hope America steps up to the table as the damn good mediator we can be. That's all I got Jim, once again thanks for the discussion and for raising some good points along the way.

[johnc]

I was not trying to "glamorize" Rachel's story either. I was merely trying to point out the control our media exhibits over US ideals. I, for one, never knew of Rachel's story, because our media never mentioned a word of it. From what I've read, Rachel did some very heroic things for an oppressed people (by the Isreal government or other Arabs, it doesn't matter). We never saw a word of it, because what she was doing what against our government's agenda.

 

Here's where I disagree (again). The "governemnt" here in the US has the least control over the media of any country in the world. Every media outlet, from large worldwide organizations like CNN, Fox, and MSNBC to your local community college cable TV channel has a tremendous amount of independence. But, ALL of them are working hard to make money from their news operation - even the so-called public corporations (PBS and NPR).

 

Since the early 1970s when CBS realized that what they could charge for advertising time on the CBS Evening News on average exceeded what they charged for prime time entertainment, what you see reported is slanted by profit. Ted Turner and CNN dramatically accelerated that change in the early 1980s.

 

What stories are selected for presentation on television news is determined more by what will give the greatest Nielsen ratings numbers then any other criteria. Once the stories are selected, the biases of the editorial staff come into play to determine what "angle" the story will take. Occaisionally the editor's bias will become the primary criteria for story selection - but those abherations usually get corrected when the ratings drop.

 

So, despite the comfort of blaming the "government" for censorship, that's rarely the case here in the US. Blame the viewers and the shareholders (yourselves).

[Heavy Z]

Since the early 1970s when CBS realized that what they could charge for advertising time on the CBS Evening News on average exceeded what they charged for prime time entertainment, what you see reported is slanted by profit. Ted Turner and CNN dramatically accelerated that change in the early 1980s.

Very good point.

Once the stories are selected, the biases of the editorial staff come into play to determine what "angle" the story will take. Occaisionally the editor's bias will become the primary criteria for story selection - but those abherations usually get corrected when the ratings drop.

Yes, bias is much more at play today. At its founding the FCC viewed the stations to which it granted licenses as "public trustee" and required that they made every reasonable attempt to cover contrasting points of views. The "Fairness Doctrine" was eliminated in 1987.

So, despite the comfort of blaming the "government" for censorship...

Media consolidation is the real "censorship" issue here. As you said, the "governemnt" here in the US has the least control over the media of any country in the world, and that's where the problem comes in. If you've been checking out the news lately, the issue that has A LOT of congress (both reps and dems), and lots of people (like me) in an uproar is not blaming the "government" for censorship, but for not censoring enough - in terms of ownership rights. The FCC just ruled that one media company can control up to 45% of the American market:

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/06/19/politics/main559385.shtml

 

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020107&s=miller

 

How does this lead to censorship? Consider the two fox reporters fired recently for not altering their story on excessive antibiotics in milk. They refused to doctor the story and so were fired because the research went against the interests of the parent company, even though it would've been great information for the public.

 

Here's another way consolidation can affect the news you get:

 

"A train carrying hazardous materials derails at 1:30 a.m. in Minot, North Dakota, spilling 210,000 gallons of anhydrous ammonia in an incident federal regulators call "catastrophic". Clear Channel Communications owns six out the seven commercial stations in Minot. Minot authorities say when they called with the warning about the toxic cloud, there was no one on the air who could've made the announcement. Clear Channel says someone was there who could have activated an emergency broadcast. But Minot police say nobody answered the phones." (The Associated Press, January 14, 2003 - Blake Nicholson).

 

With the new FCC ruling, a lot of those local stations you mentioned earlier are being sized-up and bought out, as they can't compete with big companies that offer "package deals" to local advertisers. Lack of choice creates indirect censorship, and that's that worries me.

[SleeperZ]

Heavy, you make some compelling points, and articulate them well.

 

Guys, this is an excellent example of a highly polarized, yet extremely disciplined discussion. I am rarely disappointed by these off-topic (of Z cars) discussions.

 

[johnc]

Despite the stuff I posted here I'm very optimistic about our future.

 

The world is a much safer place to live. Worldwide deaths from warfare are down significantly as a result of the creation of nuclear weapons. Sounds funny, but its very true:

 

http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/AD_Issues/amdipl_4/roland.html

 

Crime in the US, by any measure, is on a downward trend that began way back in 1950. You, as an individual, are much safer today then even 20 years ago. Cars are much safer to travel in, our food supply is cleaner and better inspected, and we've got thousands of new wonder drugs that cure previously uncurable diseases.

 

The environment is getting cleaner every year. Here in Southern California we have significantly fewer smog alerts now (I think there were 2 last year) then when I was growing up in the 1960s and that's even after the EPA tightened the air quality standers by orders of magnitude over what was considered unhealthy back in 1968.

 

But, do you hear much about much of that? Not if you watch television. Why? Probably because its much easier to be a pessimist then an optimist. People naturally prefer to sit around and complain. Don't ask me why. When I mention the items above in conversation almost nobody agrees with me. Most everyone attempts to either refute the positives or find examples of other negative things.