"More than 43,000 U.S. troops listed as medically unfit for combat in the weeks before their scheduled deployment to Iraq or Afghanistan since 2003 were sent anyway, Pentagon records show.
This reliance on troops found medically "non-deployable" is another sign of stress placed on a military that has sent 1.6 million servicemembers to the war zones, soldier advocacy groups say."
The above are the two lead paragraphs from today's AOL agenda/PROPAGANDA story (not "news"), from USA Today (instead of the usual AP). Note the second paragraph's reference to advocacy groups, and you know all you need to know about this really ridiculous story, which continues the mainstream media's propaganda campaign to show that the military is being "stressed" by Iraq (which, of course, in some ways it obviously is, but NOT evidenced by the ridiculous propaganda stories that this blog has expossed for what they are).
WHY is this story so bad? First, it says in the story itself that this is "advocacy group" propaganda--especially the way it is being played.
Second, the "facts" in the story itself show that it is INSIGNIFICANT, and such facts do NOT support the PROPAGANDA about "stress" on the military.
The story itself sows that 1.6 million troops have been sent to Iraq. 43,000 is a pretty insignificant number, in comparison with the total. It is insignificant not only because it is less than 3% (which blows entirely the idea that it shows "stress" on the military). It is insignificant because the miliarty is a BUREAUCRATIC organization (like the Federal Govrenment itself, which lefits like so much to solve ALL of our problems). There are undoubtedly 43,000 different, bureaucratic reasons why medical reords might indicate (loosely) one thing, while something else is done (inaccuracy in the medial records being one). I was in the U.S. Army from 1969-1971, and I can addure you I am right on this, and the "advocacy groups" blowing smoke for PORPAGANDA purposes.
Let us go to General Patton. Yes, in World War II he SLAPPED a soldier suffering from combat fatigue/shock (got in trouble over it, of course). Do you have any doubt that Gerneral Patton woulld have little patience for an "unfit" (covers a multitude of sins--perhaps even to the common cold) notation on a medical record? Believe it or not, there are still SOME people in the military who think a little like General Patton. I would not doubt that many commanders might have questioned an "unfit" designation, or just have made it clear that they did not want it to cause their units to seem to deploy at less than full strength--nothing to do with "stress" on the military or Iraq.
Q.E.D. This story is nothing but outrageous PROPAGANDA, that says more aoubt AOL and USA Today than it does about the military and Iraq.
Anti-military propaganda, pure and simple. On its face, this story is nonsense. The fact that AOL featured it shows that there is more despicable "news" outlet in this universe, OR ANY UNKNOWN universe (because it is impossible to be worse), than AOL "News". I have said the same thing about the despicable Associated Press, as far as "nerws" organizations. AOL, of course, features EVERY disgraceful AP story This story, where AOL reached out to USA Today, which is despicable itself, shows that AOL is DELIBERATELY using the WORST of thesee stories it can find. No. one should say with AOL: NO ONE. Why am I here? I have explained before, I am making the SACRIFICE, as a mole within AOL, to be the last person left to turn out the lights when the party is over (paraphasing Don Meredith).
No comments:
Post a Comment