This Sunday, the BBC will show a documentary on the story behind the rescue of Jessica Lange. The story differs from the official account in several respects. The Guardian, a respected British newspaper, has an advance report at
The gist of the story is that although they knew Saddam’s forces had fled the scene, they US Army still sent in several heavily armed soldiers, and cameramen, to pull Jessica out of the hospital. The whole operation seemed to have been, shall we say, stage-managed.
Facing the gallant door-kicking rescuers were a bunch of doctors and nurses who had given Jessica well-above-average treatment and personal care.
One doctor had even tried to return her to her side a few days previously – but the ambulance she was taken in was shot at by US troops unaware of its contents, and turned back.
Finally, the Pentagon claims that “Lynch had stab and bullet wounds, and that she had been slapped about on her hospital bed and interrogated” appear to have been concocted.
Question for StraightDopers : will this story receive any attention this side of the Atlantic? Would any media source dare print it? Would anyone like to accuse the Brits of lying?
I would also like more details on the shooting of the ambulance – why did it happen? Was the ambulance driver given any chance to explain anything? What if Jessica had been killed in the shooting?
Jessica Lange is an actress, Jessica Lynch is the rescued American soldier – though given the nature of the Guardian story, I can see why you’d make that slip.
As to the content of the story… if it pans out to be true, I can’t say I’ll be surprised. The entire Iraqi war effort, from "selling it to the American public to justifying it afterwards, has been heavily stage-managed by the Bush Administration and the Pentagon. This is a drop in the bucket if true… though a particularly noxious drop.
I don’t get it, what should have they done? Sent in only unarmed medics and hope that reports are correct? Hope that this wasn’t some sort of trap? Ridiculous. Overwhelming force was more then appropriate, seeing that a war was going on…
The same BBC that was booted from Britian’s flagship seems to have never heard of ‘the fog of war’. Whatever happened, the outcome was nothing but success for the Americans.
If you’re not absolutely 100% sure that there’s no chance of attack or ambush, which is basically impossible in times of war, you never ever underestimate. They made the correct decision as far as I’m concerned.
If they knew there were absolutely no Iraqi troops in the area and there was absolutely no danger they probably would’ve sent in an embedded journalist to cover the raid and make it look even more special.
And secondly they didn’t know for sure whether there were no Iraqi troops, all they had was a doctor telling them there wasn’t, which is what you quote. Was the doctor an authority on Iraqi troop movements? Should the US just assume that he is and take his word?
And as for handcuffing doctors, didn’t this follow ‘surrendering’ Iraqi troops killing some US soldiers? If so then this is probably why. How could they know for sure everyone in the building is a health worker and not someone waiting to ambush? Just because they wear white coats doesn’t mean they’re doctors.
I think a doctor working in the hospital who was trying to arrange for Jessica Lynch to be delivered safely back to American troops would be a good authority on wether there were Iraqi troops in his own hospital, so yes.
If they were so worried about wether people were ready to open fire, why did they run in so quickly shouting and screaming?. I would personally think that any patrolling triggerman would panic and open fire.
I think a doctor working in the hospital who was trying to arrange for Jessica Lynch to be delivered safely back to American troops would be a good authority on wether there were Iraqi troops in his own hospital, so yes.
How? Yes he was trying to arrange for her to get back to American troops but how from that do you get that he knew there were absolutely no troops in the area or Fedayeen disguised as civilians? And once again why should the US army take the word of some doctor as the absolute truth?
*If they were so worried about wether people were ready to open fire, why did they run in so quickly shouting and screaming?. *
Because that is a standard tactic in a raid. It’s called the element of suprise. You blast in making a lot of noise to cause a lot of confusion amongst your opponents hopefully getting everyone to surrender really quickly.
I would personally think that any patrolling triggerman would panic and open fire.
Yes causing panic is the key. You cause a lot of noise making them think there’s a helluva lot more people raiding, get the other side to panic and either get them to surrender or run. Those super stealthy commandos picking people off one by one with silencers and piano wire is the stuff of movies mostly.
They knew exactly what they were doing.
Uh yeah, raids are usually prepared qute carefully.
I agree with Skip that it would be normal to execute the operation ‘Gung-Ho style’. That would just be standard procedure.
That’s how they train, that’s how it would be in real life, regardless of the fact if any enemy is actually present.
The big question, however, is if they would have gone in at all, if there hadn’t been intelligence that said the area was safe.
I would say that would have been very unlikely.
No commander would risk such valuable troops on a rescue mission on POW’s, just like that.
No, this was clearly a propaganda stunt. All-American heroes rescuing the pretty damsel in distress. Classic!!
From what I remember of the story, initially we were very much given the impression that Lynch had a number of injuries that she had received bravely fighting off half of the Iraq army before she was captured. Within a day they were back pedalling on this rapidly.
Personally, I believe the truth lies somewhere in the middle. Maybe the US Army did see a possible trap, and were justified in sending in “America’s Finest” even if it did turn out to be over the top. There is a lot of unknowns in a war.
But I don’t doubt that the U.S. PR machine, with the happy collusion of the media, were positively salivated at the thought of a juicy human-interest story. Plucky army-girl? In the hands of evil enemy? Rescued by crack American squad of heros? This is the sort of thing the folks back home devour! When’s the film released!?
So, yeah, of course they played it for all it was worth. Without a doubt. Maybe they also realized shortly afterwards that they had over-played it just a bit, so toned down the story. I imagine public reaction, in the US and elsewhere, will be “So what?” In the grand schemes of things it was a trivial exercise of little importance and it made for a lovely story at the time. Standard propaganda during wars, keeps the attention away from the nasty stuff.
the doctor would know if there were fedahyeen in the hospital.
I don’t object to them sending in the troops to “rescue” Jessica Lynch, and I can understand the need for caution.
I saw plenty of “surprise attacks” on the news during the war, and I can see that it is effective.
I never once suggested the “super silent commando assassins”.
I was simply commenting on the OTT tactics used in a potential hostage situation, even though they’re own intellegence had been told there were no fedayeen in the area.
IMO, The rescue was deliberately OTT in order to make good propaganda.
Hmm, no surprise at the first person to jump in to defend the official line. Tell me, Brutus, do you ever question any information the US administration throws out? Is there ever just an inkling that some of the stuff just might be a teensy weensy bit, say, ‘exaggerated’. Or do you feel more comfortable just suckling blindly at the administration’s teat?
So you are saying that American forces should have taken this doctors word as absolute truth? That this doctor had some mystic ability to know, beyond any doubt, that there were no hostiles (or potential hostiles) in the area?
Taking a principled stance against the American/Coalition action in Iraq is one thing. These paranoid and silly accusations are another.
the doctor would know if there were fedahyeen in the hospital.
Which as I noted in a previous would all be well and good if they got their information from a doctor in the hospital which they didn’t. A waiter at a local restaurant told them there were no more troops and once again why would the US assume he knows exactly where Iraqi troops are (and this still applies to the doctor as well) and why should they believe him. This is from the quote you posted.
I was simply commenting on the OTT tactics used in a potential hostage situation, even though they’re own intellegence had been told there were no fedayeen in the area.*
It doesn’t matter whether their own intelligence told them there were no fedayeen in the area. You don’t walk nonchalantly into a building that is not secure. You never assume it’s safe and you never underestimate. In a raid on an unsecured building this raid was textbook standard procedure.
I’m not saying they should take anyone’s word as absolute truth. I readily admit that they made the decision based on all the information available to them.
It just looks like a great piece of organised propaganda.
And it is propaganda. Yes ,it was a staged operation.
The point is not how they tactically ‘rescued’ her but the fact that they did rescue her, in the first place. The situation didn’t warrant an extraction by special forces. She had no military significance, she wasn’t a high ranking officer or hold important information or whatever. Plus she wasn’t in any particular danger.
She was just pretty…
If she had been an ugly cow or just another he-grunt, (s)he would probably have been freed ‘conventionally’, when the normal ground troops took the city, and it’s hospital.