This was in the Washington Post today...I disagreed and sent an email to the author. I've included it after the lj cut. Really a whole lot of nonsense from this lady I think.
Mother Of All Blunders
By Kathleen Parker
hareSaturday, April 7, 2007; Page A13
On any given day, one isn't likely to find common cause with Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. He's a dangerous, lying, Holocaust- denying, Jew-hating cutthroat thug -- not to put too fine a point on it.
But he was dead-on when he wondered why a once-great power such as Britain sends mothers of toddlers to fight its battles.
Ms. Parker,
I was watching Ahmadinejad's speech and that quote struck a chord
with me as well. It angered me to see that young mother sitting in
Iranian custody being forced to apologize for her actions, actions
that she was forced to take under orders in the British Army.
However, I have a different take on the matter than you. I have a
problem with the way you have framed this issue in your editorial.
You seem to suggest that the west, as a society, sends its women to
war and has lost the will to protect them, that it has gotten to such
a point that a male soldier would listen to the screams of rape and
torture inflicted upon a female soldier with ambivalence. I
understand that your broader point is that you disagree with women in
the army and think that it reflects an unhealthy trend in society to
blur or even erase the line between the sexes.
Ahmadinejad berated the West for putting their women in harm's way and
tearing them away from their children at home. This ignores two huge
points, the first being that Britain runs an all-volunteer military,
as does the United States. Conscription hasn't existed in Britain in
any form since 1960 and "Even today, volunteer members of the armed
forces have a right to claim discharge on the grounds of a
conscientious objection developed since enlistment".
(http://www.ppu.org.uk/learn/infodocs/st
_conscription_l.html)
Seaman Turney was no more forced to fight for Britain or to be put
into harm's way than you were forced to type and submit your editorial
for publication.
Secondly, it is the height of hypocrisy for Iran to lecture the west
on their treatment of women. You brush over this in your article by
saying, "Just because we may not "feel" humiliated doesn't mean we're
not. In the eyes of Iran and other Muslim nations, we're wimps. While
the West puts mothers in boats with rough men, Muslim men "rescue"
women and drape them in floral hijabs. We can debate whether they're
right until all our boys wear aprons, but it won't change the way
we're perceived", but it is a point that is central to this argument.
For Ahmadinejad to stand with his back to a society that denies
education to women and where honor killings are a part of daily life
and look at Britain and wag his finger would be laughable if it wasn't
so sad.
There is a gulf between the two shores of thought on which Britain and
Iran stand. This event isn't going to bring them any closer together
nor will it push them any further apart than they already are. It's
just another example of the distance between the thinking of our
relatively free society and fantasy world Ahmadinejad inhabits where
he thinks that capturing the mother of a three year-old and
humiliating her on a world stage will teach anyone a lesson in gender
equality. I didn't think anyone would listen to him. It appears,
however, that you did.
Sincerely,
Ian Nicoll
PS... I don't know what kind of individual pressure these hostages
were under but I couldn't believe they had opened themselves up to be
used as such a tool for propoganda as they did. My grandfather was a
prisoner of war in Germany from 1944-1945 and I don't remember him
writing any letters of apology for incursions into German territory.
The standard instructions to soldiers upon capture is to give no
information about yourself but "name, rank and serial number". If
these sailors had simply stated their names, ranks and serial numbers
then they would have lost all propaganda value to Ahmadinejad. It is
very difficult to portray a soldier as an unwilling pawn of an
imperial nation when they follow the protocol set by that nation. It
is unfair to blame the sailors because we just don't know the pressure
Iran put on them.