You said — “OK. Show me one Q&A session in which the Pentagon said that she was indeed a hero after they debriefed her, in response to a reporter’s question.”
I’m certainly not going to spend my money doing that... You can spend yours, that’s fine...
.
And then — “I think I understand what Lynch is doing - she’s admitting that she’s a lousy soldier, but deflecting attention away from her incompetence by pointing the finger at the Pentagon. That way, she gets to be a heroic whistle-blower instead of a heroic soldier. I see they still make ‘em like Gomer Pyle.”
If she wanted to be “heroic” — she was already there. She had to do nothing and she would be reaping benefits. The the only “upside” to telling the truth — is simply — telling the truth, and that’s the thing that matters. And I have to commend her for doing so.
Likewise, we should have all the other soldiers doing the same, whenever situations come up. That would keep everyone on the straight and narrow. It would avoid lies from being built up into big stories, misleading the public...
Next time we hear about a so-called hero, then we’ll be waiting for the other shoe to drop...
Sounds like you're taking Lynch's word that the Pentagon was lying without any evidence. You're certainly entitled to do so. I'm not convinced.
If she wanted to be “heroic” — she was already there. She had to do nothing and she would be reaping benefits. The the only “upside” to telling the truth — is simply — telling the truth, and that’s the thing that matters. And I have to commend her for doing so.
There's no way she could have portrayed herself as a hero. The heat of battle was over. Iraqi POW's were being debriefed about the opposition they encountered. The only way she could come out a hero was by deflecting attention from her fecklessness and pointing the finger at the Pentagon.