Sister in the Band of Brothers: Embedded with the 101st Airborne in Iraq

by Katherine M. Skiba


Overview
From the Publisher
When U.S.-led forces invaded Iraq in March 2003, our soldiers weren't the only ones who put their lives on the line: so did 600 "embedded" journalists, including Katherine M. Skiba. Her riveting memoir provides a vivid you-are-there account of her experiences with the Army's legendary 101st Airborne, the division celebrated for its heroism in World War II as the "Band of Brothers."

Skiba, a reporter and photographer, was the sole female civilian among the 2,300 soldiers of the 159th Aviation Brigade, whose pilots flew Black Hawk and Chinook helicopters into the thick of battle. Her dispatches were a vital lifeline between the troops and their families and earned her a grateful national audience. Reporting on the men and women in uniform with journalistic dedication, natural compassion, and an eye for the absurd, she chronicles her experiences from "media boot camp" to the kick-off of Operation Iraqi Freedom to the fall of Baghdad, including a missile attack on the brigade's desert camp.

Taking readers across the wind-blown deserts of Iraq and into cramped seventy-man tents, where personal space barely exists and tempers can flare, she deftly and sympathetically portrays her brothers- and sisters-in-arms-rigid commanders, gung-ho warriors, and daring aviators, as well as intelligence officers, mechanics, medics, and cooks, among many others. She details her dealings with the soldiers, her clashes with a battalion commander, and her friendship with a lieutenant colonel who helped keep her sane. Meantime she tells of the journalist-husband she left behind-and the encouragement he gave her when the going got rough.

Whether pounding out a story on her laptop, strapping on a gas mask at a moment's notice, or flying toward the frontlines, Skiba stuck it out despite her own doubts and earned the respect of one grizzled sergeant major, who quipped: "You've got balls." The risks were very real for her and anyone else who covered or fought in the war, even in its early days, long before triumph trailed off into something less than permanent victory. Her story testifies to the courage it took to endure such risks, while acknowledging the inevitable costs of war.

My thoughts
As I was getting started on this book, the thing that stuck in my mind as unique is that reporters were not embedded in the military to get a good story, rather the armed forces invited journalists to be embedded to tell a good story. They said no soldier should die in the arms of his friend without his story being told. Wow. I couldn't agree more.

The book was terrific for describing what it's like to live among the troops. It's no piece of cake, and the author is honest about the things she likes and dislikes, and the people she likes and dislikes. She doesn't play favorites by rank to be sure, and she doesn't mince words.

The book is good, no doubt about that, but I found myself offended by some of the things Katherine Skiba did. The rules stated that embedded reporters were to be treated as majors are treated, a far too generous accommodation in my opinion. Many times Skiba lived far below the standards afforded a major without complaining, but other times I thought she came off as crass in her attempts to be a woman in the field. There is one particular segment when she is complaining about toilet facilities -- it's a war! To have the luxury of a bucket is something to be thankful for.

But that's just my opinion. I'm including an excerpt below in her own words. You can decide for yourself.

Regardless of this issue, the book is worth reading. I enjoyed it.

Favorite/Controversial Passage
Captain Goveo approached me one morning and asked to speak to me privately, giving me the knot-in-the-gut sense that I was being summoned to the principal's office.

Once we left the crowded tent, he played highway cop. "Do you know what we're going to talk about?" he asked me. Sh**, I was clueless. Given the abundance of arcane military laws, rules, regulations, lessons learned, orders, doctrines, manuals and handbooks, there was any number of possibilities. I felt a headache coming on. Still, I wasn't going to fall for his trap. I'd been stopped for speeding enough times to know better than to volunteer anything. "No, I haven't any idea," I lied.

Then he told me. During a time when water was running low, somebody had ratted me out: I'd been seen using Al-Rawdatain to shave my legs.

Having seen some top-shelf criminal lawyers in action, I sprang to my own defense. I hadn't been briefed on the shortage; and the "water buffalo," a large tank that held nonpotable water for washing up and doing laundry, was empty. Furthermore, I was a member of the media and had to talk to everybody from the colonel on down, so I had to look presentable. Besides, I added, as I understood it, people were supposed to pay attention to hygiene and grooming, which struck me a bit difficult when the showers weren't working and the buffalo was bone-dry.

And you know what else, Captain, I continued, my travel orders indicate that I'm supposed to be billeted like a major, and instead I'm thrown in a seventy-man tent with the motor pool guys, and did you hear me complain once? He knew I hadn't.

I promised not to waste bottled water again, but, for good measure, I reminded him that I don't read minds.

Web author's note: Not that it's my place to critique the author's writing or experiences, but did she or did she not know that shaving her legs with bottled water was inappropriate, common sense aside? In the second paragraph above she indicates that she lied, thus she did know what he was going to say. If so, the "I don't read minds" comment is a lie to a superior officer. Furthermore, if the buffalo was dry, do you really need briefed to know there's a water shortage? Again, common sense! As for looking presentable and paying attention to hygiene, I doubt she was wearing shorts when she was representing her employer in the presence of a colonel. If she hadn't shaved her legs for a month, no one would be the wiser.

Those are the things I found annoying about this book. Still, it was an enjoyable book.

Date Read
October 2005

Reading Level
Easy read
I breezed through it in a little over a week.

Rating
On a scale of one to three: Two
I think it's easy for me to sit here and say I'd have done this or that differently, but from my armchair, I have philosophical differences with the author, and that's why this book is a 2 instead of a 3.