CJ - I think most of us are well aware of the differences between rocket motors and jet turbines; specifcally in the fact that the rocket carries its own reaction mass with it while the jet turbine gathers it up as it goes. No problem.
But the point of referring to the rocket motor is that it is a reaction motor, like a jet. A jet creates thrust from the reaction of expelled mass, as does a rocket. The exhaust nozzle does not know if the reaction mass has come from a tank or from the air in front of it. The point of referring to rockets was to point out that there is no fundamental reason why a reaction motor cannot travel faster than its own exhaust velocity, which is what the original Poster asked.
If I recall correctly, even the the most powerful chemical rocket fuel pairs (hyrdrogen/flourine) cannot attain an exhaust velocity as high as that required for orbit (sorry, do not have the figures) and yet a single stage to orbit rocket is feasible and was being developed. That project was dropped not because the basic physics was wrong.
Furthermore, the notion that the reaction force is related to the airspeed implies that engine thrust diminishes as air speed increases - even during take off roll. This is clearly not the case.
Thank you to the original Poster - a good discussion!