Posted on 08/31/2015 8:37:24 AM PDT by Bill Russell
If you look at career Rangers, even the toughest and strongest men are seriously beat up and worn out by the time they retire from the physical wear, tear, abuse and injuries they received while in the service.
The Israeli army has had large scale experiments integrating women into front line combat units which demonstrate that women receive serious debilitating injuries that lead to permanent disability at an astronomical rate compared to men when placed in conditions that replicate actual combat conditions.
Israel is a special case given it's civil defense requirements so training women for combat is a necessity.
For the United States, women in front line combat will degrade military effectiveness in any engagement were soldiers are pushed to the limits of endurance and, more importantly, is going to result in many women taking early separation from the service due to serious permanent disability resulting from constant physical wear and tear combined with serious , debilitating injuries from training and actual combat.
As always, this will be a self correcting problem when we discover the long term physical consequences of women spending years in the military units such as the Rangers or Marines. In fact, this is already a known problem as the injury and disability rates for women are already high for women not in front line combat units.
This is not some hypothetical because we know what happens to the strongest, best trained and most physically fit men. In fact, a majority of men cannot meet the physical requirements for induction into front line combat units.
Just look at the toll such service takes on the men and multiply by factor of 10 or more to get a prediction of what it will do to women.
This does not even consider the fact that men in the military are exposed to all sorts of nasty chemicals that no women of child bearing age has any business being exposed to.
The two women who passed the Ranger course did so on their own merits and to the standards the rest of the men met.
They earned their way in and deserve the credit for doing so.
Was there a cogent point in your comments? I did not see one, but then I am mostly Neanderthal in my make up. Sorry, but that is the way it is.
If we cherry pick one in ten million gals to do the work of one male ranger or SF type, is there any sense in that? Golly, let’s sift through a million people to find one of a particular bent when there are 2000 of another? waste, fraud and abuse, not to mention the risk to those males that know they won’t be rescued by Molly Pitcher with a tab.
So it has been alleged by all official voices. Unofficial voices who chose not to be named for fear of repercussions say it is all bullsh*t.
If the assertion that these two females were given time off from their regular duties for four months to train for this test, that alone ought to disqualify them.
I believe they qualified in the same Degree that Obama demonstrated he was qualified to become President.
In my opinion, both are examples of affirmative action, and not demonstrations of actual merit.
Preparation for attendance at Army schools has always been encouraged and frequently comes along with relief from routine duties, mission permitting. That has been going on for years. As the author points out, the Army tried to recruit 160 women, but could only find 100 who were both willing and believed to be capable of making it. No unit is going to send one of their soldiers to a school without some assurance that they are going to be able to do the training. In the end, 100 women were enrolled in the pre-Ranger course and 2 of those soldiers graduated. Comments that I have seen from soldiers who were there have said that it was legit. A 2% graduation rate is about right, I would think.
Did they pass the “make me a sammich” test?
When I was at pre-Ranger (a two week program to see if I was good enough to go to actual Ranger School) there was a cadre member who was training for the annual Best Ranger Competition. He was allowed to workout as he saw fit all day. He was never really around but we saw him training like a madman during work hours. We never gave it a second thought because of how demanding that competition is. I have no problem with women getting some extra time to train for Ranger School.
I agreed with you
Sorry it wasn’t expressed properly
Who would dare speak out? It would be like speaking out against transgenders or queers, only worse. The Top of the command means to have this, and Obama has been purging the military of non-drones as fast as he is able.
Let us just say that I remain skeptical. Again, past experience shows us that the Military will LIE about the achievements and capabilities of Women purporting to be the equal of men.
I'll let you ask them that question.
I would like to be there when you ask though, should be interesting.
That an exceptional soldier was allowed to train for a prestigious award and thereby to enhance the esprit de corps is not the same as woman trying to get through Ranger School. It is an exceptional event, for the best of the best, of the already best, and even so, I would be surprised if they let this man do nothing but train for four months to prepare for it.
The point here is, Do they give everyone four months to train? If not, then they aren't treating the women the same way they treated the men. They are giving them "help."
Likewise with this business of letting them carry female soldiers (.6 body weight of men) instead of making them carry male soldiers.
People who were there say everything is kosher and legit, but I will have a better time believing them after they have left their current positions so that they will receive no recriminations for telling the truth.
While they are under the control of the Lying sack of sh*t at the top of the chain of command, I have little belief that I'm hearing the un-coerced truth.
Keep your powder dry and hold your fire. The real issue will be over the adjustment of the standard. Honorable and competent men and women executed and observed this experiment. They believed that their good work and the evidence before us would be properly used. They are good people, but they do not understand what will happen next.
Their work will be turned on their heads in order to justify and support major adjustment of standards to achieve the political objectives that are behind all of this. They will be betrayed, all of us who have ever worn a uniform will be betrayed. This will be the hallmark of the Obama Administration.
Reality and Common Sense are not a consideration in this "Politics Uber Alles" environment that constitutes our politically correct government society.
They are willing to take horrendous losses just so long as they don't have to admit they made a mistake.
There are two basic mantras of Liberal ideology. One is "CHANGE!!!!!!!" (Sweeping away the old, to make room for their NEW! Better! Ideology)
And "EQUALITY!!!!!!" (The Attempt to force everyone to be the least common denominator, and call it just as good as as what used to be the best.)
Both of these Liberal mantras are incorporated into this foolhardy policy. They get to sweep away the old, and they get to pretend equality. Both notions gives them orgasms, and they do not in fact care if their "CHANGE" makes things worse, and they do not care if their "EQUALITY!!" makes things worse either.
The powers that be are insulated enough from the consequences of the stupidity that they advocate that they have no concern for what a hash their ideas will make of society.
If you need an example, I direct your attention to Venezuela.
A most interesting and objective piece, thank you for writing and posting it here.
I understand a strong, capable woman with a desire to push to her limits, to find what she’s made of. I work with some women like that, they’re flight medics. But these women are similar to the kind you mentioned- they’re always feminine but not flirtatious, always capable, but funny as hell. They make mistakes and own up immediately- they never think of blaming anyone else.. They fight themselves, not the world. Anything they have to prove is an inner battle, not against men.The guys they work with are their pals, not their competition.
But war- that’s another story. Too much at stake, too much depends on brotherhood, trust and cohesion.
My son was in Iraq, 101st AB. He chose the infantry after 9-11. He had several reasons. One of them was -infantry is all men. War is tough enough.
While I’m not a great fan of Huckabee, I agree with what he said at the first debate- our national defense is no place to work out social experiments.
Screaming Eagle Mom
Apparently the author is of the opinion that course requirements weren’t lowered, softened, or otherwise modified to accommodate the girls.
That is a bit difficult to believe.
rdcbn, Your comments on the stresses and physical wear and tear on the body are spot on. Women’s skeletal structures are far different. This applies not just to upper body strength. It has a huge impact on the number of leg injuries such as shin splints and stress fractures which side line women more often.
Thanks, SE Mom!
And thanks for your son’s service!
Ref: “Apparently the author is of the opinion that course requirements weren’t lowered, softened, or otherwise modified to accommodate the girls.
That is a bit difficult to believe.”
Your comments reflect the cynicism I and many other men developed over the course of our military careers — and it always cast a shadow of doubt about such integration. I really believe General Odierno wanted to avoid the pit falls of previous experiments which lowered the standards. He developed the best program structure to ensure the best possibility of success and failure on a level playing field with the same standard. When we look at the fact that they could only find 100 women from across the Army who could meet the screening standard to attempt pre-Ranger and then only two percent of those could go on to complete the course,I do not believe we will see a massive influx of unqualified women. The integrity of the program has been preserved and the fighting ability of the Regiment maintained.
That said, the real test will come from the Rangers in their class. There are a lot people expressing their doubts about the standards and the actual performance of the women as Ranger students. But so many of them do not have first hand observations. When we see their classmates and the Ranger Instructors who graded them refusing to wear their tabs and saying they did not meet the standards and were passed anyway, then we will know they did not meet the standard. v/r Bill
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.