Be as PC as You Can Be…Find your Future in the US Military

Back in the 1980’s, the Army ran a series of successful commercials, with the slogan, “Be All You Can Be.” The corny ads depicted a US Army that was reborn during the Reagan administration and an Army that actually focused on killing bad guys and breaking things.

Flash forward to the Orwellian hell of the Pentagon in 2018, where your military left is right, where men are pregnant, where women are transitioning to men, where lactation stations are now part of the military’s SOP, where the girl next door, at 5 feet nothing and weighing nothing will be leading the way with the Rangers, where Mad Dog Mattis is Floyd the Barber of Arlington, where warriors are as extinct as the T-Rex, where all glory is fleeting.

Two recent stories in the news confirmed yet again, that the military’s motto in 2018 is “Be as PC as You Can Be.”

At the Air Force Academy, which is currently being run by a lesbian, the headliners at the Academy’s recent 25th National Character and Leadership Symposium were: Air Force Staff Sgt. Logan Ireland and his “wife,” Laila, who had served as a male soldier in the U.S. Army before his/her transgender transition; Cornel West, a celebrity Marxist philosopher, LGBT activist, propagandist for Communist China’s genocidal dictator Mao Zedong, and Harvard professor of African-American Studies; and Dr. Ruth Westheimer, the aging sexologist and media darling who endorses virtually every form of sexual deviancy, as long as it’s done “lovingly.”

The USAFA’s two-day symposium (February 22-23), according to an article by the Academy’s public affairs office, was “designed to ‘stretch thinking’” of the Air Force cadets. In his opening address to the symposium audience, Academy Superintendent Lt. General Jay Silveria said the event would feature “an impressive array of speakers from an amazingly diverse array of backgrounds.”

“The Air Force Academy’s appreciation for diversity and its willingness to respectfully address controversy make the school stronger,” according to Silveria. “Some of their stories will inspire and encourage you, others will shock or sadden you, some might anger you and some will make you uncomfortable,” he said. “Each of these reactions are important to our experience here and to our development as leaders.”

Like I said, the US military in 2018 isn’t focused on warfighting. General Silveria, like the rest of the feather merchant candyasses running our military now, is focused on diversity, LGBT rights, feminism and every other wacko pinko ideology.

Also presented at the symposium was an official USAFA video titled, “Understanding Transgender Service members.”

In the video, the unidentified officer making the introductions, for instance, introduces a front-row attendee as “Colonel retired Meyers,” whom he describes as a “45-year transgender veteran of the United States Government” who now serves as an instructor in the Academy’s physics department. “Most of us know Col. Meyers, in our day-to-day life as Mark, but ‘Marcy’ came to visit us today,” the introducer announced. Colonel “Mark/Marcy” Meyers, wearing a bright floral blouse and large, dangle earrings, stood and waved to the audience.

I know, this is the Air Force, they’ve always been laid back.Surely, the Army is squared away…

In the lean green machine, nearly 500 women are serving in various combat billets throughout the Army, officials said.

Moreover, 10 women have graduated from the Army’s grueling Ranger course and one is serving as an officer with a Ranger regiment. Nearly 74 women have graduated from Infantry or Armor Basic Officer Leader’s Course. One reason for the Army’s success: prior to the opening of combat fields, the Army started pushing women noncommissioned officers and leaders to previously excluded job fields to boost the ranks of female cadre members before new female soldiers entered the infantry schoolhouses. The initiative was known as Leaders First.

Success? Just one question, Fort Benning. I’d like to see the records of all ten female graduates from Ranger School. What? They’ve been destroyed like the records of the first three female grads? What, you won’t let Congressman Steve Russell, a former Ranger, see the Green Cards for the female grads?

Don’t worry, there’s still the Marines. The Marines still have it together, right?

The U.S. Marine Corps will no longer require prospective officers to pass a punishing combat endurance test to graduate from the service’s Infantry Officer Course.

Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Robert Neller quietly made the shift to standards in November, altering the test from a pass/fail requirement to just one of many exercises measured as part of overall IOC evaluation.

Marine Training Command officials rejected the notion that the change slackens service standards and said it brings the exercise back to its original intent of assessing the “retention of knowledge, skills, and fitness achieved” at IOC, Military.com reported.

“Over the past 40 years, the Marine Corps has made multiple modifications to Infantry Officer Course (IOC) program of instruction (POI) to reflect the requirements of the operating environment,” Training Command said in a statement. “The quality of the course remains the same.”

How can the course remain the same if the combat endurance test has been taken out? And, we all know the reason the combat endurance test has been taken out – because women can’t pass the course.

In the US Military, Diversity is Job One. Don’t worry about fighting wars, the important thing is that everyone gets their own body bag, a Capri Sun and picked up by Mommy at the end of the day.

Following on this bit of absurdity was the Marine Times article, “Where are the Female Marines?”

The story indicates that a total of 92 women are operating in a multitude of combat billets across the Corps, from rifleman to armored reconnaissance to combat engineers.

Yet only 11 enlisted women are serving today in the traditional “03” infantry career fields, Marine Corps officials said. No women have even attempted the Basic Reconnaissance Course or Amphibious Reconnaissance Course, and there are no female snipers, according to data provided by Manpower and Reserve Affairs.

But, times are changing. The Marines, like the rest of the services are under extreme pressure to shove square pegs in round holes and graduate women in combat arms schools, even though they are physically unable to pass the courses.

According to Maoist Cultural Revolution and Marine person, Maj. Brian T. Block, “There is no target number or quota for how many female Marines should be in ground combat fields or units; the focus is on combat effectiveness.”

Yes, the focus is definitely on combat effectiveness, that’s why we’re recruiting women for the combat arms. Block might want to have a chat with any living Marines who fought at Iwo Jima and Peleliu and Hue and the Frozen Chosin and Fallujah and ask them about combat effectiveness.

Block said the Corps’ approach to gender integration is not just focused on the number of women in combat billets but a force-wide endeavor that includes marketing and recruitment of top female talent and new efforts by the Corps that has male and female recruits training side by side, a first for the Marines.

“As the Corps continues to push its gender integration plan it has been resolute on maintaining “standards, while leveraging every opportunity to optimize individual performance, talent, and skills in order to maximize the Corps’ warfighting capabilities.”

Wait a second, Major Blockhead. I just reported that the Corps is dropping the grueling combat endurance test, aka LOWERING STANDARDS.

Commandant of the Marine Corps Gen. Robert B. Neller said in late January he wanted to grow the number women in the entire Marine Corps to 10 percent, up from today’s 8 percent female force. That would likely boost the number of women in the combat arms.

Last year, the Marines ran an ad called, “Battle Up,” which shows portrays a woman fighting in the combat arms.

To further demonstrate who is really calling the shots in the military now, Nora Bensahel, an expert on defense at American University, who obviously is another academic fool who has never been in combat stated, “The entire culture of the Marine Corps is a hyper-masculine culture.”

We wouldn’t want any hyper-masculine people in the Marines would we? Like I said, the military is no longer about winning wars.

I just have one question for General Neller. How does integrating women into the combat arms increase a unit’s speed, strength and overall combat power?

War is about speed, lethality and the ability to have an operational tempo that inflicts maximum death faster and more violently than the guy you’re shooting at. And, yes, our enemies will only be bringing Ivan, Chin and Kim Jong to the battlefield. On the other hand, we’ll be bringing Kaylee, Chelsea, Juanita and Claire.

We, on the other hand will be bringing mothers, sisters, wives, sweethearts and daughters to war.

We are not only lying to ourselves, but deliberately weakening ourselves to placate leftists, feminists and the LGBT lobby.

We are the boxer who is going to break his knuckles and go into the ring fighting with one hand.

We are the quarterback who is going to take a sledgehammer to his knee than play in the Super Bowl.

We are the center fielder who will blind himself in both eyes than take the field and hope to catch the ball.

We are committing national suicide and it is being abated by the President, who knows very little about the military, and by General Mattis and General Dunford, who know everything about the military, but are too gutless to stand against what they know is wrong and do something about it.

We are committing national suicide because the military’s other senior leaders are either outright Obama holdout leftists, or because those who know the insanity of the situation and don’t have the stones to make a stand.

General George S. Patton wrote, “Success in war depends on the golden rules of war: speed, simplicity, and boldness.”

Sun Tzu wrote, “Speed is the essence of war. Take advantage of the enemy’s unpreparedness; travel by unexpected routes and strike him where he has taken no precautions.”

Marine Corps Brigadier General George Smith wrote in Warfighting that combat power is generated through speed and focus. Speed over time is tempo, the consistent ability to operate quickly. Speed is a weapon.

The following are excerpts from the Marine Corps study, which was included in a 37 page statement presented by Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness to the Senate Armed Services Committee, chaired by Senator John McCain, on February 2, 2016:

If you click on the link above, you can read the whole 37 page report submitted to Congress. But, here are some important excerpts from it.

All-male task force teams outperformed mixed gender units in 69 percent (92 of 134) of ground combat tasks, particularly in specialties that carried the assault load plus the additional weight of crew served weapons and ammunition. Significant disparities in physical size, strength, endurance, injury rates, an early onset of fatigue that affected marksmanship were scrupulously recorded with scientific monitoring techniques. This research was definitive as possible, short of an actual war.

It is beyond dispute that in gender mixed units, physical deficiencies had negative effects on the unit’s speed and effectiveness in simulated battle tasks, including marching under heavy loads, casualty evacuation and marksmanship while fatigued. In some units, male volunteers compensated for the women’s difficulties by taking over strenuous tasks.

All male squads, teams and crews and gender integrated squads, teams and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties.

Female volunteers in the study were considered to be in above average physical condition. The male volunteers were only an average representation of their peers.

Females possess less lean body mass, slighter build that affects stride length and stride frequency as loads increase, less absolute VO2 max production and less power and anaerobic/aerobic capacity than males.

Physical differences were more pronounced in specialties that carried the assault load,, plus the weight of crew served weapons and ammunition.

All male units engaged targets faster and scored more hits with crew served weapons than gender integrated units.

In the 120mm tank loading simulation, a gunnery skills test, participants were asked to lift a simulated round weighing 55 lbs,, 5 times in 35 seconds or less. Less than 1% of the men compared to 19% of the women could not complete the tank loading drill in the allotted time. The failure rates would increase inside a tank.

In the 155 mm Artillery Lift-and-Carry, a test simulating ordnance stowing, volunteers had to pick up a 95 lb. artillery round and carry it 50 meters in under 2 minutes. Noted the report, less than 1% of men, compared to 28.2% of women, could not complete the 155mm artillery round lift and carry in the allotted time.

Less than 1% of men could not negotiate a 7 foot wall, whereas 21% of the women could not.

As every day passes, it’s more than obvious that the US military is no longer dealing with reality and is implementing polices based on a fantasy. Business as usual in the military has become something out of a Twilight Zone episode.

It’s five minutes to midnight as the Hour of the Clusterfu*k looms on the horizon. The Hour of the Clusterfu*k defined as the complete decimation of the US armed forces in the next war.

23 posted on 03/13/2018 5:34:20 PM PDT by wally_bert (I didn't get where I am today by selling ice cream tasting of bookends, pumice stone & West Germany)

The Navy’s was I think, “It’s not just a job, it’s an adventure”. or was that the 70s...

“All-male task force teams outperformed mixed gender units in 69 percent (92 of 134) of ground combat tasks...”

This is how you know they aren’t really serious. Why would you have all male units compete against mixed gender units? If a soldier is a soldier, shouldn’t they just form all female combat units and see how they do if they really wanted to know?

Freegards

Between my horrible nearsightedness and some nagging orthopdedic stuff, Marines and Army were out. Good ASVAB though.

27 posted on 03/13/2018 5:56:37 PM PDT by wally_bert (I didn't get where I am today by selling ice cream tasting of bookends, pumice stone & West Germany)

Can you visualize Putin reading this? He would be laughing so hard, his tears would be rolling down his pants legs.

If you are dirt poor, have absolutly no chance of ever getting out of poverty, have no chance of a higher education or a decent paying job then by all means join the military, use the education benefits to get a degree and try and get a MOS that will train you for a highly demanded job when you get out after 4-6 years. Otherwise, if you have any opportunities for education and/or a decent job then DON’T. I spend 24 years in service and I am grateful for opportunities I did not otherwise have. However, the service is not what it once was and I would not recommend making it a career.

Like some of us can say - I suffered through it when the military decided it was OK to be homosexual (after first deciding they wouldn’t actively pursue homosexuals who “kept their mouth shut”) and was fortunate to be able to retire before they made homosexuality mandatory.

30 posted on 03/14/2018 4:01:54 AM PDT by trebb (I stopped picking on the mentally ill hypocrites who pose as conservatives...mostly ;-})

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.