Posted on 06/13/2012 3:41:24 PM PDT by kingattax
The United States Army is debating whether to admit women to Ranger School, its elite training program for young combat leaders.
Proponents argue this is to remove a final impediment to the careers of Army women. But the move would erode the unique Ranger ethos and culture—not to mention the program's rigorous physical requirements—harming its core mission of cultivating leaders willing to sacrifice everything for our nation.
The Army's 75th Ranger Regiment traces its roots back to World War II, when it won acclaim for penetrating deep behind Japanese lines. Founded in 1950, Ranger School teaches combat soldiers small-unit tactics and leadership under extreme duress. It pushes men harder than any other program in the Army's curriculum.
Competition to attend the course is fierce, with about 4,000 men eligible to attend each year. Only about half graduate. Of those, only 20% make it through without having to retake various phases.
For decades, completion of Ranger School has been the best indicator for determining which young men can handle the enormous responsibility of combat leadership
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Put 100 pounds on her back, don’t let her eat or sleep for a few days, and tell me how effective she is then.
That picture’s been around since a few months after it was taken.
In the environment they were in, they wouldn’t have been disarming anyone who could hold a gun.
Tell me again what movie it’s a still from.
1. She's freaking Airborne.
2. It is rumored that A-stan has one or two mountains.
3. I'm sure her fellow Soldiers carried her pack for her, the gentlemen that they are. Yeah, that's what happened.
4. The Military gives out Silver Stars with valor to every blond bimbo who lets her fellow Soldiers carry her pack.
I will put your post under the category Testosterone Idiocy. There i said it. ; )
From the article you cited, she was riding around in a Humvee.
Like I said, let me know how well she does humping a 100-lb pack around the mountains for a few days of no food or sleep.
If so, thank you for serving. You do know, you guys are the best.
I mean that from the bottom of my bimbo heart. ; )
Me?
Military?
Not currently.
In any event those planes do +9, -3 G's. You don't fly that full envelope. It's just what it's capable of and sometimes you almost get up there and do that.
Where did you find a model with a 50% bonus on G's?
It flies like a jet at speeds up to 271MPH, has a very light feel on the dual control sticks, can carry a tremendous amount of weight for its small size, and its ability to withstand aerobatic flight loads of +6/-3 Gs while maintaining a very low operating cost compared to jets.
http://www.skythrills.com/our-planes/marchetti.html
And how much would that cost? You don't seem to realize that training has a cost in time, resources, and money associated with it. Not to mention the males who may have passed that will not because they lost a slot to a woman who had no chance.
If one out of every 100,000 men under 6' tall could pass Ranger school, would you have a problem limiting Ranger school to 6' minimums? I wouldn't (and I'm under 6' tall). Because the cost of finding that one short guy who can will be waaaay more costly from weeding out the thousands who can't.
Besides, that really has nothing to do with it. Any society that allows its women to fight on the front lines when not faced with total destruction is a sick nation (morally, ethically, and spiritually). Period.
BTW, 100 lb packs are tough but not impossible. I always thought that keeping the pack on was easier that taking it off. Once it was on if felt pretty light. But then again, I didn't have a military pack. My civilian pack was designed to spread all the weight to shoulders and hips. I'm sure the Military Packs are designed to carry as much as can. Big difference. I also screwed up once. I forgot to tighten my left shoulder strap when I jumped from one boulder to another attempting to cross a white water creek. My buddy caught me as the pack almost pulled me into the water. Never forget to tighten the straps. NEVER!
I know I would not have passed Ranger School. I do not do well when I don't know what coming at me. Hello! That is where Rangers, Green Berets, SEALs, and Delta, etc. do superbly. Awesome guys.
That said, still doesn't mean an American Soldier should be disallowed from attending Ranger School. ; ) There I said it again.
Perhaps you and your feminist friends would like to pay for that failed experiment? Why should everyone else?
You don’t fly 9g’s all the time.Okay? You may pull them in a tight turn but when you start tunneling out you back off. What I said was the plane was capable of pulling +9g’s and - 3. They were or are still used as close support a/c in some SA countries. You look up the stats. But yes, you can pull up to +9gs - just hope your safety pilot is there and awake.
PS - no fuel in the tip tanks either.
You were yesterday. You will be tomorrow?
There are 85 pictures of that on the internet. A site call Wargames has it. http://www.wargameyau.net/index.php
To what extent should the average person be forced to financially involve themselves so foolishly?
The U.S. military is not a social experiment.
And what I said was the FAA certifies the plane you used to +6/-3. Do you expect me to believe the business you went to for your dogfighting regularly exceeds the FAA ratings by 50% and doesn't bend their machinery? Or is this another joke that I didn't pick up on?
This is from the business you said you went to:
Powerful, High-Performance Aircraft The SIAI Marchetti SF260 is a current production, Italian-built, fighter aircraft. It has a side-by-side seating arrangement, dual stick controls, 260 horsepower, can fly at 270 MPH, and is FAA certified to +6 / -3 G's.
http://www.incredible-adventures.com/air-combat.html
; )
Did anyone ever say to you, you are cute? If not, I will. You are cute.
Now back to business. What makes you think allowing an American Soldier to attend Ranger School should not be paid by the tax payer? According to the WSJ, 80% fail. Shouldn't the tax payer pay for those failures?
"Competition to attend the course is fierce, with about 4,000 men eligible to attend each year. Only about half graduate. Of those, only 20% make it through without having to retake various phases."
; )
Did anyone ever say to you, you are cute? If not, I will. You are cute.
Now back to business. What makes you think allowing an American Soldier to attend Ranger School should not be paid by the tax payer? According to the WSJ, 80% fail. Shouldn't the tax payer pay for those failures?
"Competition to attend the course is fierce, with about 4,000 men eligible to attend each year. Only about half graduate. Of those, only 20% make it through without having to retake various phases."
Not since the ‘70s.
You're a feminist, and all that implies.
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.