Posted on 01/24/2013 6:34:43 PM PST by Nachum
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta said Thursday that whether they are male or female "everyone is entitled to a chance" to become a combat soldier in a military that will now adopt "gender netural" standards. “If members of our military can meet the qualifications for a job--and let me be clear, we’re not talking about reducing the qualifications for a job--if they can meet the qualifications for the job then they should have the right to serve,” Panetta said at a Pentagon press conference. The Defense Department announced today that it would rescind its 1994 policy restricting women
(Excerpt) Read more at cnsnews.com ...
When someone is holding a gun to her head, it won't make any difference how big a pack she could carry.
Besides the obvious differences in physical capabilities and the issues of sexual relationships in a unit, just as important is the logistical chain. Women and men are different and have different needs (as if that wasn't obvious to everyone except liberals). The chain is going to be longer and more complicated.
Think of how that logistical chain would have worked out at the Chosin Reservoir had there been a 50-50 mix of men and women, when every single plane or truck carrying supplies was just not enough and they had to make do with what they had. No room for tampons or pads. Granted, a woman under stress in combat may have her menstrual period delayed or stunted, but lest anyone think that is not a factor in anything, one only has to imagine a situation where there are nothing more than torn up fatigues or rags to use to deal with a menstruation. Guys sometimes have to deal with things like crotch rot, which can be a real issue when a forced march has to take place. Imagine how it would be marching in an environment where your pants are caked in the crotch with dried/sticky blood.
And that is just one facet. This is a bad idea, and when things go bad, the people who pushed this the hardest are going to blame everything and everyone else. They will scream the loudest and longest.
Think East German Women’s Weight lifting Team circa 1968. Are those women really going to be sexually assaulted? By who?
Yup. He definitely has the experience in the corruption and big government departments as well as in pushing the communist agenda.
I can remember when we fought these communist bastards on the battlefield. Now we have them running our government (and running America into the ground).
East German Mens Weight lifting Team
This is really stupid, the percent of the female population that can hump 80-100 pound packs over rugged terrain is so small as to be insignificant. This whole thing is preposterous. The World has gone insane....You know the physical standards will be changed...
Coincidentally, I searched that today and couldn't find mention of it.
No, its not our culture. Our culture is already dead.
You’re a snake, Panetta. You’ve allowed this Marxist president to castrate, feminize, and demoralize our armed forces. Now I have to hear about WOMEN being captured, raped, brutalized, tortured, decapitated etc.? What a joke. A sick joke. Blood is on your hands, you slime. This will not be forgotten, and your name will go down in history as the worst defense secretary this country has ever seen.
It is a HUMAN tradition and practice not to put women on the front line. It’s not American. It’s not even Western. It’s HUMAN. No successful military in civilized history has sent women to die in the horrific conditions of the front line where only men belong. The only good examples are countries who train women for combat for the defense of the nation, because they don’t have a choice (Israel).
I could complain about all the problems that will arise from this: women’s body differences compared to men, how they could make male soldiers act in a combat situation, rape... but I don’t have to. These things are secondary. First and foremost, you do not recognize women as having the same options as men when it comes to combat, because you then have to recognize responsibility. Women will then be drafted. Daughters dragged away to the darkest holes on Earth to fight savages like the Muslims, to be shot up, taken hostage, have their fingers cut off. It is against all that is decent. It goes against every male instinct. Women serve as patriots in wars, as support personnel, medics, and drivers, but when it comes to going into battle in the old tradition, men shoulder that responsibility in the same spirit that we see women and children safely off sinking ships before thinking of our own lives.
If this goes through without the opposition rising up, we have not only lost another piece of traditional America, we have lost a piece of our humanity, and the results will be too horrific to contemplate, all on the head of this inept swine.
Now we have females integrated into combat units, and soon the army Rangers and the navy SEALS....because we've "evolved" and anyway it's a matter of Fairness.
Now in all the arguing for this new policy (well in the day and 1/2 discussion about it) has ANYONE mentioned how this brave new military's combat readiness and efficiency is being enhanced by these new 0bama policies???? Because I sure haven't.
No misunderstanding at all. I was just springboarding off your comment. Women can be plenty tough. Pioneer and farm women stood up plenty of times while their man was away. Don’t threaten a real woman who is charged with protecting children- she will put herself between them and harm and fight to the death.
But, I believe we don’t put women in that position unless there are no options.
I agree. Males, even ones that are short or slight of build, have the bone structure and innate musculature that can be trained up and built up to do it, women simply don’t. Putting women through the same physical regimens as men in training results in a far higher risk of injury to the lower extremities, that has been amply demonstrated.
It is crazy. But to point out this reality as the paragraph above does is sure to make some people think you don’t respect women or what they ARE capable of.
I’d just be preaching to the Choir over here at FR.
Not following this news story closely, but in talking to a female coworker which was stationed in Barstow during Vietnam, she said everyone on the base, because they were in a support position, was getting combat pay... except the women.
I believe this news with this women in the trenches first glance is merely equalizing pay for people that all don’t deserve combat pay in the first place.
An except is made for muslim females. You can bet on it.
Heh, I missed that post.
Granted, some guys LIKE a woman with facial hair...but we know that won’t make any difference.
The sickos who would rape an 80 year-old woman aren’t going to be deterred by musculature, man hands, facial hair or an adams apple.
And the average female recruit will reflect East German Women’s Weight lifting Team? LOL! If so, recruit them and put them on the front lines.
So now we have a Constitutional right to be in the military?
“Forget preggers and periods...how will they *go* in a bottle, while stuffed into a van, en route to the combat zone?”
Got it taken care of! I just invented and patented the “Strap On Pecker”, SOP for short. Now, the ladies can let it all hang out with the guys!
Conscientious objectors would ordinarily still be required to serve in non-combat roles, under the US code.
I’d have a serious problem with shrouded “women” scurrying around the back lines.
Too many “women” intercepted planting IED’s at night were found to have beards when the sun came up.
Christian men don’t hide behind women and children, let alone fight or bomb disguised as such.
Just a thing we have, I guess...
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.