I agree
Posted on 12/03/2015 2:02:50 PM PST by Kegger
After long periods of study and vigorous debate over the idea of women on the front lines in battle, Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced today that he was tossing the entire issue out the window and that the United States military would be opening all combat roles to women at the beginning of the year.
Does that include registering for the draft?
That is a great quote & never more true than when we look at Washington DC politicians, or state & local politicians, or the entire judicial system. The political class will now always choose the worst possible decision or outcome. Common sense decisions or judgments are no longer common. God help us!
as the least effective troops, the gals will be put on point to draw fire.
after there are 100 or so killed, volunteering of women will dry up and the situation will revert to the present
I am sure there are quite a few men who given the option would have opted out of combat. According to this QA, women would not have that option.
Fine.
Women will register for the draft.
Women who enter the military will be assigned to AFSC/MOS without regard to gender and have no option to opt out once assigned.
Women live and perform under the same rules and regulations as men.
Women who become pregnant after being notified of deployment or while on deployment will be charged with malingering.
No special privileges, squat and drop in the privy hole you dig for yourself.
More than a ratio of total women vs men, the PC crowd will take a keen interest in parity in higher positions. So any female that shows ability will be fast tracked to promotion. The percentage of female company commanders will end up higher than the percentage of total females in the unit for example.
I also predict a gap in the chain of command. I just don’t think a lot of women will stay in the infantry, so it will be a revolving door of privates coming and going. But there will be female officers, and gender politics being what they are, they will end up taking an interest in the day to day lives of the privates - since there will be few to none female nco’s. This is all fairly disruptive.
But I really just can’t imagine a tank unit at 50% female for example. In a very literal sense, somebody has to do the heavy lifting...so its just physically impossible to have more than a small percentage of the unit as women. As an example, I have witnessed women (fellow cadets) try to load a tank round. The heavy ones weigh around 40 lbs, and you have to do it very quickly. For the vast majority of men, its downright easy. But for the women, it was a herculean task. They would take 4-5 times as long to do it. A small example - but that means that (unless an unusually strong woman joins the unit), all the Loader jobs will be closed to women by default. That’s 25% of the unit right there. And there’s a lot more examples where that came from. I’d predict one or two tanks in a platoon would have a woman, likely a driver. So 1 or 2 out of 16.
Oh hell, this is Hillary’s big chance. She wanted to be in the Corps, so now it’s on.
Come on Hill, get in there and hump.
And how many men will die that shouldn’t trying to rescue a woman that is on the front lines????
Many. Unless, that is, men wise up and let the feminists have what they’ve always said they want; equality.
Please...please do not hold your breath waiting for Buraq Hussein Obama to encourage his daughters to join our military. If anything, he is more likely to encourage them to join ISIS.
Carter’s attachment to an ideology fueled by arrogance and premeditated ignorance does not constitute a long period of study and vigorous debates. This tragedy of women in combat provides another reason I now always council men to never enter the armed forces. Social engineering that amalgamates GLBT acolytes and feminist aspirants everywhere has now become the over arching imperative to which all operational capabilities must submit.
Combat operations entail applying and enduring unimaginable brutality until victory. Therefore, only the highest physical abilities and most severe restrictions on human emotions and behaviors can foster the required high morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion required. Human sexuality simply cannot intrude into this one dimensional world where only those displaying the greatest savagely can hope to win. Resorting to war for national defense entails the ultimate Olympics, so there is much less excuse for merging men and women into this environment than exists for the athletic competitions every four years.
Combat forms personnel into small, rigid, task oriented units. These people continuously face extraordinary stress punctuated by killing other humans. At the point of collision, they face environments requiring extraordinary physical capabilities and unbelievably demanding sacrificial, primitive and intimate relations. Such environments are inherently chaotic and brittle. They can be overcome only by a totalitarian leadership and narrow focus unimaginable for those who see any opportunity for social engineering.
The regimental combat teams for infantry, mechanized and armored units are now the playthings of bureaucrats committed to equal opportunity, and dismissive of warriors enduring the brutal carnage imperative for victory. Institutional memories no longer exist for fighting ferocious, shrewd enemies such as the Germans, Japanese, Chinese, and North Vietnamese, who utilized a full array of modern weapons. If one notes the ribbons on any senior officer’s uniform, they show they fought Arabs the Israelis beat three times at 20 to 1 odds, and never fought the enemies mentioned. Such people now question the necessity of high standards which already allow inferior female performance.
Women not only do not belong at the pointy end of the spear, but should not be holding it to the extent the infantry must depend on their savagery. There is no reason to depart from the writings of Rudyard Kipling and George Orwell that can be synthesized into the quote, “Men sleep peacefully in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.â€
General Martin E. Dempsey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Dempsey
Notice from the ribbons on his uniform that General Dempsey, never fought the enemies mentioned, and now questions the necessity of current high standards which already allow inferior female performance?
Gen. Dempsey: If Women Can’t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask ‘Does It Really Have to Be That High?’
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gen-dempsey-if-women-can-t-meet-military-standard-pentagon-will-ask-does-it-really-have
Coed Combat Units - A bad idea on all counts
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/coed-combat-units_697822.html
You’re In the New Army Now
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/01/youre-in-new-army-now.html
In terms of marksmanship a reasonable comparison could occur after folks humped it through the brush for a few days with constant rain so they couldn’t sleep at night. It would also help if they stayed out long enough for some critters and plants to begin eating at their privates.
Sometimes two words and a picture doesn’t get your message across. This one could go either way.
Thank you.
Of course they can use one of these.
Smart rifle means hunters never miss
Those that remember Patsy will understand, those that don't can just remain perplexed.
I think they should wear burkas. It’s only right you know.
I really don’t agree with women in combat at all.
OK then. I no longer see any reason that 18 year old girls shouldn’t be required to register for the draft. Women can do anything men can do after all. We’re all for equal rights aren’t we?
Hello? Feminists... Hello?
Great pic!
Perfect illustration!
Thank you!
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.