“...TV has nothing to do with me. I trained troops in the military for over 25 years for fitness and combat capacity. I know the needs and the difference...But that is one of the major concerns for the entry of women ...There is no substitute for the physical ability to run a mile for escape with a full pack and weapons. Not all men can do it...what the public is up in arms about with the drafting of people that can’t handle the job they are put into...has been drafted so no one has been placed in a career field they can’t handle...yet...” [whitney69, post 39]
There’s no substitute for physical strength and hardihood, only if you believe masses of foot troops are the answer to everything. They are not. Without all the other specialties and branches to support them, they are nearly helpless.
I do share your concerns about the military establishment’s ability to determine an individual’s potential and then train accordingly, so that they may contribute optimally to the overall mission. But failure to do all that is a problem all across all armed services. Drafting only men and limiting recruitment of women won’t remedy that.
Not sure where television enters into it but I cannot say that it influenced my outlook much either.
I spent just over 24-1/2 years on active duty in USAF, more than half of it in operational testing and force assessment, part of it in Joint billets. The organizations to which I was assigned crossed all service dept lines and touched on nearly every occupational specialty; among other tasks, we assisted training specialists in standards development and had a hand in rewriting doctrine. Creating more effective forces, developing better systems for them, and figuring out ways to employ all of it better is process that never ends.
“We urge those who value the core values which our Armed Forces defend to contact their U.S. senators NOW and urge them to have removed any provision requiring females to register.”
You and I, playing the game for a big part of our lives, understand the thinking going into this and understand that a lot of people, male and female, are going to get cut and they will be either palace balance, allowed to, or forced to, cross over into another career field that might be open, or processed. I remember when they were really interested in closing bases and when they closed Mather, they had two lines after the initial walk in: One to agree with the choice they made for you to PCS, or the line that processed you out and you’d be on the street by close of business if single airmen or just as soon as you get packed if with dependents.
If they toss combat career fields into the works, and government loves to play the diversity game, the same thing will happen. Palace balance, an open (or deal made) career field, or the street. They won’t make it through basic and they will be right where they started and uncle sugar says well we tried. Feds are bailed, incoming numbers are padded, and then the process starts to do the same thing when the physical aptitude fails. It’s the same thing, just a little more expensive at the git go and the slots will remain empty. I don’t trust them any more than I can throw them.
wy69