Posted on 06/28/2004 6:33:18 PM PDT by wagglebee
How could what happen? Mean girls? Are they still crying about the panties? This is soooo played.
"I can only imagine how much worse it will get if Hitlery ever becomes POTUS."
According to bjclinton, Hillry was co-president, we got two for the price of one and what a price that has been.
Now not much of the babel of Clinton speaks to the military. Probably because the first act as president he set in motion the "gays" in the military. Now which one of the two co-presidents fits that description.
Why of all committees would Armed Services Committee be the one Hillry gets herself upon?
Everything about these two seems to be obsessed about "sex" and making it one and the same as a "spiritual" status.
An except from a retirement letter I sent to a close friend with many starts. This letter was writtene xplaining why I decided to retire and in this letter I disucssed many issues and concerns.
EXCERPT BEGINS:
. . .
There seems to be a lack of strong military leadership to stand up against the trend towards de-militarizing the military. The often mocked "macho" chest-thumping behavior is warrior behavior. At all times, in print media, TV news, popular shows, schools and even in the squadron we see strong, manly behavior mocked, scorned and subverted in favor of politically correct feminized traits. This is a complex issue that challenges even the best sociologists and beyond my meager ability to articulate. Nonetheless, it is wrong, morally wrong to sacrifice the development of warrior skills and ethos in favor of short-term politically correct agendas. My own experience in war, on the ground, highlight the fact that it is bloody, violent and draws out the primal instincts of the hunter. Therefore, the front lines of war are no place for women. Look, I have seen women in warrior roles and, almost without exception, these women soon affect forced manly mannerisms. Why? Social pressure? Perhaps. But more likely is the acceptance that macho behavior is warrior behavior--aggressive, competitive, combative and necessary to win in a life and death struggle. This is not "natural" behavior for a woman, it is unnatural.
If one believes in evolution, warrior behavior developed as a result of millions of years of genetic conditioning, it can not be legislated by fiat. As Harry Summers said a few years back when we discussed this subject, "The train has left the station" on this subject. He was implying the debate was over. Maybe, but as I look at it, the train may have left the station but that doesn't mean it's on the right track and I am definitely on the wrong train.
...
EXCERPT ENDS
Superb column, Elaine Donnelly! And keep on banging the drum!
Except = excerpt
starts = stars
writtene = written
xplaining = explaining
Bad night. (Root canal today. On drugs.)
My question is:
Do any other countries have co-ed military?
Do similar problems exist? Have solutions been found that we could learn from?
I really don't think male soldiers can be "desensitized" to real or threatened violence against women soldiers. It's against human nature. And there is no way on earth that the public could be likewise desensitized. Hence the sensationalism around the Jessica Lynch saga.
Israel has a co-ed military, and I don't believe they have the problems we do, which I think is partially due to the religious atmosphere among (most) Israelis.
True, but they have only one religion, judaism. We have several including, unfortunately, Islam. The problem is distraction and diminished unity. It is a negative byproduct of diversity.
The problem is women dont belong in the military in a combat role. Thats it plain and simple. All the BS articles the PC crap , the equal rights of women, dont change the basic fact women dont belong in Combat.
Concur.
Gunny, modern intellectuals don't believe in nature, unlerss they are attempting to defend something like homosexuality. THAT, to them is "natrual," ie.e inborn. But differences between the sexes? Somehow, no, even though the differences between men and women is obvious to the casual observer. Confused? Join the crowd.
They need to quit their hand wringing and start looking at the people being beheaded around the world. So some of Saddam's guys had dog collars and leashes put on them and were disrespected by the evil gender they despise so much, it's nothing compared with what they would do to prisoners.
In 1998 the House passed legislation to end co-ed basic training
It's not a social experiment.
Elaine (who is really good people and really concerned about an effective military) is being a little too kind to the memory of PFC Winchell. Winchell's "girl" friend was a full time drag queen with an Adam's apple and a man's voice. The liberal press played up this "bereaved lover" while playing down some of the person's circus-freak characteristics, but if you read enough of the righteous braying about poor, sensitive Winchell beaten up by those unthivalized thavages, you'll be able to fill in the blanks.
Mind you, Winchell could have given you change for a $9 bill (all in threes) but that did not justify murdering him. (Throwing him out, yes, killing him, no). The command, hypersensitive to Clinton Era accusations of "persecuting" homosexuals, had refused to act on the troops' unhappiness with a barracks mate that was willing to take the "mate" part literally. They were told that Winchell would have to be caught in a gay sex act in the barracks before the command would move to dismiss him. Winchell was smart enough to do his buggery elsewhere. Unfortunately, with a commander who would not follow regulations, poor Winchell became the victim of drunken vigilantes.
The Army landed on the murderers with both feet (as it should have done) but that CO should have gotten an OER that stank like a billy goat carcass... and I bet he didn't. The whole incident was an inexcusable failure of leadership.
d.o.l.
Criminal Number 18F
Aw Jay Leno pointed out after this "scandal" broke,
"There are men here who will PAY five hundred dollars for a woman to do that to them!"
So, why is the media still stirring this old s#!t?
Virtually every nation has a co-ed military when you consider the role women fulfill in administrative, logistical, and medical assignments. The problem isn't women in the military; the problem is women in combat. And I have yet to find a single historical precedence where a military has successfully fielded women in combat.
As for the Israeli combat women, that is a myth spread by people with a political agenda (feminists and anti-military activists). There are many articles written about the true history and role of women in the Israeli military; here is a link to one published on a US Air Force Web site: The Israeli Fighting Women: Myth and Facts
I served in the military both pre- and post-women in combat. I can tell you from first-hand experience that women in combatant units is a disaster. There are many official studies and reports--as well as personal accounts--about the problems, disadvantages, and dangers of women in combatant units, but all the information gets buried and ignored.
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.