Replies

Delusional? No. I'm experienced. I served in the Navy almost all my adult life, active duty and reserve. I had the occasion to serve with women, command women, and be commanded by women. And I'd stack just about every one of them up against someone like you who hides behind his wife and kids and criticizes those who serve in his stead.

Look, let's cut through the anecdotal stuff and the personal insults. Answer this one question: If every woman in the US armed services was replaced by a man, would the military be stronger or weaker? Conversely, if every man in the armed services was replaced by a woman, would the military be stronger or weaker?

It takes a special person to serve in the military, a sense of dedication and duty that I've never found among those who couldn't be bothered to serve.

I don't disagree. I have profound respect for those who server honorably in the military. But to put service in the military above motherhood (or fatherhood) when it comes to the nobility of the calling is just incorrect. Without mothers, fathers, and intact families, the number of individuals willing to become soldiers, sailors, marines, etc. would dwindle. Indeed, it is dwindling.

My question for you is this: if you disdain those of us who didn't serve so much (the vast majority of your fellow countrymen, btw), then what exactly was your reason for serving? To protect a bunch of worthless cowards?

Sure I see the difference between men and women. But more importantly I see the difference between those who serve and you.

Yes, I'm detestable because I didn't serve and I think that single mothers should not be allowed to enlist. Got it.

Look, I know you all have had a rough time when it comes to critcism from every quarter--most of it undeserved. But the day civilians can't criticize the military fairly when necessary (eg. a case like this) will be a very scary day indeed.

If every woman in the US armed services was replaced by a man, would the military be stronger or weaker? Conversely, if every man in the armed services was replaced by a woman, would the military be stronger or weaker?

I don't think you can answer that with a simple yes and no. The answer to both questions depends on the quality of the people you've banned from serving, and has to be that the military would be stronger in some areas and weaker in others.

I don't disagree. I have profound respect for those who server honorably in the military. But to put service in the military above motherhood (or fatherhood) when it comes to the nobility of the calling is just incorrect. Without mothers, fathers, and intact families, the number of individuals willing to become soldiers, sailors, marines, etc. would dwindle. Indeed, it is dwindling.

Hence the need to take advantage of all those who do choose to serve, regardless of gender, regadless of whether they are a parent or not. If women want to serve and can serve then let them serve.

My question for you is this: if you disdain those of us who didn't serve so much (the vast majority of your fellow countrymen, btw), then what exactly was your reason for serving? To protect a bunch of worthless cowards?

No. To protect your right to choose to be a worthless coward.