Posted on 01/25/2013 7:15:27 AM PST by NKP_Vet
The first line of attack in political battles is language. Getting people to phrase things your way is the first step to getting them to think your way.
In the foggy mess of the debate over women in combat, you will see media references to a “ban” being “lifted.”
Bans are bad. Lifting bans is good. Therein lies the bias strangling this issue in the dominant media culture.
Am I “banned” from the women’s restrooms at work? No, I’m just not supposed to be in there, so that word doesn’t come up. The left has commandeered combat as a rhetorical battlefield, where excluding women is as vile as denying them the right to vote.
Just as allowing gays in the military has become a litmus test for human decency, the argument for women in combat focuses on their self-interest before the nation’s.
We see the same examples of noble service, as if they outweigh the arguments against. We hear scolding references to opponents stuck in some bygone era, steeped in bigotry. We hear no evidence of how this helps us win wars, which is the military’s actual job.
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Just ask yourself this: You are a General and get to choose one of two armies to fight. The first enemy army that you could choose to oppose had an all male army, or you could instead choose to fight the second enemy army that was mixed fag, women and men. Which army would you choose to fight?
I wasn’t looking at the threat to society the same as you. I was thinking more like our society falling apart due to some moral reason/threat, not physically being threatened.
Or a reason why they would destroy our reserve currency status by abusing the ability to print money? Or compromise the deterrent effectiveness of having stockpiles of nuclear weapons by unilaterally disarming?
Yes, there are reasons...
“but how is society threatened by this?”
Taking the essential element of civilization, the young women,, the critical nucleus of it’s young families, and sending them at that innocent age into the mind shattering experience of infantry combat. Yeah,, sounds like a great way to build a better society. And when a draft kicks in, they will do what it takes to avoid the draft, thats get knocked up FAST.
So we will create a generation of very young single moms.
But yeah,, lets take our daughters, fill them with dread, force them to do something against the essential nature of the majority of them who grew up singing in the choir and watching romantic movies at slumber parties. Lets give them them the ultimate nightmare, and call it a right.
Yeah, can’t see how that could EVER harm society.
Only sci-fi movie fans think women will be as effective as a man in combat anyway.
Tell me one ‘principle’ liberal elites fight for ... there are none beyond their own power and glorification. Hell, these people are giving fighter jets to the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. If that's not evil, nothing is...
Because when they should be keeping the flame of civility alive, and making a society worth living in, starting families, giving mind shattered veterans some hope of normalcy to return to, they will instead be filling the male role of combat.
They will be stripped of their true role which is deeply critical to us all.
It’s immoral.
Ask any old guy who was in combat, how important it was to find a sane woman when they came home.
It’s immoral, and it’s like the old Harley ad, “if you have to ask, i probably can’t explain it to you”.
I fail to see how putting females on the front line of a battlefield could somehow change the dynamics of war to our favor.
“We are five days away from fundamentally changing America...” were the words spoken by Obama in 2008. Those desperately seeking the hope and change he promised gave little thought to what those words truly meant.
What we are seeing happen to our military is all part of that bastards corrupt and treasonist plan for America, his dream...... his America.
I love women, I’ve been married to one for over 40 years. ;>)
Anyone wanting to see just how tough, relentless, deadly and focussed for battle a woman can be.... divorce one. But, we don’t NEED them on the battle field.
I don’t see how this is good for women. It may be good for a few ambitious female officers who want to move up the ranks and be on the Joint Chiefs. Any captured female soldier is going to be raped. It’s a gimme. Yes, male soldiers can be raped, too, especially if you got homosexuals in the ranks. It’s ironic that a few months ago democrats were outraged by the supposedly republican war on women. For weeks the only word coming out of the jackass’s mouth was rape, rape, rape, and how terrible the Republicans were for being so insensitive. Phony, sick, jackass perverts.
Putting aside how it destroys the human balance and society, have you forgotten what happens if America loses a major war?
Have you come to think that wars are like a sporting event between the respective "military" forces and then they both return to their respective homes with society still intact?
If America loses a major war, then we become whatever the conquerors remake us into.
Another way to look at this is Obama wants to cripple the military even further. Enlistment is already sufffering over queers openly serving. Now that a young 18 year old girl knows that she stands the chance of being in the infantry, and expected to perform exactly like a man twice her size, look for not too many females to enlist. Women are women. Most like to be treated like women. They are nurturers, they are not wired to be in the killing fields. It’s hard enough for a man to get used to shooting at someone and someone shooting at him. Real combat is hell on earth. It’s scary. It changes you for the rest of your life. It has destroyed many fine men and I am not talking about the one that were killed. It’s not fun. Then you have the dykes. Dykes will make up the majority of the female force. I am beginning to think that was the plan from the beginning. Destroy the fighting capability of the military, then we are all speaking Chinese in the next 20 or so years.
Of course I haven’t come to think that.
I don’t think we would lose a war whether there are females in combat or not.
They’re already talking about lowering standards. It’s a race to the bottom now. Instead of the best fighting force, it will be the fighting force of the lowest common denominator. That’s collectivism in a nutshell. Teamwork is important in the military and a group is no stronger than it’s weakest link. Yes it will demoralize our troops and make our military weaker.
Good Lord, I don't think that military issues are a strong area for 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.