Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: markomalley

NONE OF THIS is necessary and NONE OF IT will enhance the ability of the armed forces to fight. This issue is being impelled by radical feminist activist politics and cultural marxism. Now we are being told that women are MORE suitable for recruitment for the armed forces than men. This ids the sort of propoganda that those in the cultural marxist homosexual activist movement employ when they imply that homosexual couples are more suitable to raise children than heterosexuals. Anything to achieve their objective of “fundamentally changing” important societal institutions.

This notion of placing women into combat roles is just so easy to refute. Many of you may have heard of a little dustup called World War II. At the peak of United States involvement in that war there were 12 ½ million personnel in uniform, many of them women. Over 400,000 personnel were killed in the line of duty, against the toughest battlefield enemies this country has ever had to face, ones that were capable of and often did inflict shattering BATTLEFIELD defeats upon our sea, land and air forces. Despite this no one saw any need to place women into combat roles that had the responsibility to directly close with, engage, and destroy the enemy..

Today with a much smaller and almost hand picked elite Armed Forces, and a population base that is more than twice as large as that during World War II, there is even less need for it now than then.

This entire idiocy is being propelled by the demand for selfish feminists to qualify for chairmanship of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, nothing more and nothing less than that.

This lunacy WILL weaken the ability of the Armed Forces to fight, just consider the logistical strain that it will place on the Armed Forces for separate housing and the like. The evidence of the disparity in physical suitabilities for combat MOS’s as reinforced by study after study is simply overwhelming. The effort that will be necessary to obtain a relative few qualified women will not result in anything remotely resembling any accepted model of effeciency, but since that is NOT the object any way, why worry about that? This is merely another sop to the perverted Cultural Marxist notion of fairness and equality and another step on the road of “fundamental transformation” of the vital institutions of this nation.


8 posted on 03/26/2013 6:49:17 PM PDT by DMZFrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: DMZFrank

BRING THE DRAFT....FOR MEN.

then let the military pick and choose.


12 posted on 03/26/2013 6:53:49 PM PDT by Recovering Ex-hippie (Go Galt!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: DMZFrank

“Elite Armed Forces”...are you kidding. In WWII the average NCAA athlete ended up in uniform as did the average graduate of Tulane or BU or Stanford. It would be a novelty now to see any more than a handful of able bodied me from these institutions (or any others like them) to serve in any capacity in the military. Last time I heard statistics even the Citadel, Norwich and VMI had paltry rates of guys going into the military...well under 30%...what a disgrace.


20 posted on 03/26/2013 7:09:40 PM PDT by MSF BU (n)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: DMZFrank

Good points - all of them.


28 posted on 03/26/2013 8:00:28 PM PDT by Last Dakotan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

To: DMZFrank

That’s the purpose. It’s designed to destroy the US military.


34 posted on 03/27/2013 12:22:35 AM PDT by Eagles6 (Valley Forge Redux)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson