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

To: P-Marlowe; Venturer

There has never been any military position opened to females that held females to the same physical standards as males. The recent push to bring females into the combat arms is not driven by a desire to prove the ladies have finally arrived in terms of physical strength. It is being done because all of the highest positions in the military always go to combat specialties....infantry, artillery, aviation, special operations, etc.

In order to have a 4-star chief of staff of the Army who is female, they have to let females in those combat specialties. Since females can’t meet the physical standards, they will change them again. Then they will try to avoid females in actual assignments that would prove their inability to keep up physically. They will be assigned to staff jobs, headquarters companies, etc., or their equivalents.

Some of them will be pre-selected at about the rank of major to receive a star. One of those will be pre-selected to be a 4-star. She will also become a Chief.

That is how they’ve done it in every other field opened to females. That is how they’ll do it here.

My sense is that NO young lady will EVER see a real Seal mission, except, perhaps, one specifically tailored for her....but, she will eventually be put in charge of that which she could not do. That favoritism will injure morale.


18 posted on 12/28/2013 8:22:35 AM PST by xzins ( Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: xzins

Excellent explanation.


21 posted on 12/28/2013 8:25:28 AM PST by Venturer (Half Staff the Flag of the US for Terrorists.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: xzins
My sense is that NO young lady will EVER see a real Seal mission, except, perhaps, one specifically tailored for her....but, she will eventually be put in charge of that which she could not do. That favoritism will injure morale.

But...but...but Demi Moore did it!/sarc

29 posted on 12/28/2013 8:58:55 AM PST by Don Corleone ("Oil the gun..eat the cannoli. Take it to the Mattress.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: xzins

Rather than weakening the combat ranks, women could go the administrative route to becoming a general or other high ranking officer. Eisenhower never saw combat, but his administrative and strategic skills got him to the highest level of military service.

IOW, IF women want to be generals, they need to serve in the positions for which they are most qualified and prove themselves worthy of command. They are not qualified to man an artillery barrage. They call it “manning” for a reason.


38 posted on 12/28/2013 9:17:17 AM PST by P-Marlowe (There can be no Victory without a fight and no battle without wounds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

To: xzins
My sense is that NO young lady will EVER see a real Seal mission, except, perhaps, one specifically tailored for her....but, she will eventually be put in charge of that which she could not do.

One brutal approach: let a whole bunch of women through the training, put them all on the same group, and send them all on a real SEAL mission. If any survive the mission, and the mission is a success, then they get to call themselves SEALs.

51 posted on 12/28/2013 12:49:20 PM PST by SauronOfMordor (Socialists want YOUR wealth redistributed, never THEIRS!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | 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