OohRah!
GOOD.
Every branch of the military, whether homosexuals, cross dressers, or women should have been left up to the branch’s.
Instead the divider in chief has been replacing Generals who are yes men and women for his agenda.
Good. I agree with the Marine Corp.
sharing part of a post from an earlier thread regarding a career soldier leaving because his men could not carry their weapons on Federal property...
“On another note; a former Army officer told me over 20 yrs. ago that when they got a “bug out” signal, the women in his outfit did not have the upper body to load the heavy equipment onto the trucks. So, their outfit just didn’t bug out - which in real combat would be a tragedy if attacked.
16 posted on 9/17/2015, 11:49:04 AM by Twinkie (John 3:16)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3337908/posts
Nope. Hire the ladies. Draft ‘em if you have to. Demand a quota that they must meet or be drafted.
Or for Muslim lands form some all women units to scare the hell out of those wishing to die with their 72 virgins but then fear a bad death.
The tragedy of women in combat provides another reason I now always council men to never enter the armed forces. Social engineering that amalgamates GLBT acolytes and feminist aspirants everywhere has now become the over arching imperative to which all operational capabilities must submit.
Combat operations entail applying and enduring unimaginable brutality until victory. Therefore, only the highest physical abilities and most severe restrictions on human emotions and behaviors can foster the required high morale, good order and discipline, and unit cohesion required. Human sexuality simply cannot intrude into this one dimensional world where only those displaying the greatest savagely can hope to win. Resorting to war for national defense entails the ultimate Olympics, so there is much less excuse for merging men and women into this environment than exists for the athletic competitions every four years.
Combat forms personnel into small, rigid, task oriented units. These people continuously face extraordinary stress punctuated by killing other humans. At the point of collision, men face environments requiring extraordinary physical capabilities and unbelievably demanding sacrificial, primitive and intimate relations. Such environments are inherently chaotic and brittle. They can be overcome only by a totalitarian leadership and narrow focus unimaginable for those who see any opportunity for social engineering.
The regimental combat teams for infantry, mechanized and armored units are now the playthings of bureaucrats committed to equal opportunity, and dismissive of the warriors enduring the brutal carnage imperative for victory. Institutional memories no longer exist for fighting ferocious, shrewd enemies such as the Germans, Japanese, Chinese, and North Vietnamese, who utilized a full array of modern weapons. If one notes the ribbons on any senior officer’s uniform, they show they fought the Arabs the Israelis beat three times at 20 to 1 odds, and never fought the enemies mentioned. Such people now question the necessity of high standards which already allow inferior female performance.
Women not only do not belong at the pointy end of the spear, but should not be holding it to the extent the infantry must depend on their savagery. There is no reason to depart from the writings of Rudyard Kipling and George Orwell that can be synthesized into the quote, “Men sleep peacefully in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.”
Navy brass treating Marines like crap,mwho would have thought?
When I see the words “close combat” and “women” in the same sentence, the first thing that comes to my mind is ... marriage.