They blame an unknown General for giving the order, but does anyone not think the order came directly from the white house?
Pingy.
Of course it was fixed. It was the equivalent of throwing spaghetti against the wall, eventually something will stick.
If you run hand-picked, selected women at the program, eventually you will find someone who can pass in some fashion.
Ahh just go ahead and let those female Rangers go out onto the battlefield. No special assistance, coddling or female protectionism. Lets see what happens. I’m pretty sure I know but let nature make her point.
The claim of Maj. Gen. Scott Miller has become extremely dubious, especially since he now refuses to discuss specific details which might refute what he said.
Miller is starting to look like a demonicrat.
The input I got third hand was that a Senior NCO at the Camp stated the entire unit those 2 women were in, got more rest and food than any other unit before.
My conjecture was, “ya...30 minutes more rest and 500 calories more food each day would make a big difference”.
> They blame an unknown General for giving the order, but does anyone not think the order came directly from the white house?
ISIS would love it if all Navy Seals and Army Rangers were women. So would Obozo.
Maj Gen. Scott Miller is a disgrace to his uniform.
This whole vagina worship thing is getting on my nerves. Women on military front lines. Fire fighters. Hillary. Carly. Affirmative Action - glass ceiling. Enough already!
It is not the ‘course standards’ that are being changed.
I notice that nicely parsed Clintonian response. Why not just hand your Ranger patch back and your balls to because obviously those in charge would rather have power than integrity
And I would say only about 50% of the men that finish Ranger school would pass SEAL “Hell Week”, if that much..
And what moron doesn’t know this was BS!!!
One only needs to understand one truth...If your son’s life is at stake who would you pick to save him?????
Here is another tid bit.
The all male latrines to service 200 males was cut in half to service a dozen female Ranger students. Personal hygiene time is short and precious and you can get negative spot reports if not properly done (like shaving). So the males suffered and all were not treated equal.
Additionally - the cat hole in the patrol base now had a curtain. Because that is tactical.
This will end just as badly as the first female navy fighter pilot did, dead at the bottom of the ocean. That performance was so bad that dod has since removed the video. The positive note was that the navigator was smart enough to punch out and survived the stupid ordeal. I just hope that whomever goes on missions with these sub standard GI’s are situational aware enough to not die attempting to make up for their weakness.
If even half of this is true, just “wow”. And...this breaks in People magazine? Wow again...
regards,
On several of the Free Republic discussions on this drama, I described this as the "Weekend at Bernies" scenario. The Army was going to figure how to achieve the "mission" (graduate a female) one way or another. That's what they do. 100 female soldiers were hand selected into a one year intensive training events designed to produce a female graduate. In the end, 2 women out of 100, 2% of a very select group succeeded and only through extraordinary effort by the women and by many, many other soldiers including leaders who could influence the outcome.
The Army considers this as a mission success. I consider the results as clear evidence that the traditional wisdom that women do not belong in the ground gaining combat arms is correct. A success rate of 2% is proof of the pudding and only served to meet political and media results.
The danger of all of this is that the next steps will be the systematic revisions in existing standards so that the success rate will be at least an order of magnitude better than this first experience. This will happen, it has occurred everywhere in the services that have been opened to women. Some of these changes were made without a reduction in combat capability. But, in other cases our combat capability was reduced. This change will fit into the latter scenario.
If women should be in front line warfare, somewhere in entire recorded history there should be an example of an all female army overwhelming inferior male forces.
Active Duty ping.
Why should the Army bother to lie about this?
The Army should have put names of women in a jar who wanted to be Rangers and picked one name. That woman could be called ‘Ranger’ - or better ‘Ranger of the Year’... or maybe ‘Goddess of Unicorn Land”...
Why the hell go half way?