The Case Against Women in Combat [Isaiah 3]

Weird Republic ^ | 3/15/2011 | Thomas Clough

[Jan_Sobieski]

Imagine your seventeen-year-old daughter fighting for her life in hand-to-hand combat with battle-hardened enemy soldiers. How long would she survive? Two minutes? One minute? There is a resurgent movement to push female military personnel into ever more intimate contact with hostile forces. The few arguments mustered in support of doing this focus narrowly on manpower issues or misplaced feminist vanity. In all the literature on this subject that I have collected over several years, not once have I found a proponent of women in combat who would speak honestly about the consequences of thrusting our daughters into man-against-woman festivals of death.

The vapid bravado of chair-bound bean-counting feminists was captured by Anne Applebaum in her Washington Post op-ed where she declared that "the argument about women in combat is over," because two female sailors were killed in the bombing of the USS Cole and women are deployed in Iraq. Ms. Applebaum is content that "American civilization has not collapsed as a result." In an editorial titled "The Pinking of the Armed Forces," the New York Times lamented that the United States "is simply a laggard on the topic of women in combat."

Right away we have a false argument: that because some women were the passive victims of enemy ordinance, therefore women are "in combat." A mortar shell landing on a mess hall is not what any normal person means by combat...

[Jan_Sobieski]

Isaiah 3:12 As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths.

As a former 8 year veteran of the US Army, it is astounding to me at the rapid pace of the fundamental transformation of our armed services. The village idiots in charge have now opened up combat arms roles to women, and are actively pushing for females to be included in the draft. Historical and factual data be damned! This is going to be a recipe for disaster, disintegrating combat unit readiness and cohesion (as if it needed further degradation after opening to sodomites). It will also cause families across the nation to protect their daughters by choosing conscientious objector status (Law of Unintended Consequences).

Bye, bye Miss American Pie
Drove my Chevy to the levee but the levee was dry
And them good ole boys were drinking whiskey and rye
Singin' this'll be the day that I die
This'll be the day that I die...

[Nifster]

I don’t need a Bible verse to tell me that women at the front line is not wise

[Kozak]

That’s the plan. To make it impossible for us to fight a war because of the reduced capability and the resistance that will occur to sending women into combat.

[WENDLE]

This needs reversal. Or we need these little high school girls to REGISTER FOR THE DRAFT NOW!!

[CaptainAmiigaf]

What a wonderful thing...WOMEN IN CLOSE COMBAT.
Imagine the pride across America when Wounded Warrior commercials feature a 20 year of woman with half her face blown off. Of the young mother who can’t pick up her baby because she has no arms any longer. Or the delightful day when “going for a walk” means the 10 year old is pushing mommy in her wheel chair.
There is a reason, however outmoded, that the MALES of the specie did their utmost to protect their FEMALE co-speciest.
Do you think today’s modern feminist would stand aside so the MEN on the Titanic coulde get that seat in a lifeboat?
Frankly, I don’t think so!!

[notdownwidems]

I am 100% in agreement with your comments about women in combat; HOWEVER, I am vehemently opposed to continuing to allow women to escape the ‘selective service’ as a matter of fairness. In fact, if the draft were ever to return and women were included, it would free up that many more men for combat roles, thus increasing combat efficiency. For too long women have been able to evade the armed forces; it is high time and beyond that they shouldered their share of the responsibility for our nation’s defense. Also, make getting pregnant out of wedlock in the military a court-martial offense then kick them out so their bastard brats don’t become wards of the state!

[Parmy]

For anyone who is interested, search for the Israeli experience with women in combat. From what I have read it was a disaster. They now use women in other than direct combat.

[DMZFrank]

I fear we are losing the institutional memory of having faced enemies that are capable of defeating us on the battlefield. We have not faced such an enemy since the summer/winter of 1950 on the Korean Peninsula. The names of Task Force Smith, the 1st Battles of Taejon and Seoul, the Pusan perimeter, the near destruction of the 2nd Infantry Division at Kunu-Ri the annihillation of Task Force Faith, the 120 mile retreat of 8th Army and the 80 mile withdrawal of the 1st Marine Division from the Chosen Resovoir seem but distant memories. The cultural marxists now in charge of the Obama administration are indulging in the sort of social experimentation SURE to result in defeat or serious setback against an enemy capable of projecting the sort of battle field power that would lead to the battlefield reverses that the US Armed Forces suffered at Kasserine Pass, the opening phases of the Ardennnes Offensive, the Hurtegen Forest, the Rapido River, the US Strategic Bombing Campaign, the 1st Naval Battle of Guadalcanal, (Savo Island) or the Rangers at Cisterna in Italy. Over a decade of facing an enemy that is only capable of terrorist/guerilla warfare that can be largely countered by elite specops units has us fighting the last war, and would not be suitable against any enemy capable of projecting real battlefield conventional power.

Only a feckless, unserious and irresponsible nation, enamored of the current crop of “combat chicks” in almost every one of today’s action movies, that is oblivious to the possibility of facing an enemy that IS capable of inflicting these sorts of battle field defeats would contemplate such a disastrous notion as placing women into the first team of ground combat units whose task is to close with, engage and destroy similar enemy units. Sheer and utter madness!!!!

[Retain Mike]

As far as I am concerned, from now on we do not have a chance unless we keep fighting Arabs. I am going to send the below essay to Congress every December and shorter letters to papers to commemorate the end of our military.

The Tragedy of Women in Combat

Ash Carter’s announcement December of 2015 demonstrated the Obama’s Administration attachment to a political ideology fueled by arrogance and premeditated ignorance. His direction of any long period of study and vigorous debate has been among those mutually supportive creatures that have metastasized throughout the military to serve a social agenda bringing future needless devastation. Most of the points I highlight about women in combat arose first when the decision was made to do away with DADT. A lot of good men are going to have to die in years to come to cover up this disaster.

This tragedy of women in combat provides another reason I now always council men to never enter the armed forces. Social engineering that amalgamates feminist ideals everywhere has now become the over arching imperative to which all operational capabilities must submit.

However, combat operations too often demand unpredictably and unimaginably exhausting brutality to achieve 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 sub-culture where only those displaying the greatest savagery and endurance can hope to win. Resorting to war for national defense entails the ultimate Olympics of conflict occurring at the bleeding edge of existence where the unbelievable must become possible. In this authoritarian meritocracy there is much less excuse for merging men and women into these struggles than exists for the athletic competitions held every four years.

Combat forms personnel into small, rigid, task oriented units. They then can descend into a squalid cacophony of shrieking, sobbing, crashing dissonance to orchestrate the killing of other humans without hate or joy. These people continuously face extraordinary stress and survive by acquiring the wisdom of wild animals that live in the moment without schedules for eating and sleeping.. At the point of collision, they undertake operations requiring sacrificial, primitive and intimate actions. They must display a noble fidelity to each other in spite of environments that are inherently chaotic, barbaric, and brittle. This alternate reality can be overcome only by trained killers subject to a totalitarian leadership and narrow focus unimaginable for those who see any opportunity for the social alchemy popular in civilian life.

The regimental combat teams for infantry, mechanized and armored units are now the playthings of bureaucrats committed to equal opportunity and affirmative action. They are dismissive of warriors enduring the brutal carnage imperative for triumph. 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 only Arabs the Israelis beat three times at 20 to 1 odds. Such people now question the necessity for high standards which do not obfuscate or 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 they intrude into the fellowship of combat arms which depends upon savagery for victory. As this tragedy unfolds I will remember the quote that, “Men sleep peacefully in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf”.

All Combat Roles Now Open to Women, Pentagon Says
http://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/pentagon-nbc-news-all-combat-roles-now-openomen-n473581?cid=eml_nbn_20151203

The Greatest Lie Ever Told - Female Rangers
http://usdefensewatch.com/2015/12/the-greatest-lie-ever-told-female-rangers/

Why Marines, unlike Army and Navy, are so against women in combat
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2015/0911/Why-Marines-unlike-Army-and-Navy-are-so-against-women-in-combat?cmpid=editorpicks&google_editors_picks=true

General Martin E. Dempsey
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Martin_Dempsey

Gen. Dempsey: If Women Can’t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask “Does It Really Have to Be That High?”
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/gen-dempsey-if-women-can-t-meet-military-standard-pentagon-will-ask-does-it-really-have

Coed Combat Units - A bad idea on all counts
http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/coed-combat-units_697822.html

You’re In the New Army Now
http://sultanknish.blogspot.com/2013/01/youre-in-new-army-now.html

Marine Corps boot camp, job titles to be gender neutral by April
http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/story/military/2016/01/06/marine-corps-boot-camp-job-titles-gender-neutral-april/78351756/
Be sure to check out the photo of Secretary of the Navy Ray Mabus. He looks to me like someone who should be holding personnel seminars at Health and Human Services. I would not want to have anything to do with the gooey product resulting from the fulfillment of his vision. I think it is time to retire the service dress blues for a mauve uniform with a pink stripe and fashionable French berets. Considering the defense secretary claimed a long period of study and vigorous debate, I maintain discussion was among those mutually supportive creatures that have metastasized throughout the military to serve the LGBT and feminist social agendas. Most of the points I highlight below about women in combat first arose when the decision was imposed to do away with DADT. A lot of good men are going to have to die in years to come to cover up this needless disaster.

The Great Social Experiment Takes the Field - In the War of 2020
http://usdefensewatch.com/2016/02/the-great-social-experiment-takes-the-field-in-the-war-of-2020/

See also: Re: Fiorina: Marine Corp leaders should decide on jobs open to women

The Day the US Military Died
http://usdefensewatch.com/2016/03/the-day-the-us-military-died/

[Ancesthntr]

“The cultural marxists now in charge of the Obama administration are indulging in the sort of social experimentation SURE to result in defeat or serious setback against an enemy capable of projecting the sort of battle field power that would lead to the battlefield reverses that the US Armed Forces suffered at....”

---

Don’t you understand, this is what they WANT - a major U.S. battlefield defeat. Everything that they do makes sense when viewed through the lens of looking at the U.S. as a force for evil in this world - thus, anything that reduces our economic or military power is good, and that which saps our national will and changes our culture is even better. They have NOTHING in common with our values, or with 90% of the people in this country and are, in fact, our mortal enemies.

[rlmorel]

Thanks for your service, FRiend.

I have almost got to the point I have difficulty even posting about it anymore, because it is clear that facts do not matter here. It is being pushed ahead by people who don't have the faintest idea of what real combat is. I have never been in combat (thankfully) but I have read enough to understand that it isn't any of the things that people pushing for women in combat think it is. Their idea of real combat is based on two visions they have:

Personnel sitting in an air conditioned room monitoring screens and pushing buttons, or a 130 lb woman kicking the butts of multiple men in a hand to hand combat, as seen in Hollywood.

The truth is that real combat is more like Edson's Ridge on Guadalcanal or Chosin in Korea. The entire engagement can hinge on the ability of one fighting hole to hold their ground in hand-to-hand combat. And every account I have seen indicates combat was, for many men, the most physically (and mentally) draining thing they had done in their entire lives.

Combat has nothing to do with providing equal opportunity. It has everything to do with surviving and winning, which are blind to things like sex, gender identity, race, or income level.

It has everything to do with preparation, training, equipment, mental preparedness, and physical preparedness, not always in that direct order.

And combat cares not at all that you have a 50-50 distribution of men and women, or that the portion of men contains a number of men who are not in great shape, or that a portion of the women are superbly fit.

All combat knows is that an average very fit woman would be unlikely to win a direct physical fight with an average man who is far less fit than she is. We wouldn't get points for putting women in combat, giving them an "equal opportunity". We would get dead women (and men, as a result) and lost engagements.

This graph below illustrates the salient points, that are not in question, and come from medical sources who have demonstrated a willingness to portray women as the physical equals of men. The hatched red area is the area the tells the story:

This has nothing to do with respect for women, which is how the people pushing for women in combat will take issue with.

It has everything to do with the logistics of supplying/mandating gender specific items and behaviors/processes, unit cohesion, mission capability, and at the fundamental level, the AVERAGE strength of a given combatant.

When one small thing can make the difference in actual combat between victory and defeat, we would stack our own table against ourselves by insisting on women in combat roles.

[Night Hides Not]

I also put in 8 years active, as an Air Defense Artillery officer. I was there at the beginning of the AVF, I could tell you dozens of stories, both good and bad, though they are likely interesting only to me.

I worked with a greater proportion of good men/good soldiers over poor soldiers. There are always those who are determined to go their own path, though I had several in my platoons who straightened themselves out.

I question why our military is being redesigned for the sake of several minorities (women in combat, gays, transgenders, lactating moms, etc.) at the expense of unit readiness? All I ever knew was the concept of accomplishing the mission. As a platoon leader/battery commander/primary staff officer, if my unit did not accomplish its mission, it was my responsibility. I have accepted the fact that I was a real PITA most of the time, only because it was my butt that was on the line. I wasn't much more than an average officer, but my strengths were clearly showing initiative, imagination, and independence. These traits worked to my benefit in positions where I could be anywhere from 40 to 400 miles from my battalion headquarters.

With more impediments being forced on small unit commanders today, the brass is striking at the heart of what makes our military the envy of the world: the independence and flexibility at the squad/platoon/company level to accomplish their mission. We're sending those units into battle burdened by 50 pounds of rocks in every rucksack.

Fortunately for me, I served during an era of peace, but I knew what it was like to put my rear on the line, whether it be a tactical evaluation, or for my soldiers who relied on me. I must have done a few things right, as my battalion commander in Germany asked me to work for him when we both returned to Fort Bliss. He put me in a LTC's job when I was but a mere Captain with a year time in grade.

[rlmorel]

Sounds like you did well in your time in. I was grateful to have served, and I got a lot more out of my service than I can repay.

In the case you describe, it isn’t necessary the concept of physical strength that will detract from the mission, but all the other stuff I referred to, logistics, unit cohesion, readiness, preparation, etc. because time spent on LGTBCSCQRNMWMSOXYS rights, women’s rights, and any other rights or special things that COULD have and SHOULD have been spent on training or other relevant things is not only a waste, but a criminal mismanagement of our resources.

And that 50 lb rucksack, instead of being filled with small arms ammo and rations, will be filled with other non-mission critical things, like the stupid sensitivity training that their heads are being filled with.

Boy, does this piss me off.

[Night Hides Not]

I got a lot more out of my service than I can repay.

Dittos. Our battalion was airbase defense, so we had batteries deployed at 3 NATO airbases. My battery was 40 miles from Battalion HQ. Contrast that with stateside units, where you'll find an entire brigade within a several block area.

Enjoyed many great experiences, and made many friends over there. I was able to travel at a very young age, a luxury most people don't get.

[lonevoice]

Thanks for posting this. Even though it was published 5 years ago, a lot of his documentation was new to me. One doesn’t need to quote Isaiah or appeal to religious faith to make the argument against women in combat. The author does an outstanding job, purely based on facts, logic and evidence.

[lonevoice]

For anyone who is interested, search for the Israeli experience with women in combat. From what I have read it was a disaster. They now use women in other than direct combat.

The article documents quite extensively the Israeli experience. It's a well done article, and well worth the time to read it.

[Lera]

[[I am 100% in agreement with your comments about women in combat; HOWEVER, I am vehemently opposed to continuing to allow women to escape the ‘selective service’ as a matter of fairness. In fact, if the draft were ever to return and women were included, it would free up that many more men for combat roles, thus increasing combat efficiency. For too long women have been able to evade the armed forces; it is high time and beyond that they shouldered their share of the responsibility for our nation’s defense. Also, make getting pregnant out of wedlock in the military a court-martial offense then kick them out so their bastard brats don’t become wards of the state!]]

It’s not about a matter of fairness , it’s just plain bad for society . You really do not the countries future mothers to all be suffering from PTSD.

I have a friend who served in a branch that normally never see combat . Her MOS was suppose to keep her working in a hospital setting helping people survive , not shooting them . They attached her to an Army unit in Iraq (she isn’t Army) and she ended right in the front lines shooting .
She’s messed up right now and she has baby.

There is no way I would let my daughter serve and that is exactly what I told the recruiter that kept calling my house after the school forced her to take the test.

[notdownwidems]

I find your anecdotal argument that since some woman got misdirected to a combat zone therefore no women should have to serve ridiculous; if the draft is reinstituted it will be because there is a serious CRISIS; women will be NEEDED. As to the argument that too many women will get PTSD? Well, why shouldn’t they bear some of that burden? Why must it just be men who get traumatized by war?

[Lera]

I didn’t say women should not serve , I said they should not be forced to serve .

You really do not want and entire generation raised by mothers with PTSD . It ends with very messed up kids if they don’t come out of it quickly.

[notdownwidems]

No. 1, you won't have an 'entire generation' as most, even the vast majority of, women will never see combat.

No. 2, it seems to me that kids are pretty messed up right now, and for the reason that they are coddled and never have to face any real adversity (exceptions notwithstanding.

No. 3, take your statement "I didn’t say women should not serve , I said they should not be forced to serve" and change 'women' to 'men'...still think the same thing? If not, why not? This is where the issue of basic fairness comes in. If women are truly the equal of men, they MUST BE TREATED AS SUCH, in ALL circumstances. To exclude them from the selective service is the worst kind of condescension.