Posted on 06/13/2012 3:41:24 PM PDT by kingattax
The United States Army is debating whether to admit women to Ranger School, its elite training program for young combat leaders.
Proponents argue this is to remove a final impediment to the careers of Army women. But the move would erode the unique Ranger ethos and culture—not to mention the program's rigorous physical requirements—harming its core mission of cultivating leaders willing to sacrifice everything for our nation.
The Army's 75th Ranger Regiment traces its roots back to World War II, when it won acclaim for penetrating deep behind Japanese lines. Founded in 1950, Ranger School teaches combat soldiers small-unit tactics and leadership under extreme duress. It pushes men harder than any other program in the Army's curriculum.
Competition to attend the course is fierce, with about 4,000 men eligible to attend each year. Only about half graduate. Of those, only 20% make it through without having to retake various phases.
For decades, completion of Ranger School has been the best indicator for determining which young men can handle the enormous responsibility of combat leadership
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
Thank you. I haven’t laughed that hard in over a week. :)
Your last sentence makes the whole point.
Ya work with what ya got, and if ya ain’t got it don’t try.
Some do, some don’t, and no amount of attitude will overcome not having it when it counts.
Sometimes it comes down to guys being scared that a woman might just out do them. So to prevent that, they come up with all these excuses.
When as kids as soon as the boys were seeing we were winning they started to change the rules. No different after they grew up. Or thought they did. Still can’t stand it if they’re outdone by a woman. Never will.
I’m not that kind of woman.
Wait, what?
Who’s delusional?
OK, I propose a challenge to you two tough cookies.
Upon acceptance by both, I’ll specify locations A and B, somewhere between 100 feet and 100 miles apart, and a starting time.
First one to get from point A to point B wins. Winner gets to call the other delusional.
Full MMA-rules contact is of course allowed. Should go without saying: do not underestimate this point.
If you decline this challenge, I expect a satisfactory justification (variations of “inconvenience” not accepted).
Ready?
What excuses?
It’s not about excuses, it’s about whether those on the front lines are the absolutely most capable we can put there.
Despite your “I did the same training” lines, you weren’t even in the same _class_.
“Wow, how big of you to group women in with transgenders, gays and lesbians. What a prig you are!”
This isn’t about how anyone feels about women, gays, transgenders, etc.
The question remains:
“Does including women, gays, transgenders, lesbians, etc enhance the force’s abilities to achieve their objective.”
The answer remains:
“No”
Again, in intelligence, all of the above are indespensible assets.
We discriminate against the very short or the very tall for some mission roles. Why? They aren’t suited to fill the mission.
We didn’t send 6’4” 300 pound 50 cal. gunners down ratholes in Vietnam either.
If it makes you feel any better, I can’t have babies. I don’t want to try.
I can’t qualify for minority points on contracts. I can’t be list my company as a ‘women-owned business’. I can’t win minority awards for engineering excellence. If someone murders me, it’ll be just straight murder, no matter who does it - never a hate crime or an aggravated murder.
Should I want to be a firefighter, and I’m up against 8 black candidates, and I’m the only guy that passes the exam, I still won’t get the job.
Should I ever divorce, the court will award my wife custody as a matter of course, and if I want custody, I’ll have to sue for it, even if she’s a crack smoking whore (she isn’t, and I’m not).
I’m being penalized and discriminated against to atone for the actions of people I don’t know, and I’ve never met.
Now, I think sending in a 110 pound female firefighter to drag a 250 pound guy out of a two story walk up is ridiculous, and I don’t think women should be fire fighters either. Arson investigators? Absolutely think women can be cracker-jack arson investigators.
I think if you ask most 110 pound women whether they’d rather see a 200 pound guy come in to get them from a burning building, or have a 110 pound woman come get them from a burning building, I’d bet 6:2 and even that 9 out of 10 of those women will opt for the man, and not because of any firefighter pin-up calendar fantasies either.
It’s because, when you life, or your freedom, is on the line, you want the uncompromised best opportunity to prevail against either circumstances OR the enemy.
Now, all of this is just common sense. I regret that common sense isn’t as common as it used to be.
“My son is a fighter pilot (wizzo), USAF.”
He is not a “fighter pilot” and he would be soundly beat if he called himself that. . .especially among his squadron buddies. He is “Goose” to Maverick. He is NOT driving the jet nor is he leading the formation—ever.
A good wizzo is great to have, for sure, but don’t call him a fighter pilot. Ask him and he will tell you that same thing.
“They have quite a few women pilots and wizzo’s. The females seem to make good wizzo’s (something to do with less machismo and more deliberate behavior (or brains) I suspect).”
Has to do with a lack of aggression, natural aggression.
“A lot of these guys don’t seem to realize (when was the last time we engaged in serious air-to-air dogfights?) that in this day the danger is not such combat with enemy planes,”
You are aware that there are other 4.5 generation jets out there and our adversaries are making more of then each day. . .and making them better. China, anyone?
“much more the DOD lawyers hanging over you if you hit the wrong target (not to mention CNN reporters!).”
Of that we agree.
“I do laugh, however, when I am told that being a pilot of that type is not very strenuous. “
I do, too. They know nothing.
“Jeremy Clarkson did a good special on F-15E’s, where at the end he points out that he was more tired than anything else he had ever done (which is a lot, if you watch his show).”
Yup. Can really pound you into a heap of sweat on a simple A/A or A/G mission.
“will be my daughter who gets my son out of the “problem”,”
Mostly because of the fact SHE is female and most men would not engage (fight) with a female.
Well stated.
After reading the thread and paying attention to your posts, I offer the following to you, SkyDancer.
“I waxed his butt so many times when we flew air combat sim’s in real planes it wasn’t funny. We’re pulling almost 9g’s and he couldn’t take it.”
Just a reminder, there are many current and former REAL fighter pilots here on FR, and statements like the above are viewed with amusement—at best.
“Sim’s.” Really? 9G’s? Big whoop. Upper body strength is key to the ability to maneuver your torso to look around while under G. To many women, you included I’ll wager, couldn’t move hardly an inch while at 9G’s.
Regarding your BF, sorry he was such a wimp he couldn’t hack the G’s.
I was a UPT instructor/evaluator pilot for the USAF and every class had a few women in it. The “strongest” woman student pilot was identified and it was agreed by the flight commanders up to the wing commander that if all others washed out, and she (the strongest) could not hack it, she WOULD graduate. Too much politics to deal with if women don’t graduate so efforts were made to pass the “best” if it came down to it.
I was an instructor/evaluator pilot in two fighters (A-10/F-15E), and yes, the same political pressure was on to ensure we had a share of females flying fighters.
We were TOLD just before a female flying fighters arrived she was to be qualified MR ON TIME and upgraded to 2-ship and 4-ship flight lead ON-TIME, as well as become an instructor ON-TIME. So much for merit and skill, let alone standards.
(By the way. . .this much admired first female flying fighters would cry in de-briefs. Debriefs are the real school of hard knocks, no quarter given and you are crushed for every little thing. You better have a strong will and heart and be able to take the pressure. Apparently she could not but by the time she was enroute to the school, it was too late and standards had to be lowered for HER. If any male cried during de-brief during a training mission, he would be ejected from the program. But not her. It is all about lowering standards as many point out. Lowering standards is bad enough, but lowering standards for a select few—women—is worse.)
As other posters stated, this is real-life, fighting to the death we are talking about.
Aggression is not cruelty. Aggression is not meanness. Aggression is innate and part of a fighters (warriors) very being and women, because they do not have the oft-mocked testosterone in their system, they simply don’t have natural aggression. They act, they behave like they think they should act. . .down to the swagger and arrogance that is ever so popular in media.
Thing is, that arrogance and swagger is contained in a fighter squadron because, really, who are you going to impress. . .we ALL are fighter pilots. Banter is rife and ego’s abound for sure, be we have nothing to prove to anybody—we know who we are and what we can do, and unbridled arrogance gets people killed. Confidence keeps them alive.
As I’ve posted before: “Men and women are not the same; they don’t think, act or emote the same. All this nonsense about “same” physical standards is nonsense. What matters is the innate aggression that resides in males (testosterone). Media and other “equal rights” advocates mock it as chest-thumping behavior and they don’t recognize it as warrior behavior. Women can be mean but true aggression is lacking, and after a career in the military I am tired of the empty argument that say, “well, if they can meet the same physical standards. . .”. That is NOT the most important aspect. Natural aggression is. Women in the military ACT like they are all hoorah and aggressive but acting is not being. It is an act. The feminine side is always repressed and hidden in warrior environments, therefore females deny their own femininity when they enter the warrior world. That is not natural.”
I found concerning your Post 96, (flying into a thunderstorm). Your derisive statement about the other pilot being scared when you were at the controls is telling.
First, if he were indeed “scared” then he had a reason beyond the fact you were flying into T-storms—the fact you did not respect the situation made him scared. You see, YOU scared him, not the situation. He was concerned because he respected the situation and you apparently did not.
He had solid airsense and judgment and here you were, appearing unconcerned, not fully appreciating the danger and risks. Yes, he was scared. . .not because of the T-storm but because of YOU.
Second, and this applies to that situation and probably others where you arrogantly feel other pilots were weak or meek, it is clear from your postings you carry a bit of “I’ll-show’em-I’m-just-as-good-as-they-are-maybe-better” attitude. That attitude pushes aside sound judgment and gets people killed.
Real pilots know risks and they know their skills and know when to be concerned. You apparently do not.
So, your bravado statements about waxing someone in simulated BFM/ACM, or your comments about being a steely-eyed cool-under-pressure pilot, and “FAA certified” no less, mean nothing to men who know what flying is all about.
Enjoy your time, be safe and remember the old adage: “There are old pilots and bold pilots, but there are no old bold pilots.”
Well said.
First thing is you don’t recognize a joke when you read one. Secondly, it was Air Combat USA out of Fulertn airport. My bf flew 737’s ... always did martini turns. OTT, have a nice day. Turn your sarcasm filter off.
No, wait. Turn your sarcasm filter on ....
At least I know you read my post. . .now I hope you got the message.
In any event those planes do +9, -3 G's. You don't fly that full envelope. It's just what it's capable of and sometimes you almost get up there and do that. Trouble is too many people take things at full value without bothering to ask. I get lots of private mails and we have a pretty fun chat there. They get it, some people don't.
Regards, Janey
Weird, you posted that exact post twice, 8 hours apart.
I read, answer, and they’re good I copy them to a journal. I did that with yours.
That is quite a post, well done.
I have never met a pilot so childlike and detached from truth and reality as this girl.
She seems to have no idea what we are posting to her, the most detailed thoughtful post is responded to as though from a ditzy teen girl. I think she has mental issues and is not playing with a full deck.
You shouldn’t be talking about the first Jewish Female Pope heading out to the Vatican next week to take over.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.