In fact, she thinks you're a киска.
Posted on 08/22/2015 4:25:02 PM PDT by smokingfrog
The defense secretary has an incredible opportunity to usher in the end of legalized sex discrimination in the military.
As tens of thousands of women have proved over 13 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, women are capable of the combat skills necessary to fight alongside their male counterparts. The question now is whether to give women the opportunity to compete for coveted combat arms assignments, such as infantry and special forces.
Since the Pentagon formally rescinded the combat exclusion policy in 2013, well over 100 women have successfully passed the Marine Corps’ enlisted infantry school and two female officers will graduate from the Army’s elite Ranger School this week — debunking three long-held cultural myths: that women don’t want these jobs, they are mentally and physically too weak for these jobs, and training standards have to be lowered for women to do these jobs.
But as of yet, none of these female warriors can legally be assigned to infantry or other combat arms billets for which they have proved themselves qualified. It’s like surviving the trials of medical school and being told you can’t be a doctor.
Defense Secretary Ashton Carter needs to ensure the following happens going forward if he wants integration efforts to create a stronger fighting force:
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Example: If that had been three American women on the French train — would the gunman have been subdued?
Women will NEVER be ready for combat.
It is women’s place in life to give and nurture life, not to take it.
A society that sends its women to fight before it sends its non-shaving boys and cane-borne old men deserves to be destroyed, and will be by societies that do not make that mistake.
“women are capable of the combat skills necessary to fight alongside their male counterparts.”
But they are NOT capable of carrying the same weight load in their packs; nor carrying the same heavy equipment.
And never will be.
Ergo, their presence in an infantry squad will detract, rather than add to, that squad’s readiness.
What a load of hogwash. A country that send it’s women to do its fighting is a country that will be defeated.
And Neither do Men >:'(
What happens to our Women when some Derkastani Jihadi gets his blood up and finds one of our Women soldiers?
What Happens when a city is Sacked? You have more women raped than one would ever care to count.
Still no.
Still, always no.
Dream on.
I’m guessing all this crap about sending women into combat is just another population reduction measure just like the homo agenda.
>>women are capable of the combat skills necessary to fight alongside their male counterparts.
Then why do we have to listen to all the stories of “rape culture” in the military and on campuses? If women are ready for combat, then rapists should be the first to know.
Unlike the author, I served in the Army. He or she is full of it.
In fact, she thinks you're a киска.
Claptrap. Having two women successfully complete Ranger School doesn’t in any way demonstrate that women can and should serve in combat. Two women out of thousands does not mean that all women can be infantry or even artillery personnel in the arduous world of direct combat.
Combat is killing and being killed. It isn’t a “job”; it’s a mission that cannot be diluted or distracted and still result in success. It’s already hard to get young men to learn how to fight and kill. Even with the best, hardest training, a certain percentage of men can never successfully do more than make noise and maybe survive.
Adding women to units will not improve combat effectiveness but more than likely distract and diminish combat effectiveness. Units that are less effective lose more lives and lose fights.
Will the families of the dead be grateful that we decided to put women into combat units?
Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine Corps Captain, is the founder of Service Women’s Action Network, which is a plaintiff in Hegar v. Carter, a lawsuit filed in 2012 by service women to repeal the combat exclusion policy.
NO.
I wouldn't really wish this on the country, but I will say this: We will not be a serious country again until we go through a horrible war and suffer something like a half million casualties.
We need a return to clear thinking and an appreciation of Quality. But that will not happen until we suffer, and come to understand what the lack of quality really means.
NHL - (Not Hardly Likely three American women on the French train could have subdued the terrorist.) - Oh, I could have SAT on his head; at 185 lbs.; that might have crushed his skull; butt that’s a stretch!
Several years ago, an acquaintance who was an Army officer stated that when they got a bugout signal; the women in their outfit did NOT have the upper body strength to lift the heavy equipment onto the trucks in order to “bug out”. So - they could not and did not bug out. He left the service; & from the looks of things; it’s only gotten worse & worse & standards have gotten lower & lower. - Now that Hussein has readied himself to deliver the death blow with his “fundamental” change to America, take my word for it, standards aren’t what they’re advertised to be
Ok. Make an entire female battalion and send them to Fallujah or the Korengal
Irrelevant.
Even if you get some steroid-enhanced super-Amazon former MMA fighter, sending her to fight while there are still cane-borne old men sitting on the sidelines is intrinsically flawed.
The NY TIMES is the mouthpiece for the Obama White House.
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.