Posted on 02/02/2016 7:27:15 AM PST by huldah1776
Sen. Ted Cruz said he would reconsider opening all ground combat positions to women if elected the next commander in chief.
Cruz promised to take another look at the administration's decision late last year to open all positions to women. The administration's move ignored a request from the Marine Corps to keep some frontline combat positions male-only after some studies showed women were more likely to be injured and perform worse.
"The Marine Corps request [for exceptions] must be reconsidered," Cruz wrote in response to a Center for Military Readiness survey released Sunday. "As long as the requirements are fair and universally applied, the military must always place the best person for the job at hand, whether male or female, but we cannot let political correctness compel the military to lower its standards."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonexaminer.com ...
I’m bothered there’s no qualifier. Like “combat ban on 7s and higher”
Bull.
I heard from a Marine vet that when he was in the requirements were harder even for men. Hopefully the Dept of education will be demolished for a parking garage and the states take back the kennedy style of physical education. I got one of those patches. Wonder what I did with it?
http://mentalfloss.com/article/62991/1960s-high-school-gym-class-would-ruin-you
Genetically freakish girls cannot pass the test. If they could they’d be in the special forces doing boys’ jobs. But they’re not they’ve passed the test but the circumstances are so iffy it is no longer discussed
Women can do Intel, admin and medical. Drafting women is insanity.
Cruz cannot pander and win against Hillary. People need to get over that
Cruz’s default position is always couched in lawyer talk. Lawyer talk always presents wiggle room, first and foremost.
Would reconsider. It’s not even will reconsider.
Cruz uses the proper grammatical mood here...the subjunctive; proper because Ted Cruz will almost certainly not become president...
He doesn’t make decisions any longer. His donors are now in charge.
“My son (army) says yes.” To what?
I (Air Force combat vet, girl) say no
Did you noticed that the captured Navy guys had the one women in the corner of the room where they could protect her?
Agreed my silly progressive cousin got in a FD, how I don’t know, passed, and quit. She’s probably a clinton voter. barf
I don't think meeting the same standards is the key reason that women should not be integrated in direct combat units. You don't want young soldiers thinking about sex and competing for female attention when they should be totally focused on their mission; it is a biological imperative, so they will. Men will also biologically act to protect women no matter how much they try not to. Women will be attracted to some men, and not others. Even if they don't act on this, they will still behave differently, more favorably towards some while rejecting others; men will pick up on this and it will lead to significant loss of unit cohesion. If there are actual romantic relationships going on, it will cause utter chaos on a small team. If some women with no moral compass are banging multiple guys at the same time, it will completely destroy the entire team. If women use their influence to get special favors from their leaders, or alternately to punish by false claims of harassment/assault, that will destroy cohesiveness as well.
During my time in the Army I have seen all of the things I mentioned (and worse) happen in integrated combat support units, but it isn't life or death there. These units can tolerate poor command climates, reduced cohesion, lukewarm morale, and no espirit de corps. In an infantry unit the focus is on a small team performing under very high stress as one entity, like a well oiled machine, with high confidence and energy. They can't tolerate even a small loss of cohesion, lack of confidence in their team and leaders, and need a high state of espirit de corps.
Guys are hard wired to protect and defend. Obama and his ideology are all about driving that out of the military- along with everything else good about it.
Cruz is no longer a thinking person if he can’t see that. He is a group of people who give him billions. Not the email donors he plays to.
Best reply.
I don’t care if some genetically freakish girl can pass the male standards. Combat just isn’t the place to put women. Period.
So no women in any unit in Iraq or Afghanistan at all?
The latest figure I could find quickly on females killed in the War on Terror in Iraq/Afghanistan is 146 as of 2013
If they dont belong in combat then they don’t belong in the military
“women are not going back home”
In war, a lot of them might not. Some might spend time in enemy captivity.
more importantly Goldie Hawn succeeded ...
:)
If they dont belong in combat then they don’t belong in the military
The culture that willingly places it childbearing element on the front lines of its mortal battles is a self-loathing culture that embraces its own demise...
No, she shouldn't. This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of military training and standards, confirmed by the team-oriented testing the Marine Corps did. In addition to other problems.
A military combat unit is not composed of a bunch of people who met the minimum standard. What you really have for most combat units is a distribution, with a few making the bare minimum, a few much better than everyone else, and then the bulk of males usually sitting well above the minimum requirements. And having those people who are way above the minimum helps elevate the unit as a whole.
The ability of a few women to meet the minimum standards lowers the overall distribution. You'll have a higher proportion of people right at the minimum, and that isn't good. And that's inevitable when you introduce a recruiting cadre -- females -- whose overall performance distribution will overlap that of males only at the highest female performance, and the lowest male.
A related issue is that study after study has shown that even when women can pass higher-intensity physical tests over a short period, that they subsequently incur a much higher injury rate than do men over the longer haul. The durability at high levels of weight-bearing, etc. simply is not there.
So great -- they pass the test, get assigned to a unit, and then spend a much higher proportion of time with the docs. Wonderful.
Another major issue is pregnancy. The military doesn't talk about this because it is un-PC, but as of 2013, over 10% of women in the military reported an unplanned pregnancy. And over 11% of women who were scheduled to deploy could not because of a pregnancy.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/23/pregnant-military-unplanned-women_n_2534873.html
And that's only those who were scheduled to deploy but didn't. I didn't even try looking for the numbers who become pregnant while already deployed, but that is not uncommon either.
We simply cannot afford to take 10% casualties before even entering combat. And what makes it even worse is that pregnancy is essentially a "golden ticket home" for anyone who wants to get there. Sure, there are a lot of guys who get to the point where they'd like a ticket home, but biology doesn't give them that option, so they're stuck. Not so with women.
You cannot field effective, reliable combat units when troops have a golden ticket home in their pocket that they can cash in at any time.
There are other reasons relating to esprit d'corps, etc., that I'm omitting for the sake of brevity. But I will point out that this change in policy means that young 18 year old women will have to begin registering for the draft as well, and if drafted, could be assigned involuntarily to ground units just like men.
I think a lot of Americans may think the idea of women in combat is nice in the abstract. Not sure daughters signing up for the draft is going to be equally popular. There are other issues such a esprit d'corps that will be affected adversely by letting women in combat units. Service in combat units is a traditional male right of passage going back thousands of years, and many young men are attracted to that today because of a desire to demonstrate manhood. Gender-integration will adversely affect that mystique. Sure, it's not like no men will want to do it any more, but you will end up chasing away some guys you'd want to have, and replacing them with less capable women.
Then there is the whole issue of sexual/romantic tension and potential for infighting that inevitably occurs when you mix young men and women. Commanders don't need that headache.
You do realize that the President doesn't have to get Congress to approve of a change like this, right? He is Commander-in-Chief. All he should do is rely on the advice of the experts in the military, not the social scientists. But whether or not Cruz has ever been a "team player" in the Senate is irrelevant to this issue.
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.