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

(It's "borrowed" !!)

And especially NO being excused from having to serve in combat.

The problem is that male soldiers and Marines who had nothing to do with this policy may die as a result of you wanting to make some point. To me, that is not an acceptable trade-off.

I remember I heard a much more unfaltering term. I won't say what the acronym REMF’s meant.

The problem isn’t the “rifleman” part of it. Women are frequently better shots than men. The problem is simply a question of strength and stamina, which, for most women, is less than for most men.

I think it is basically over when it comes to deploying truly effective fighting units. When Richard Winters chose men to attack the the German artillery on D-Day he looked for those he believed were killers. The need for equitable employment policies precludes such an outcome for the future. Below is the letter I wrote to Congress to mark the demise of our military.

LETTER SENT TO MY COGRESSMAN AND ALL SENATORS (December 2015)
The Tragedy of Women in Combat

Ash Carterâ€™s announcement demonstrates this Administrationâ€™s attachment to a political ideology fueled by arrogance and premeditated ignorance. 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 becomes the possible. Here 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. These people continuously face extraordinary stress punctuated by killing other humans. At the point of collision, they undertake actions requiring sacrificial, primitive and intimate actions. Such environments are inherently chaotic, barbaric, and brittle. They can be overcome only by 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 victory. 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 officerâ€™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 the combat arms must depend on their savagery. As this tragedy unfolds I will remember the quote that, â€œMen sleep peacefully in their beds at night because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalfâ€.Â

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 CanÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask Ã¢â‚¬ËœDoes It Really Have to Be That High?Ã¢â‚¬â„¢
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
Youâ€™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.

When I am out at the range I just sit down, take my time and squeeze off a round in good time. Now if someone was shooting back at me I suppose it would be much different. That’s when you would find out just what a good shot you were.

Add this one to the list

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/

Thanks for you efforts in writing that. I think there will still be a lot of institutional resistance in the Mari es, simply because the physical standards are high and they won't compromise them unless directly ordered to do so. No women has yet completed the Infantry Officers Course.

But unless there are politicians willing to fight on that end, it will ultimately be a losing cause.

This is a man's world, this is a man's world
But it wouldn't be nothing, nothing without a woman or a girl
You see, man made the cars to take us over the road
Man made the trains to carry heavy loads
Man made electric light to take us out of the dark
Man made the boat for the water, like Noah made the ark
This is a man's, a man's, a man's world
But it wouldn't be nothing, nothing without a woman or a girl
Man thinks about a little baby girls and a baby boys
Man makes then happy 'cause man makes them toys
And after man has made everything, everything he can
You know that man makes money to buy from other man
This is a man's world
But it wouldn't be nothing, nothing without a woman or a girl
He's lost in the wilderness
He's lost in bitterness

This is a Man's World, by James Brown,
but sung most memorably by Ron "Pigpen" McKernan

The end-game of this policy is to destroy the US as an effective fighting force.

Once all of the experienced people leave the service, the ones that thrive will be the ones who are skilled in filing the appropriate paperwork.

Get some people killed? It won’t matter, because the appropriate ratio of race/gender check boxes were filled.

The only investigations that will ever take place will be due to a disproportionate number of one identity group getting killed in action. (Obviously, whites men will not matter. The more of those killed, the better)

(sarcasm tag optional)

Oh, I like that article. Thanks.

I was reminded of it when you mentioned storming cliffs ...

The truth is that at least some stubborn b*stards unwilling to give in will stay in the military, and try to preserve all that can be preserved for as long as possible. They'll keep doing it for as long as they can, and if our country ever gets its head screwed back on, or if we face a truly existential danger that forces us to become realists, they'll be there to put the pieces back together.

Can't forget those guys, because they'll still be there, and they'll still deserve our support.

Yeah I’ve heard that term. Sad to say that PC had slipped into the fray when I was in.

i think they should have separate outfits or companies or whatever they are called. Men and women are not equal - i.e.: women tend to have less upper body strength which can make big differences in how men and women might choose to perform different tasks not to mention differences in feelings/emotion and such.

I’m glad pro sports are not mixed gender teams, I don’t think our military which is life or death not a game, should be mixed gender either.

On 20 November 1943, during the horrific fighting on Betio atoll during the battle of Tarawa, two Japanese tanks mounted a counterattack against the fragile Marine toehold on Red Beach 3. The Marines were huddled there at the base of a seawall in the face of withering fire from the rikusentai of Admiral Keiji Shibasaki fanatical Japanese Naval Landing Force defenders who were slaughtering hundreds of their 2nd Marine Division comrades in Betio Lagoon during 76 hours of some of the most savage fighting in the history not only of the Marines, but the US armed forces.

Marine anti-tank gun crews were trying to figure out how to get their 912 lb 37MM M3 antitank guns over the 7 foot plus seawall. The battery commander ordered his 5 man crews to LIFT them over. Being Marines who always obeyed even seemingly impossible orders, they did EXACTLY that and promptly knocked out the tanks. They then engaged several enemy bunkers whose dual purpose guns were repeatedly knocking out the approaching landing craft and put them out of action. Finally they routed a local counter attack of 200 or so Japanese against the south shore of Red Beach 3 with canister shot, all of this at a critical and precarious point in the landing.
Whats that about upper body strength being not as important
in modern warfare anymore and that women are just as likely to be able to do the job of combat infantry?

Familiarize your self with the case of Merrils Marauders in WWII in the China Burma India Theatre. From Feb-May of 1944, the men of Galahad ForceÂ were subjected to the most grueling long term commitment probably of ANY US combat unit in history. They were tasked with a long range deep penetration operation. At the end of it, almost every man was wracked by dysentery, malaria, scrub typhus, cholera, and any number of debilitating diseases that sapped their strength to far below whatever it was when they began the operation. Their mission had been extended and lengthened several times, and their debilitated condition was not deemed sufficient to allow them relief.

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 ambush of the 2nd Infantry Division at Kunu-Ri and the 80 mile withdrawal 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 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.

I mean no disrespect to the female personnel of the US Armed Forces who have served and ARE serving their nation honorably and well. I respect them as fellow vets and comrades in arms. Policy decisions are above their level for the most part.

But as a matter of POLICY, I think that women should be excluded from the armed forces for the most part, with a few exceptions and COMPLETELY from combat and most combat support roles, particularly when the armed forces are a small percentage of the total population, as is the case now. The use of significant numbers of women should be reserved for large scale mobilization as was the case in WWII. The population base is more than twice as large now as then and there would be no problem securing a sufficient number of qualified men with appropriate incentives for such a relatively small armed forces.

The advantages for the armed forces, particularly the Army would be greater flexibility as to how personnel can be deployed in combat emergencies and other contingincies and a lesser logistical strain as involves clothing, barracks and housing, and innumerable other considerations that are exclusive to the maintainance of large numbers of women. I think morale and discipline would also be improved as well.
The courts have repeatedly ruled that the armed forces are exempted from many of the equal opportunity requirements of the civillian world, and for the very good and sufficient requirements that are unique to the armed forces. This contretemps is being propelled largely by the cultural marxist wing of gender equity feminism who wish for the placement of a leftist Chairwoman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The resultant detriment of the ability of the armed forces to fight plays no consideration in their calculus, other than as an peripheral side benefit.

I know that women have played a vital role during guerrilla, partisan warfare and sabotage/espionage activity. But to deliberately employ them in ground combat units whose primary task is to close with, engage and destroy similar enemy units is the height of lunacy and madness given the effort required to identify the relative few who could qualify even if we ignore the potential detriments to morale and discipline.

This is sheer and utter madness akin to allowing open homosexuals to serve in the armed forces. Oh has that happened too???

On 20 November 1943, during the horrific fighting on Betio atoll during the battle of Tarawa, two Japanese tanks mounted a counterattack against the fragile Marine toehold on Red Beach 3. The Marines were huddled there at the base of a seawall in the face of withering fire from the rikusentai of Admiral Keiji Shibasaki fanatical Japanese Naval Landing Force defenders who were slaughtering hundreds of their 2nd Marine Division comrades in Betio Lagoon during 76 hours of some of the most savage fighting in the history not only of the Marines, but the US armed forces.

Marine anti-tank gun crews were trying to figure out how to get their 912 lb 37MM M3 antitank guns over the 7 foot plus seawall. The battery commander ordered his 5 man crews to LIFT them over. Being Marines who always obeyed even seemingly impossible orders, they did EXACTLY that and promptly knocked out the tanks. They then engaged several enemy bunkers whose dual purpose guns were repeatedly knocking out the approaching landing craft and put them out of action. Finally they routed a local counter attack of 200 or so Japanese against the south shore of Red Beach 3 with canister shot, all of this at a critical and precarious point in the landing.
Whats that about upper body strength being not as important
in modern warfare anymore and that women are just as likely to be able to do the job of combat infantry?

Familiarize your self with the case of Merrils Marauders in WWII in the China Burma India Theatre. From Feb-May of 1944, the men of Galahad ForceÃ‚Â were subjected to the most grueling long term commitment probably of ANY US combat unit in history. They were tasked with a long range deep penetration operation. At the end of it, almost every man was wracked by dysentery, malaria, scrub typhus, cholera, and any number of debilitating diseases that sapped their strength to far below whatever it was when they began the operation. Their mission had been extended and lengthened several times, and their debilitated condition was not deemed sufficient to allow them relief.

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 ambush of the 2nd Infantry Division at Kunu-Ri and the 80 mile withdrawal 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 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.

I mean no disrespect to the female personnel of the US Armed Forces who have served and ARE serving their nation honorably and well. I respect them as fellow vets and comrades in arms. Policy decisions are above their level for the most part.

But as a matter of POLICY, I think that women should be excluded from the armed forces for the most part, with a few exceptions and COMPLETELY from combat and most combat support roles, particularly when the armed forces are a small percentage of the total population, as is the case now. The use of significant numbers of women should be reserved for large scale mobilization as was the case in WWII. The population base is more than twice as large now as then and there would be no problem securing a sufficient number of qualified men with appropriate incentives for such a relatively small armed forces.

The advantages for the armed forces, particularly the Army would be greater flexibility as to how personnel can be deployed in combat emergencies and other contingincies and a lesser logistical strain as involves clothing, barracks and housing, and innumerable other considerations that are exclusive to the maintainance of large numbers of women. I think morale and discipline would also be improved as well.
The courts have repeatedly ruled that the armed forces are exempted from many of the equal opportunity requirements of the civillian world, and for the very good and sufficient requirements that are unique to the armed forces. This contretemps is being propelled largely by the cultural marxist wing of gender equity feminism who wish for the placement of a leftist Chairwoman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The resultant detriment of the ability of the armed forces to fight plays no consideration in their calculus, other than as an peripheral side benefit.

I know that women have played a vital role during guerrilla, partisan warfare and sabotage/espionage activity. But to deliberately employ them in ground combat units whose primary task is to close with, engage and destroy similar enemy units is the height of lunacy and madness given the effort required to identify the relative few who could qualify even if we ignore the potential detriments to morale and discipline.

This is sheer and utter madness akin to allowing open homosexuals to serve in the armed forces. Oh has that happened too???

The idea that the standards should be changed to reflect "the tasks that they are required to perform", which is the current lingo, shows just how clueless they are. Combat tasks are of an infinite variety because the nature of combat is unpredictable and chaotic.

This whole political correctness in the military is disrespectful to those who serve, and devalues their lives.