Pentagon halts the advance of fighting women

The Telegraph (U.K.) ^ | 11/02/2001 | Toby Harnden

[Pokey78]

THE former president Bill Clinton's policies of allowing women soldiers into combat zones are being halted as part of a fundamental rethink by the Bush administration about the culture and purposes of the armed forces.

Opponents of boosting the role of women in the front line have been appointed to influential positions in the Pentagon and a move to open up a reconnaissance unit linked to special forces is likely to be reversed.

But the primary factor influencing the Pentagon is the need to fight a war against terrorism in response to September 11 and the subsequent anthrax attacks.

Peacetime considerations such as the desirability of gender balance and the avoidance of casualties have been subordinated to the more pressing concern of defending America against a deadly and determined foe.

The Defence Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (Dacowits) is already being marginalised at the Pentagon as senior planners seek to maximise the killing potential of the armed forces. "That's all changing," one Pentagon official told the magazine US News and World Report when asked about women going into combat zones. Another said front-line units "won't involve women".

Traditional fighting skills, rather than the values stressed by the US military's notorious Consideration of Others (Coo) programme, are back in vogue as America engages in probably its biggest conflict since the Second World War.

American women serve in front-line ships and as jet pilots but not in submarines or with combat ground units.

Anita Blair, the new deputy assistant secretary of the US Navy, is an opponent of allowing women to serve in submarines, a key Dacowits aim, and is an advocate of separating the sexes during training.

She is on record as saying: "Defence funding should first be spent on training, equipment, better pay - things that will improve the nation's defence and not just the job opportunities of a tiny number of women."

Sarah White, a former master sergeant in the US air force reserve, has been appointed deputy assistant secretary of the army for force management, manpower and resources.

An opponent of women in combat, she once described the move, introduced by Mr Clinton in 1993, as "a radical departure from where mainstream America believes that good men protect women and that women enjoy being protected by men".

She is against women flying combat aircraft.

"We have to remember that even if you are at a high altitude in an airplane at a distance from the enemy, if you crash, then you automatically become an infantry or special forces-type of person," she said.

"It is your mission then to survive, to escape and to evade, and you have to have all of the skills and the capabilities as the men throughout history have had. And clearly women don't have those as a rule."

Some Pentagon officials are fearful of the American public reaction if a female pilot were shot down over Afghanistan. The only female pilot publicised so far is "Mumbles", a British-educated 26-year-old with an F14 Tomcat squadron based on the aircraft carrier Carl Vinson.

[Mahone]

God bless Dubya, Cheney, Rumsfeld! The adults are back in charge!

[Dacus943]

Thank Goodness!

[Orion78]

Saying women shouldn't fight is like saying that women shouldnt learn, or show thier face. What are we, the Taliban? If a woman wants to fight, let her fight. Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. What if a free woman wants to be brave and fight for her country? Bad move by the Bush Administration IMHO.

[FUSSBALL]

Woman should not be in combat. 99% of woman do not have the physique for it. Nor the mental capabilities for war. Mentally remember for a moment the different reactions you all felt after 9/11. and the reactions of people around you.
many (not all) many woman would say things like "we need to think about peace now" or "we dont want more people to die" or "waht if questions " on the other hand most men (And i mean most as in 90%) where mad and wanted to start fighting right now. That right there is a prime reason why men are sent to war and woman are not.....EMOTIONS

[FUSSBALL]

Then they should shave their heads at boot camp(GI means government issue ...everyone is the same) and have to sign up for the draft.

[Orion78]

Maybe so, but they should still be allowed to fight if they wish to.

[A. Pole]

If a woman wants to fight, let her fight. Land of the Free, Home of the Brave.

And if there is draft, for women it will be optional? If so it equals pandering to women who want to be with the male soldiers if it is mandatory it does not seem so free and brave.

[this_ol_patriot]

Some of us respect women. Do you want to see any American woman in the hands of the Taliban, as a POW in a Vietnam or in the hands of Saddam? Think.

[nightdriver]

"Saying women shouldn't fight is like saying that women shouldnt learn, or show thier face."

Hardly.

[Orion78]

Your trying to change the direction of this to the draft, and its not going to work. If a woman wants to fight. She should be able to fight. Your suggesting it would be unfair to draft men and not women. I'm saying its unfair to say a woman is equal but forbid her from fight if she chose to do so.

[FUSSBALL]

But see...Here is the main issue. For this to work the woman would have to go through exactly what the men do in training. And as of right now they do not..They would have to run the 2 miles in what I think it is 14 minutes or under. Few woman can do this. A certain amount of pushups in a minute (60 i believe) ...REAL pushups ,,,no knees down....

they all have to perform at the same level. If a man does not reach that level he does not pass through boot camp. He is voted off the island.

If this where to occur woman would say it was not fair.

[okie01]

"Saying women shouldn't fight is like saying that women shouldnt learn, or show thier face."

Actually, it's more like saying men shouldn't give birth or nurse the child.

[VaBthang4]

Since when does any woman's "wish" override the safety and security of a military unit.

Get real you idiot.

You dont know the first thing about combat (please dont try and argue that out because I will detail disassemble you right here).
That being said neither you or anyone else without it (combat experience) is fully qualified to comment.

[FUSSBALL]

I dont remember saying that! Nor did I say mentally inferior. I meant their mental outlook is different in this situation ...more meotional ..not inferior

[Orion78]

I respect women too. I would'nt like to see any POW's; male or female. When you join the military, you accept the consequences. If a woman choses to join the military and fight for her freedom (or for whatever reason), she should be allowed to do so.

[Orion78]

Next time you decide to post your two cents, try contributing a logical rebutal instead of just disagreeing.

[Oberon]

If a woman wants to fight, let her fight. Land of the Free, Home of the Brave. What if a free woman wants to be brave and fight for her country?

If all our soldiers fought as individual soldiers, I would agree with you. However, our armed forced don't fight as individuals; they fight as a team. The survival and success of a unit, squad, platoon, brigade, or regiment may depend on whether a few soldiers...or one single soldier...can get the job done effectively. In infantry, spec ops, recon, armor, and so on, this effectiveness requires having a big, strong, ugly, testosterone-laced grunt in place to do the work.

Gender equality is for arenas where the genders are, in fact, equal. Combat isn't one of them.

[ChemistCat]

All of these threads begin to look the same.

Women shouldn't be on the front lines.
Women shouldn't be in any combat role.
Women shouldn't be on subs.
Women shouldn't be on any Navy ship.
Women shouldn't be in mobile units.
Women shouldn't be deployed overseas.
Women shouldn't be in the military at all.
Women shouldn't work outside the home.
Women shouldn't vote.
Women shouldn't speak.
Women shouldn't be seen.

You can find conservatives on this website who would balk at sentence #1 and others who will wax more enthusiastic the further down the list they read--some, I fear, would agree with Taliban if only because they agree with every single one of the statements above. This isn't an argument that can be resolved because you can find particular examples that appear to support any amount of restriction upon one half of the adult American population. There are certainly women who oughtn't be seen or heard!

*