As one may expect from my background, I have some rather strong opinions on this subject that are based on experience in combat, not some academic, institutional, gender biased, bigoted slant. So, unless you have been there, unless you have had to “locate, close with, and destroy an enemy by fire and maneuver or repel his assault by fire and close combat,” which by the way is the mission of the Marine Infantry, I’m sorry but I do not believe you have a voice in this matter. We are talking about killing human beings as a primary reason for existence.
Our inexperienced decision makers have opted to totally disregard the recommendations of some* of our senior military officers and enlisted. I have read so much from both sides of the aisle trying to ascertain why someone would be doing this to our military. There must be an underlying reason for such idiocy as, “this will make our military more effective due diversity. . . . . . .” What? You have to be an idiot to believe that.
Anyway, forgive me for going off on a tangent, this whole issue boggles my mind. I believe the move is meant to degrade our military to near ineffectiveness, to weaken us to the equivalent of a third world country.
The following link will take you to a very well written article on the subject of women in the infantry published by a prominent and respected national magazine. The author is certainly qualified to have an opinion since he has been there and lived it.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/428303/women-marine-infantry-politically-correct-integration
- I used the word “some” since there are generals, particularly in the Army and Air Force who seem to actually believe it to be a good move. In fact, the Army even cheated in Ranger School to bolster their agreement with the administration.
Originally posted 2015-12-14 12:39:14.
Colonel:
I believe it is said best in your book, We’ll All Die As Marines, Chapter 28 “The Silent Majority” (pgs.: 231–232):
“Neither the president nor an overwhelming predominance of those in Congress have served a single day in our military. For them to now cater to an ultra-liberal minority seeking an interpretation of society’s established mores is disturbing and quite revealing as to the total lack of any consideration of the residual effects of their actions. To politicize our military at any time—but especially in a time of war—is as incredibly contemptable as it is indisputably ignorant of the military as an institution.
“Now, at a time when our military is as heavily engaged as it has been for more than forty years, at a time when individual troops are ordered to repeated deployments to war zones, now at a time of military uncertainty and maximum commitment, is the wrong time for our politicians to advocate for social engineering experiments…nothing more than blatantly political ruses and should not fool even the most naïve of individuals.
“To our politicians I say: Tinker with the civilian world if you must, but do not impose your liberal agenda on America’s military for the purpose of vote gathering.”
This is undoubtedly part and parcel of Obama’s (I can’t even write the word President any longer in front of his name!) liberal agenda for his last year in office. Women in all branches of the military is just one of his items to firmly establish his mark and legacy among his liberal base—consequences be damned! It is not over. Look for more to come.
My take: Worst F**king president in our history! Even worse than Jimmy “Peanuts” Carter, if that’s possible—and it is!
Jim, I haven’t had to physically close with an enemy (etc.), except in early years bar altercations. However, I agree completely about combat requiring substantial physical demand (hauling equipment, digging in, hauling a wounded comrade to safety, and the like).
Imagine a wounded Carter Ash having to choose between a 115 pound female Army infantry grunt and a 200 pound, 10% body fat Marine to provide a much needed rescue….. The big guy is going to make 3 rescue runs before the former is pressed into duty.
Those foxholes are not only filled with “believers rather than atheists”, they are also filled with “bigots” when certain kinds of help are needed.