Nothing to see here... They have it covered!
Posted on 12/06/2012 9:52:06 AM PST by george76
Three sailors assigned to the USS Maine and USS Wyoming became the first female unrestricted line officers to qualify in submarines on Dec. 5.
Lt. j.g. Marquette Leveque, a native of Fort Collins, Colo., assigned to the Gold Crew of Wyoming, and Lt. j.g. Amber Cowan and Lt. j.g. Jennifer Noonan of Maine’s Blue Crew received their submarine “dolphins” during separate ceremonies at Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay, Ga., and Naval Base Kitsap-Bangor, Wash.
In order to receive their dolphins, Leveque, Cowan and Noonan were required to qualify as Officer of the Deck and Engineering Officer of the Watch, perform damage control functions, and demonstrate satisfactory qualities of leadership.
...
Prior to reporting to their boats beginning in November 2011, Leveque, Cowan, Noonan and the other women assigned to Ohio, Maine, Wyoming and Georgia graduated from the Submarine Officer Basic Course in Groton, Conn. In addition, the submarine line officers under instruction graduated from the Naval Nuclear Power School at Charleston, S.C., and underwent naval nuclear prototype training.
(Excerpt) Read more at wtkr.com ...
Good for them, but I wonder about the tension that is created during a cruise.
Our Navy has lost its warrior ethos. It is now a politically correct force to “do good.” Mothers don’t let your boys to grow up to be sailors.
Nothing to see here... They have it covered!
Countdown has commenced for poverty pimp shakedown artist Jesse Jackson to threaten the Navy over the lack of ethnic diversity amongst these new bubbleheads.
Uhhhhh, Yeah???
Based on the evidence presented, Lts. j.g. one and two are judged “not guilty”.
I second your motion of not guilty.
Dang, I was expecting something kinky! B-) B-D
Any here on FR who were on the boomers during the cold war? How would six months submerged been with one or two females aboard. Would the tension level gone up or down? Would anyone have gone crazy and nuked Moscow?
Disaster in the making. Sick, evil, wicked idea to have women put to sea on warships, let alone subs. War is not a game or an arena for political correctness regarding deviant social engineering.
There is no need to have women on board naval vessels, we have 150 million men in this nation.
Few people talk about the high rate of women returning from sea pregnant.
If we don’t return to traditional, honorable policy, we have a disaster in the making, as the military is rapidly losing it’s focus on real warmaking in large conflict scenarios.
“Operation Petticoat”
(Sigh)......truth is always stranger than fiction.
One Ocean different Continent rule: If you are more than one ocean or 2 continents between you and your spouse then you are no longer married. Being deployed in the Navy adds a geographical component into marriage/relationships.
We are going to regret this.
Gee, I wonder how long it will take before we have our first “Three Dolphin” club members?
In Roman times, soldiers were forbidden to marry, on the understandable grounds that single men without wives and children to worry about were likely to be the most effective soldiers (and less likely to desert). Obviously, modern militaries don’t have that kind of policy, because it is unrealistic.
What I’m saying is, it would probably be ideal for all soldiers/sailors etc to be male and single, but it is unrealistic in this day and age to expect them all to fall into this category...
They may yet prove themselves warriors. If they passed the various schools to earn the right to serve on subs, they are obviously intellegent.
All that I am saying is give them a chance, they might surprise you. If they fail, then they fail and send them else where.
Every time a female is allowed to enter the military ranks that were exclusively men they started to not only find fault but take umbrage over the “coarseness of the fighting men and their culture. The brass then puts the hammer down on the males and changes the culture and downgrades their combat effectiveness.
The women then get more smug and wander around the males with a haughty attitude and a chip on their shoulders, just waiting to find even a hint of maleness so they can feign even more hurt, get more men in trouble for nothing, and then gain control of every aspect of what used to be an effective combat unit/team/crew.
I served on a boomer (USS Patrick Henry SSBN 599G) from 1969 to 1973. We talked about female crew members all the time because even then the Navy was conducting surveys and studies to see what the reaction would be to mixed crews. The theory was that anything that would make the patrol more pleasant would give the Navy an excuse to extend them beyond the normal 65 days.
The general consensus was then that the wives and girlfriends would be the only ones who would object. An idea that was floated then was to make all the females admitted lesbians so the wives wouldn’t have a reason to worry but that didn’t fly because gays weren’t allowed to serve. It was a fun debate back in the day.
Be an interesting cruise with those ladies in a boat filled with seamen.
LOL!
It gives me great solace that the military the Marxists hope to marshal against us patriots when the time comes is the same military that hasn’t won a war since WWII, and is continually being gutted further both in terms of funding, warrior ethos, morale and common sense. Bring it on!
Transfer requests to the USS Maine have suddenly increased.
Remember the Maine, indeed.
}:-)4
That’s the one the shipyard worker burned for 400 million?
Another sad day on the road to serfdom...
They’re easy on the eyes, too!
whoopie.
“If they fail, then they fail”
Kind of cavalier about our nation’s defense and our tax dollars aren’t you? The military isn’t a social experiment! What a FReeping liberal!
I believe you have forgotten that those officers EARNED the right to wear the uniform and EARNED the right to serve on subs.
Just my opinion, and just so you know, those who disagree with you are not automatically liberal in their views.
Sheesh!
“EARNED”
You know that and that no standards were compromised? They have always been in the past with these female affirmative action hires.
To answer your question — are submarines the type of ship (boat) where standards of performance can be altered for a few members of a crew?
The nature of vessel and it needs for damage control teams would suggest not.
I do understand your position, there should be no women in combat, I agree with that position as well.
However, the naval hierarchy seemns to believe that these three officers are capable of performing to the level required for subermarines.
The naval hierarchy believes anything Obama tells them to believe. And no statistics or facts will ever get in their way!
“are submarines the type of ship (boat) where standards of performance can be altered for a few members of a crew?”
How about airplanes? Can the military services change standards for pilots of military aircraft? Your logic would probably assume not, but they did.
“the naval hierarchy “
That naval hierarchy had Moochelle Obama show up and proclaim her support for an all female sub crew. That hierarchy will do whatever it takes to get it and that includes lowering standards however far necessary to obtain an all female crew.
I don’t mean to be misogynistic, but there was an article published recently about two female college roommates, one of which poisoned the other (hospitalization, no fatality) because of an argument over who did the dishes.
I’m sorry, but some people don’t grow up at all, and I’d hate to see the equivalent of that sort of attitude on some submersible metal tube.
:(
Add in a little liberal propaganda that they “deserve it” and it is “rightfully theirs” and that attitude magnifies greatly; “Who are you to flunk me off this sub? F’ You! *bang*”
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.