Skip to comments.Elaine Donnelly: Women in Combat Order “Dangerous Social Experiment”
Posted on 01/24/2013 10:06:04 AM PST by Olog-hai
Military-readiness advocate Elaine Donnelly warns that the Obama administrations decision to put women in ground-combat roles amounts to social engineering to achieve a political end in the name of diversity.
She adds that the policy shift means lives could be lost unnecessarily, not just women, but men.
Donnellys organization, the Center for Military Readiness, released a 42-page report earlier this week exploring the unintended consequences of putting women on the front lines.
It will do great harm to women in the military, especially those who will find themselves in the infantrysomething theres no indication they wanted, Donnelly said Wednesday in an exclusive Newsmax interview. It will harm men and the mission of the infantry as a whole.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsmax.com ...
Anyone who knows combat as I do, knows this is a very bad idea.
My reaction is that the female must be able to meet the same qualifications imposed on the male. Thereafter, if she is in a frontline role and gets pregnant, both the father and her are discharged.
“And in the Overseas Contingency Crisis Management all front line casualties represented the diversity which is our strength in almost all demographic percentages. However military experts are at a loss to explain why Gay casualties haven’t reached the projected 10%.”
Gee, ya THINK, Elaine!?? You could try to impose worse ideas on the military, but your feminist meddling where it doesn't belong has lead to this.
Look at the numbers of men who have been in combat that now suffer from PTSD. Why would ANY sane person believe that this is a good idea for women!!!?????
In many if not most billets, gays and women can serve effectively although they are going to be challenged and degraded by their ability to cope with the effects of pregnancy and homophobia and fitness.
Remember ladies, all of our shooting enemies are muslim men. For them is haram (forbidden) to look or talk to women, any women, even those in uniform or demonstrating any authority.
Factor that into the combat walking patrol and liaison with village elders that will greatly help in keeping your troops alive.
Special Ops is a highly testosterone-driven boys club.
Ladies, I been there, don’t go there.
Why should women get a choice of meeting the men’s standards or not?
No man in the US armed services has the option of meeting the lower women’s physical standards, even if he’s a nurse or accountant.
Neither should the woman have the choice. If they want the “option” of front-line combat positions, then it should be a uniform standard for all servicemembers.
This is going to be very bad. I just finished a couple of books on the war in Afghanistan. One was about the special forces/ranger fight during Operation Anaconda and the other was about a 10th mountain Division unit in Eastern Afghanistan. What both of these units went through was brutal combat at about 10,000 feet. I don’t think any woman soldier would have survived. Our soldiers are required to patrol in some of the roughest terrain in the world against the most savage sons of bitches we ever fought. Our guys have to carry combat loads of eighty to 100 pounds I don’t see women doing it. What will probably happen is that they will be left in base camp and the men will do the patroling and combat. The women will still count against the combat strenth of the unit. This has just got so many things wrong with it and a lot of soldiers are going to die for the decisions made by Obama and the chicken shit Pannetta.
'You could try to impose worse ideas on the military, but your feminist meddling where it doesn't belong has lead to this'.....
... to Elaine Donnelly.....
you are wrong, wrong, wrong.
Donnelly has had a long standing belief that women should not be in combat situations....
She is not a feminist.
Aside from the oblivious military ramifications, think of the social effects.
1). The hardening attitude of men towards women. If our men sees enlisted women as just another “soldier” and not an more vulnerable member of society. PTSD is already an known effect on our troops, must we instill callous attitude towards women, most of whom do not share the same desire to "hump" large backbacks across hostile terrain while getting shot at
2). Women must be included in the Draft.(14th Amendment) Hey it's only fair. And most important, the line between combatants and civilians will be completely erased, no longer just occasionally blurred.
Women will necessarily seen as an untapped source of manpower(no pun intended) and thus “war material” to be destroyed by our enemies.
All just to advance the goals of a few feminists
An emotional issue for sure. However in WW2 the Russians had women fighter pilots, tank drivers and snipers.
In past wars the weakest and the dumbest. and those with no connections were always assigned to become cannon fodder. Put them out front, they will not be much of a loss. The smart and strong and the rich found ways to stay out of harms way. I am wondering just what will happen to a 5’2” 120 lb lady with an IQ of 90 who can’t type in this modern army? (You know the army still discriminates against those they term overweight.)
Two anecdotal examples of how the military can never, ever keep the same standards between men and women, because of PC pressures.
Jumpmaster - one of the duties of a Jumpmaster is a pre-jump inspection. He checks the parachute, static line, helmet, etc....and the final check: he runs his hands along the harness and follows the straps under the crotch. He’s checking to make sure they aren’t improperly routed around your testicles. Once I had a female jumpmaster. She, of course, did not do this. This was 20 years ago - the military failed to hold her to the same standard, and put us all at risk (a poorly routed strap is more than ha-ha it hurts stuff...it could be serious trauma).
Pull-ups: At Airborne school, you learn how to steer an older style parachute (T10C). It requires quite a bit of upper body strength. In order to be prepared for the real thing, we were required to do 10 pullups before entering the mess hall. So, if you were to go to the Airborne School at Ft Benning, you would notice a few pull up bars in front of every mess hall. In adddition to that, you will see one bar around 3 feet off the ground. What’s it for? Well most women cannot do 10 pull ups - so they lie on their backs and do a sort of simulated pullup on this lower bar. Now steering is important in a parachute...and its dangerous if some of your fellow jumpers can’t steer. They could run into you, or they could end up in a situation where they are essentially standing on your parachute, which is extremely dangerous. But there it was - a lower standard, and obviously most of the women could not steer.
I have absolutely no reason to believe women will be held to a higher standard in these new positions.
Get your head outta your butt and look up Elaine Donnelly. Your post makes you appear terribly ignorant.
They also had a lot of material help from the USA. If not for that, the USSR could have fallen to the Nazis.
Yeah, and they never paid back a dime of it either and all the time it was “When are you going to launch the second front’’? Every once and awhile I run into some Russian on the internet talking about how the brave Red Army vanquished the Nazis. When I point out to them that old Joe Stalin was quite content at first to walk down the garden path with old Adolph they shut up.
I dunno, a few platoons of PMS deranged feminazi butchs could be a pretty lethal force............. /s