Posted on 01/25/2013 6:57:52 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe
When she heard that women would be allowed to serve on the frontlines of battle, former Camp San Luis Obispo garrison commander Lt. Col. Nicole Balliet’s first reaction was, “Well, it’s about time!”
The Atascadero native then had to better understand the announcement and its implications.
“It’s very overwhelming,” she said of the decision. “It’s a huge validation for all the hard work women have done serving in combat for the past several decades.”
The official announcement came after initial reports Wednesday of the Pentagon’s reversal of the 1994 ban on women serving in small frontline combat units.
In his announcement, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta also called on the armed forces to come up with a plan to comply by 2016, or to petition for exemptions if they felt specific roles could not be filled by women.
But Baillet said she thinks women will do just fine on the battlefield.
Balliet, who was promoted in November to executive officer to the adjunct general of the National Guard, served two separate tours in Iraq, 2003-04 and 2010-11. During her time there, Balliet saw many situations in which women were involved in combat, despite the ban, she said.
“Women have held these sorts of jobs for years,” she said. “We’ve had direct fire. We’ve been under attack. We’ve had vehicles blow up, just the same” as male soldiers.
Though Balliet is not sure whether she would have chosen to be on the frontlines when she entered the service 25 years ago, “it would have been nice to have the opportunity,” she said.
The decision may increase the number of women enlisting in the military, Balliet said.
“I think (an increase) is a very good possibility,” she said. “And that’s not a bad thing.”
Approximately 15 percent of active duty personnel in the military are women, according to the U.S. Department of Defense. Of these, women are most represented in the Air Force (19 percent) and Navy (16 percent).
In the past few years, those branches relaxed most of their prohibitions on women serving in combat. Women are allowed to fly fighter jets, fire weapons from ships and serve on submarines.
Pismo Beach resident and former Petty Officer 1st Class Brianne Richardson knew several female fighter pilots during her time with the Navy.
“They were very tough, very dedicated,” she said. “They were able to do what they needed to do.”
For her, the announcement of the ban’s reversal wasn’t a shock, since many females in her branch had already been serving in combat-like situations.
Richardson, who entered the military with the intent to become a nurse, said she would not choose to go to the frontlines. She was also apprehensive about the decision, because women would have to pass the same rigorous physical tests as men to go to the frontlines.
“(Right now) in the military, women don’t have to pass the same tests as men,” she said. “In combat, that goes right out the window because you are then responsible for the safety of everyone in your group. … I support it if women have to pass the same exact test as men.”
In the announcement, Panetta confirmed that women would be required to pass the same physical requirements as men to serve on the frontlines, but there may be some review of these requirements in the months to come to ensure that they are gender-neutral.
The California National Guard office in Sacramento issued an official statement in support shortly after the Pentagon’s announcement, saying the decision would strengthen the military by increasing diversity.
“This decision is more than a move toward equality, but a tactical advancement, as well,” the report stated. “This greater diversity translates directly into mission success, both in combat overseas and during domestic operations here at home.”
“I think (an increase) is a very good possibility,” she said. “And that’s not a bad thing.”
I think it will have exactly the OPPOSITE effect. I believe FEWER women will go into the military, if they know they could be sent to the 'front line'.
A female nurse accidentally being killed doesn't ruin combat efficiency of the fighting forces. In Vietnam only one American female soldier was killed by the enemy, a nurse was struck by shrapnel, while working in a hospital during a shock terror attack.
When we went to war after 9/11, female and black enlistments shrank because they didn’t want to join during war.
She is a lieutenant colonel in the Nationl Guard. Don't they have an "up or out" rule in the Guard. I suppose she could have come up through the ranks.
My son was with the 101st in Iraq. Being an airborne unit, that meant he walked all the way from Kuwait to Baghdad. So goes the army... Anyway, he carried an M249 with a 100 round magazine (take that DiFi!). He also carried 500 extra rounds, an extra barrel, a Beretta pistol(should have been a Colt), a ruck sack some mules would balk at, and about 85 pounds of body armor. All of this in the the desert heat.... Honey, how would you like to do that on your period? They don't carry couches in the open air latrine for your cramps either.
You are a General of an Infantry division and your Commander lets you choose one of two enemy divisions to fight in an upcoming engagement. Intel confirms the first enemy division that you could choose to oppose in the upcoming battle is all male. Or you could instead choose to fight the second enemy division that was mixed faggot, women and men. So which enemy division would you choose to fight?
Answer Yes or No and explain your answer.
Another question for them.
Will we ever go up against another army that has female front line combat soldiers?
You really need to do some serious reading on the subject. I suggest Eugene Sledge's “With the Old Breed: Peleliu and Okinawa” or Robert Leckie’s “Helmet for My Pillow” or “Strong Men Armed.”
Colonel Balliet rhapsodizes that “it's about time” and “I'd like to have had the chance”. Are you absolutely insane, woman? Let's talk about the numbers.
Has it occurred to you that infantry units in ground combat lose people and those deaths are not “Hollywood” kinds of deaths? These deaths are as gruesome as you can imagine: people are vaporized; people with heads, arms, legs blown off; people eviscerated with their internal organs spread around. In Eugene Sledge's K Company, they went into action with 240 men and came out with 5 still walking upright. So, Colonel, what exactly happened to the other 235? Do you envy them that they got a chance to experience “front line combat”?
One of the dirty little secrets in the military that no one talks about is the female “option”. If Suzie Soldier, Airman, Sailor, or Marine gets an assignment she doesn't like or doesn't want to do, Suzie gets pregnant. Pregnancy gets her a free ticket out and back to a nice, safe rear area so she can have her child [and about a year's duty in this safe duty station as she raises her new born]. Meanwhile, the unit she abruptly left gets no replacement for her and those remaining have to do her job besides their own.
Now imagine Sledge's K Company with 50 Suzie Marines who don't want to invade Peleliu or Okinawa so they get pregnant to avoid combat? That leaves 190 males to shoulder the load of the original 240 BEFORE the shooting actually starts. That's hardly fair, is it Colonel Balliet? You don't think females in infantry units would exercise the “option”, Colonel? The women already ARE exercising the “option” and the women aren't in combat arms, Colonel.
There's also another thing I notice about people like Colonel Balliet — it is officers who think front line combat is just wonderful because it gives them a resume enhancement for advanced promotion! I don't see a lot of senior and junior enlisted people clamoring for ground combat slots. Let me be blunt, Colonel Balliet. I have been on the sharp end of the spear and it is not a pretty place to be when the real crap hits the fan. This is not a “stepping stone” to an advanced promotion; this is a good way to get maimed, permanently disabled, or killed. You cannot get promoted if you're dead Colonel Balliet [or maimed or permanently disabled].
Let's be very frank, Colonel Balliet: infantry ground combat is an equal opportunity killer and respects neither gender nor rank. Anyone who looks on it as a fast track to advanced promotion is a bloody fool [or worse].
Just another way to weaken OUR military to appease the chi-coms!!!!
That was my initial reaction when her name came up. The O-5 isn't going into combat.
Why don't these newspeople pick a random female E-3 or E-4 at the base PX and ask her what she thinks?
Hell, I'm 60 years old and a retired AF weenie. I still bet, sight unseen, that I can clean her clock in hand-to-hand and carry more than she can over a 5 mile hike.
A man and a woman in the same foxhole? By all means; why should gays have all the fun?
Couldn’t agree more!
We had a guy on here the other day crowing about Marine daughter and then in the same breath stating they hoped she wouldn't get combat assignment
Women appear to join for career....like too many generals today
In WWII men apologized for being rear support and not actually in the fight like they were embarrassed
Women in harms way is unavoidable at times
But as frontline assault force.....that is ridiculous
Any man who wish’s a combat assignment for his daughter is a friggin nutcase.
I don’t want my grandson to have to serve in combat, but if he has to he will.Not my grand daughter. I want her to be like my wife. A woman.
We cannot have military based on who diesnt want to fight
Which is why integrating women into our male military has been a disaster
There are plenty more reasons too
Whats next....wheelchair combat
12 year old boys
My 7th grade boy is a crack shot full of vigor....lets give him a shot
To be FAIR and all
The age of lunacy my man.....ain’t it grand
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.