Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Women in Combat: Felony Stupid
TownHall.com ^ | Matt Barber

Posted on 02/18/2013 9:11:08 AM PST by jimluke01

The term “moronic” is defined as “notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.” It is frequently used as an insult.

The Obama administration is moronic.

This is not an insult.

President Obama’s latest “notably stupid” stoke of America’s calculated slow burn is the decision to lift the ban on women in direct combat. Along with the move a few years back to turn the Officers’ Club into the Blue Oyster Bar, this most recent social experiment with national security represents one small step for the “progressive” agenda and one giant prance toward the pansification of the greatest military in world history.

It’s a jaw-dropping “lack in good judgment.”

(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: army; combat; marines; progressives; women
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

1 posted on 02/18/2013 9:11:13 AM PST by jimluke01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: jimluke01

Bring back the draft, now.

Serving your country should be a requirement, not an option.


2 posted on 02/18/2013 9:19:37 AM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

Go back in and stay in until you effing die. Requiring people to serve with those who do not belong there merits permanently being forced to do the same.


3 posted on 02/18/2013 9:22:53 AM PST by MrEdd (Heck? Geewhiz Cripes, thats the place where people who don't believe in Gosh think they aint going.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd

Take a flying leap.


4 posted on 02/18/2013 9:25:08 AM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

Conscription is just a mild form of slavery. I wouldn’t want anyone in my unit who didn’t want to be there. They turn out be a slow acting poison.


5 posted on 02/18/2013 9:34:32 AM PST by sean327 (God created all men equal, then some become Marines!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01

If women are capable in the role then great. They can get shot just as well as men. They deserve no special protections.


6 posted on 02/18/2013 9:38:39 AM PST by BigCinBigD (...Was that okay?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sean327

Some of them. But it is also true that there were many conscripts who served with distinction and did their job well.

But I am firmly against conscription except in cases of total unrestricted warfare. I think the quality of our forces since 1973 is a positive affirmation that an all volunteer force works, and works well.

As anyone knows who has spent even a short time in close contact with our modern military, they almost all bitch, gripe and complain to one degree or another.

Ususally, open griping is reduced to mutters when someone points out that they “signed up for it”...:)


7 posted on 02/18/2013 9:41:20 AM PST by rlmorel (1793 French Jacobins and 2012 American Liberals have a lot in common.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

I say make them all serve.....just make conscripted units of them......send them into combat.....thin the herd.....those who survive, send them to non-conscripted units......LOL


8 posted on 02/18/2013 9:55:38 AM PST by superfries
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

We outlawed slavery for reason.


9 posted on 02/18/2013 9:58:47 AM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01
Entire article

The term “moronic” is defined as “notably stupid or lacking in good judgment.” It is frequently used as an insult.

The Obama administration is moronic.

This is not an insult.

President Obama’s latest “notably stupid” stoke of America’s calculated slow burn is the decision to lift the ban on women in direct combat. Along with the move a few years back to turn the Officers’ Club into the Blue Oyster Bar, this most recent social experiment with national security represents one small step for the “progressive” agenda and one giant prance toward the pansification of the greatest military in world history.

It’s a jaw-dropping “lack in good judgment.”

In 1991 the late Gen. Robert H. Barrow, former commandant of the Marine Corps, gave compelling testimony on the subject before the Senate Armed Services Subcommittee. He stated, “If you want to make a combat unit ineffective, assign some women to it. … In three wars – World War II, Korea and Vietnam – I found no place for women to be down in the ground combat element,” he concluded.

In a recent column headlined “Women in Ground Combat,” Bing West, former Marine officer and assistant secretary of defense under President Ronald Reagan, notes that, during his testimony, Gen. Barrow “cited the 1950 fighting retreat from the Chosin Reservoir in temperatures of minus 20 degrees, with one Marine division pitted against eight Chinese divisions. Had women comprised 15 percent of his division, Barrow concluded, the Marines would have lost the battle. ‘The very nature of women disqualifies them from doing it (killing so brutally),’ Barrow said. ‘Women give life, sustain life, nurture life; they don’t take it.’”

Evidently, Gen. Barrow never met one of today’s abortion-worshiping feminist “Flukes” of nature. Still, they only kill innocent children who can’t fight back.

In short, Gen. Barrow observed that opening the front lines to, um, “infantrywomen” would not only cost precious American lives, it would ultimately “destroy the Marine Corps.”

Now, I know, who the heck do Barrow and West think they are, right? Did they ever bravely serve God and country as a glorified teacher’s assistant at Harvard Law?

I think not.

Did they ever do “a little blow,” march with the Black Panthers, “organize their communities” into welfare-dependent hellholes, or drink lattes with “Marxist professors and the structural feminists”?

No.

Sheesh.

Even so, despite an obvious lack of credibility on combat readiness and a meager century or so in combined service, I think we should at least humor them a bit.

“To Barrow, a warrior admired by three generations of grunts,” wrote West, “ground combat meant killing under the harshest of circumstances. Barrow opposed the incorporation of women into infantry units characterized by primal instincts: sleeping, defecating, eating, and smelling like wolf packs while hunting down and slaughtering male soldiers.”

That’s the problem with political correctness – with liberalism in general. It raises a pseudo-utopian barrier to reality. Often times that barrier is deadly.

This is what happens when a gaggle of left-wing civilian politicians who don’t know which end of the gun goes “bang!” are placed in charge of national security. These yahoos couldn’t bust a grape with a sledge hammer, let alone lift a sledge hammer.

This is what happens when we allow “progressives” to deconstruct our culture by imposing, through public policy, the fantastical delusion of a “genderless society.”

I fully support women learning self-defense and packing heat for protection. I’ve known a number of gals so tough that, for his own safety, a fellow would be better served to break it off via text message should the relationship go south.

Still, as a former professional boxer and police officer, and having served 12 years in the armed services myself, I can say this without equivocation: While there may be the extremely rare anecdotal exception, in direct one-on-one military combat, the toughest, baddest, meanest chick out there is going to get stomped by the weakest infantryman.

This is life and death stuff. Women are no more made for the front lines than men are made for childbearing.

Don’t get me wrong – I love women. I’m married to a woman and am on the hook for two future weddings of future women who, admittedly, have me hopelessly wrapped around pink-polished little fingers.

Even so, if I’m on the front lines and Ahmed, Abdul and Hakeem come charging with fixed bayonets, I danged sure want Billy Bob, not Barbara, in my foxhole.

This doesn’t even scratch the surface. What of the sensitive dynamics of sex and jealousy? How about the reality that, despite feminist protestations to the contrary, chivalry is not dead? Men are naturally wired to protect the weaker sex, even if it runs counter to combat mission. Honorable men will drop everything to protect a woman, even if it means dying in the process.

If the presence of women is not a factor, than neither is sex, jealousy or chivalry (putting aside the whole “gays in the military” debacle). More importantly, if women remain shielded from direct combat, lives are saved and battles are won. Add women, and you add weakness. Both lives and battles are lost. It’s felony stupid.

Am I suggesting that the sitting president of the United States is stupid? Not exactly – not in terms of overall intelligence. But, as Momma Gump always said: “Stupid is as stupid does.”

I’m sure that Mr. Obama has an average or slightly above average IQ. Still, objectively, measurably – as a point of fact supported by the overwhelming weight of the evidence – this man stupidly, perhaps even seditiously, insists upon circumventing Congress to shovel executive order after executive order atop the Mount St. Helens of dictatorial dung heaps.

Eventually it has to blow.

The question is no longer whether Barack Obama is weakening every noble aspect of American life, including our military. The question now becomes whether the rest of us will be able to put the pieces back together once this radical lefty is finally back in Hawaii for good – Mai Tai in one hand and leather-bound copy of the Communist Manifesto in the other.

The question is whether America will survive Barack Obama.

10 posted on 02/18/2013 10:02:08 AM PST by Kaslin (He needed the ignorant to reelect him, and he got them. Now we all have to pay the consequenses)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
We outlawed slavery for reason.

So, can I now present myself as a freed slave?

11 posted on 02/18/2013 10:04:57 AM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

Not while you’re prescribing it for others.


12 posted on 02/18/2013 10:08:34 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: BigCinBigD

Women should not be in combat. War is no place for social experimentation.


13 posted on 02/18/2013 10:10:08 AM PST by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

“So, can I now present myself as a freed slave?”

If you are old enough to have been a slave, sure; otherwise, that was a rather lousy attempt at sarcasm.


14 posted on 02/18/2013 10:10:29 AM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01

A healthy nation understands that the purpose of a nation is to provide protection to it’s women. This is simply because bearing children is the primary purpose of humanity. It’s also very good for the nations future. However, we are no longer a nation so it’s difficult to explain this simple logic that has been common knowledge from the very start of human life on the planet.


15 posted on 02/18/2013 10:12:41 AM PST by The Toll
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01
If women in combat is such a good idea, why has no nation or country in history embraced it? Is it because they don't have a clue? Sure, women have been used in combat in some extreme instances where there was a lack of male soldiers, but they were almost always used in segregated units and not done unless absolutely necessary.

This isn't simply "felony stupid". It's ultimately going to result in "felony murder" - the murder by a competent enemy of the weaker, less able women and the men forced to depend upon them for purposes of "political correctness" rather than military necessity and ability.

When a country loses a war, it loses a lot more than just the people in the armed forces. It loses everything, including it's independence and freedom to direct it's own destiny!

Of course, that's the plan, no?

16 posted on 02/18/2013 10:14:20 AM PST by Gritty (The 2nd Amendment protects the right to shoot tyrants effectively, not deer-Judge A. Napolitano)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01

Just imagine!

Think of what a newsreel would show if...

Battan death march, half the POWs women.

Omaha Beach. Half the attackers women.

Iwo Jima half the fighters women.

The USS Indianapolis. Half the drowned women.

There would be national outrage!


17 posted on 02/18/2013 10:26:17 AM PST by Ruy Dias de Bivar ( Too old to cut the mustard any more.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: The_Media_never_lie

> Bring back the draft, now.
> Serving your country should be a requirement, not an option.

No way. I served in Vietnam with volunteers. I also saw many draftees. Draftees didn’t want to be there, resisted efforts to properly train them and could not be depended upon for anything. I would never want to go into the field with a draftee. Draftees will get you killed along with themselves.


18 posted on 02/18/2013 10:32:27 AM PST by BuffaloJack (Guns should not be illegal; they should be undocumented.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
If you are old enough to have been a slave, sure; otherwise, that was a rather lousy attempt at sarcasm.

If Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) can describe herself as a "freed slave", anyone can:

When are our friends on the other side of the aisle going to listen? I want to challenge this body to be the kind of "Lincolness attitude." As yesterday was the official birthday of President Lincoln, February 12, and although it was a tragic time in our history, I can assure you that it shows the greatest promise of America when people could come together and do something great. I stand here as a freed slave because this Congress came together.
Quoted here
19 posted on 02/18/2013 10:36:04 AM PST by Bob
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack; MrEdd; CodeToad
I served in Vietnam too and met some pretty damn good draftees. Nonetheless, we probably shouldn't draft anybody until we have a declared war.

However, the divots on this thread who refuse to serve are just cowards who don't mind other people risking their lives and their bodies for their freedoms. "Conservatives" who don't serve aren't conservatives, they're parasites.

20 posted on 02/18/2013 10:45:24 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: superfries
I say make them all serve.....just make conscripted units of them......send them into combat.....thin the herd.....those who survive, send them to non-conscripted units......LOL

The WWII army was 93% draftee, the Marines and Navy were full of draftees, men are interchangeable once in the service.

21 posted on 02/21/2013 2:27:14 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: trisham

When a college man can pummel a college woman into the ground and everyone just laugh it off as an ordinary ‘fistfight’, then maybe it will be time to look at women in the military.


22 posted on 02/21/2013 2:32:01 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01

If they are just as able as men, why not try an entire platoon of women? Or how about entire platoons of homosexual men and entire platoons of homosexual women? Couldn’t possibly be any disruptive problems within the ranks./s


23 posted on 02/21/2013 2:34:04 PM PST by bramps (Sarah Palin got more votes in 2008 than Mitt Romney got in 2012)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BigCinBigD
If women are capable in the role then great. They can get shot just as well as men. They deserve no special protections.

How is that relevant to the discussion? That is like saying one can accept 6 year olds being president if they are capable of it, or other non-statement/statements.

24 posted on 02/21/2013 2:39:58 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MrEdd
Requiring people to serve with those who do not belong there

A drafted Marine is the same as a volunteer Marine, draftees are not like women with a separate standard, the men are interchangeable.

25 posted on 02/21/2013 2:47:15 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Ah, you again! No, a drafted Marine is not the same as a volunteer: they never get over the fact that they were shanghaied into the Corps and often don’t blend well with the men enlisted voluntarily. We who volunteered couldn’t complain because when we did, our leaders would just say “you asked for it”. Draftees never had that to fall back on.


26 posted on 02/21/2013 3:45:49 PM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

Yes men are interchangeable, better a drafted 18 year old Marine who grows up in basic than a teen girl being hired in his place, a girl who will never be a man.

Few Americans are even aware that the Marine Corps drafts for major wars, just as they aren’t aware that the WWII military was mostly draftees.


27 posted on 02/21/2013 6:30:54 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Agree with the part "better a drafted 18 year old (male) Marine (who finishes boot camp) than a teenage girl..".

However my experience with the few draftees we had during Vietnam was that the non-volunteers never picked up the ferocity that we volunteer Marines had. We had one drafted guy that was sent as a replacement to our infantry company in early 1967 and he was a nice guy and he tried hard enough but he was almost useless in a fight. He finally got so psychologically worn out that our battalion CO recommended that he be sent home. He hadn't wanted to be there and he wasn't mentally ready to fight and kill, so he was a liability to the rest of us.

28 posted on 02/21/2013 7:10:49 PM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

“”Conservatives” who don’t serve aren’t conservatives, they’re parasites. “

True, however, drafting them is the answer? What did the nation do or not do to allow someone to be such a coward in the first place? How did we arrive at a point where people don’t want to serve? Even in the Revolutionary War we had problems recruiting people because most didn’t believe in a war with England. Draftees, while many if not most did serve honorably, didn’t fair as well as the volunteers. If you want people to serve their country you have to give them an honorable country they desire to serve. Simply demanding it doesn’t get you anywhere, draftees or not. God help us if we have to draft people for a war on our soil, we might end up with a bunch of well trained and equipped traitors.


29 posted on 02/21/2013 7:40:23 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

I served with GIs who showed no difference between draftee and volunteer, good and bad came from both, many draftees went on to become super soldier volunteers going Airborne and into Rangers and Special Forces, women are inferior to male soldiers regardless of whether as 19 year olds they wanted to enlist or were drafted.

“Last Vietnam Era Draftee Finally Retires” July, 2011

“It was 1972, a time of protest when war was stigmatized and some of those who fought in it were spat on.

A young drywall installer in Oregon, just 19 years old, had just gotten a letter from the White House, and believed that President Nixon had sat down and written to him. It was a letter informing him that he would be drafted.

Now that teenager is Command Sgt. Maj. Jeffrey Mellinger, and he’s been in the Army for 39 years.”

“Mellinger told the draft board there was a mistake.

“I ... told them I don’t need to go into the Army, I’ve got a job,” said Mellinger, who hung drywall for a living. “They just kind of laughed.”

“He went to the draft board and asked them if it was really serious. He was told that it was and ended up training at Fort Ord, in California, soon thereafter. He later was stationed in West Germany as a clerk and could not wait to get out after his two year service was up. The company commander ended up changing his mind when he convinced him on the possibility of joining the Army Rangers. He said in a 2007 ABC News magazine interview that reenlisting was the best decision of his life. As of 2011, he has made over 3,700 jumps with a total of thirty-three hours in freefall.”


30 posted on 02/21/2013 7:42:13 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
“”Conservatives” who don’t serve aren’t conservatives, they’re parasites.

Wow. I hope you don't really believe that.

31 posted on 02/21/2013 7:42:31 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
I see your point about Sgt Maj Mellinger but he was an exceptional guy - wish we Marines had got him. I was about to dispute your point that "just any guy can be a Marine" when I remembered how completely unsuited for the Marine Corps I was back in '65 and how I accidently joined. I was a skinny, glasses-wearing dweeb that was flunking out of Junior College when I went to a recruiting station to ask a few questions about the Air Force. The Air Force recruiters were out at lunch but there was a huge Marine Corps Master Sergeant there instead and before I could think twice, he had me signed up for four years. I remember a whole bus full of us dweebs heading for San Diego and Boot Camp and 13 weeks of running, drilling, yelling, obstacles, weapons, and shaved heads (and some of the best food I had ever eaten). At the end of this mess and graduation, I was a different guy by miles and once I finished infantry training, I was ready for my part in Vietnam.

So I sort of prove your point - except if I were dragged into it, I might not have adapted to things properly and never accepted my place among my brother Marines as well. A large part of the Marine Corps' success has been the bond between us and I knew, as all my other Marines knew, that the man on either side of me would carry his weight and if I was in trouble, they'd risk their lives to help me. I knew that I was up to that too - and I was wounded while dragging a wounded Marine out of an open rice paddy while a whole bunch of people were shooting at us.

I liked the guys who were drafted and served well in Vietnam - I met a bunch of them in the hospitals while we recovered - but they had a different mental set from those of us in the Marine Corps who volunteered and knew what we were in for.

32 posted on 02/22/2013 4:18:46 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
Drafting people is just forcing them to do their duty and I personally don't like the practice. Worse, I believe that drafting people makes them unlikely to fully accept military life/responsibilities and therefore less likely to be effective combatants.

I believe that any man who is physically able should join his country's armed forces and serve at least one enlistment. It is our duty as citizens and has the side benefit of getting everybody out of their little burgs and out into the rest of the country and the world. There is also the major side benefit of fully training all our young men in the use and employment of small arms. If we have a war going, then if one set of American young people are at risk, we should all be at risk.

33 posted on 02/22/2013 4:26:23 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad
Drafting people is just forcing them to do their duty and I personally don't like the practice. Worse, I believe that drafting people makes them unlikely to fully accept military life/responsibilities and therefore less likely to be effective combatants.

I believe that any man who is physically able should join his country's armed forces and serve at least one enlistment. It is our duty as citizens and has the side benefit of getting everybody out of their little burgs and out into the rest of the country and the world. There is also the major side benefit of fully training all our young men in the use and employment of small arms. If we have a war going, then if one set of American young people are at risk, we should all be at risk.

34 posted on 02/22/2013 4:27:41 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: GeronL
"Wow. I hope you don't really believe that"

I do - a conservative is a person who believes in our nation's Constitution and our core values. One of those core values is the sharing of our country's defense and learning military skills so we can carry out our part of protecting our families and our communities when we have completed our service. Dodging that responsibility is not a conservative principle and leaves somebody else to fill that person's place and assume the risks instead. That is why I am no fan of people like Rush who talk a good game but when we needed every single able man to help us in Vietnam, he stayed out because of butt cysts. I hope that he always wonders who took his (and Clinton's, and Cheney's) place and if that guy survived. In Vietnam, I learned which citizens were willing and able to shoulder the risks for their country and each other and which people suddenly decided that their skins were worth more than their country.

35 posted on 02/22/2013 4:38:44 AM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

I don’t remember state slavery being part of the Constitution.


36 posted on 02/22/2013 6:37:44 AM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

The military is doomed no matter what, a modern draft will be used to draft women and other elements to reshape the military in a political sense.

An all volunteer military doesn’t work either, it is too weak and tiny to do much, our dealings with China and hostile alliances will become based on the cold fact that we can’t meet and defeat them on the battlefield, and the social engineering and clamor for ever increasing pay, benefits, and quality of life issues, will eventually turn our military into merely another federal job, either unionized, or the same as unionized.

In time our military will be half female, liberal, isolated from citizens and they will all be career people, and patriotism and sacrifice will be replaced by the usual government employee demands for more goodies and an easier life that is less risky and less demanding, and that is absolutely about social equality and job fairness.

The military will eventually become hostile to the people and a democratic voting block.


37 posted on 02/22/2013 11:08:06 AM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BuffaloJack
> Bring back the draft, now. > Serving your country should be a requirement, not an option. No way. I served in Vietnam with volunteers. I also saw many draftees. Draftees didn’t want to be there, resisted efforts to properly train them and could not be depended upon for anything. I would never want to go into the field with a draftee. Draftees will get you killed along with themselves.

I defer to your experience as a wartime vet. Thank you for your service to our country!

I was simply making a statement of a method that would end the lunacy of women in combat.

I worked with a vet of Gulfwar I. He was in a transportation unit ferrying supplies to the troops at the front. It was a rather dangerous night time drive, 8-10 hours at highway speeds with running lights only. His stories of the women in his unit is that they did not pull their weight, either through fraternizing with the detailers or pregnancy or illness.

I simply don't think most women are fit for combat duty. Yet, it is not possible to discuss this topic rationally due to political correctness. Defies common sense.

38 posted on 02/22/2013 12:17:00 PM PST by The_Media_never_lie (Actually, they lie when it suits them! The crooked MS media must be defeated any way it can be done!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

It’s called “duty”. Most men are familiar with the term.


39 posted on 02/22/2013 3:30:54 PM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

You think every single person should become a slave of government for a time?

That is ridiculous.


40 posted on 02/22/2013 3:35:11 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jimluke01

Blue Oyster Bar

***
What the heck does that mean? (If it’s something naughty, please be gentle with your explanation for this Boomer grandmother. Thank you.)


41 posted on 02/22/2013 3:43:18 PM PST by Bigg Red (Restore us, O God of hosts; let your face shine, that we may be saved! -Ps80)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Kaslin

In short, Gen. Barrow observed that opening the front lines to, um, “infantrywomen” would not only cost precious American lives, it would ultimately “destroy the Marine Corps.”

**
Well, that destruction is the goal of the Soros Administration.


42 posted on 02/22/2013 3:48:27 PM PST by Bigg Red (Restore us, O God of hosts; let your face shine, that we may be saved! -Ps80)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: GeronL; Chainmail

Conservative men should try to enlist, their refusal to serve created a situation where the Army actually had to allow grandmothers in their 40s enlist to help us after 9/11, although our manpower needs were small.

Reagan should be the example, not Mitt Romney and Rick Santorum.


43 posted on 02/22/2013 4:42:40 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

Free citizens have no duty to service the government. Except in times of major national crisis.

Especially this particular government that refuses to fight the real enemies.

When US troops are on the streets rounding up free citizens I will remember that it is OUR duty, we should be proud of them as they take us to the camps.


44 posted on 02/22/2013 4:52:54 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

I already know the Romney defense for not serving his country.

Patriotic men, conservative men, should be driven to serve in the military, to pull a hitch, to not send their mothers, wives and sisters, and daughters in their place.


45 posted on 02/22/2013 5:00:56 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

This government doesn’t deserve it.

“in their place”. I’m not sending anyone anywhere.

Haiti? polishing bathtub fixtures in Kuwait? Making Kosovo a Muslim country? great service.


46 posted on 02/22/2013 5:24:30 PM PST by GeronL (http://asspos.blogspot.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: GeronL

If your America doesn’t deserve it, or if you don’t hear the warrior call, then so be it, but you need the protection of those who serve, and since we have a huge population, and a tiny military, and still can’t find enough patriotic men to serve, then they sit in witness as American women and mothers take their place.


47 posted on 02/22/2013 5:29:16 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

IMHO, having every able-bodied male conscripted is impossible. I’ll bet that at any point in time there are at least three million men of draft age. The services couldn’t handle an ocean of new recruits every two months. Where would we get the funds to pay them? How many more basic training centers would we need? This is a non-starter.


48 posted on 02/22/2013 5:44:29 PM PST by Ax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Ax

Why waste time discussing such a bizarre, non-existent hypothetical as you described?


49 posted on 02/22/2013 5:50:35 PM PST by ansel12 (Romney is a longtime supporter of homosexualizing the Boy Scouts (and the military).)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

I was just opining on some other posters’ views. That’s why I said “non starter.”


50 posted on 02/22/2013 6:16:18 PM PST by Ax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-54 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson