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

Skip to comments.

Women Don't Belong in Ranger School
Wall Street Journal ^ | 6-12-12 | Stephen Kilcullen

Posted on 06/13/2012 3:41:24 PM PDT by kingattax

The United States Army is debating whether to admit women to Ranger School, its elite training program for young combat leaders.

Proponents argue this is to remove a final impediment to the careers of Army women. But the move would erode the unique Ranger ethos and culture—not to mention the program's rigorous physical requirements—harming its core mission of cultivating leaders willing to sacrifice everything for our nation.

The Army's 75th Ranger Regiment traces its roots back to World War II, when it won acclaim for penetrating deep behind Japanese lines. Founded in 1950, Ranger School teaches combat soldiers small-unit tactics and leadership under extreme duress. It pushes men harder than any other program in the Army's curriculum.

Competition to attend the course is fierce, with about 4,000 men eligible to attend each year. Only about half graduate. Of those, only 20% make it through without having to retake various phases.

For decades, completion of Ranger School has been the best indicator for determining which young men can handle the enormous responsibility of combat leadership

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: liberalagenda; rangerschool
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 401-450451-500501-550551-589 next last
To: dixiechick2000
Thank you for your post. It is a pleasure meeting you dixiechich2000.
501 posted on 06/17/2012 1:04:56 AM PDT by Chgogal (WSJ, Coulter, Kristol, Krauthammer, Rove et al., STFU. TY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 497 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; dixiechick2000
I really meant to spell dixiechick2000 correctly. Sorry about that.
502 posted on 06/17/2012 1:06:53 AM PDT by Chgogal (WSJ, Coulter, Kristol, Krauthammer, Rove et al., STFU. TY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

“...less bulky soldiers used to be seen (generally) as the most successful for Special Operations units.”

I was just telling my daughter about I guy I work with (perhaps 12 years older than me) was a Ranger in Vietnam. Tall, skinny and a calm and quiet demeanor while being super friendly as well. He can still beat me hiking through the brush at our sites. Super smart as well which I imagine is a huge part of being a Ranger.


503 posted on 06/17/2012 1:12:41 AM PDT by 21twelve
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal
My God.

When you graduated High School the military was begging for you.

You rejected the military, even though you were some kind of female warrior/athlete freak "In my youth there were God Damned few males who could better me. They tried and they failed. Like you they were not only ignorant they were arrogant. But me being a God Damned cunning female managed to beat them at their game not only physically but mentally and emotionally as well. They went home with their tales between their legs."

Now you still want the worst for the American military.

504 posted on 06/17/2012 1:13:48 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 495 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; dixiechick2000
Thank you for your post. It is a pleasure meeting you dixiechich2000.

Yet she was also disagreeing with you.

I think we all just learned what drives your dedication against the military, especially the most male components of it.

505 posted on 06/17/2012 1:17:36 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

To: 21twelve

Rangers and all Special Operations are required to be bright, (same level as for officers), but the Special Forces used to require a GT score 5 points higher than that required for Officers, or other Special Operations.

I had never thought about the second part of that until tonight.


506 posted on 06/17/2012 1:24:45 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 503 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; dixiechick2000
When I was in high school the Military was begging for women because the Communist Left wanted women in the Military. Men that I respected, conservative men, men like you told me the Military is not a place for women. I believed men like you.

You have a problem with that?

Now, decades later, all I am saying is that all eligible Soldiers should be able to apply to Ranger School and there is a shift in the continuum. If those eligible Soldiers fail they fail.

507 posted on 06/17/2012 1:30:36 AM PDT by Chgogal (WSJ, Coulter, Kristol, Krauthammer, Rove et al., STFU. TY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 504 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

What in the world are you talking about?

Men didn’t do this to you, conservatives didn’t do this to you.

When you were a young high school girl we couldn’t get you into the service, today you are embracing Nancy Pelosi and the hard left to destroy the military.


508 posted on 06/17/2012 1:35:36 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

To: SkyDancer
I may as post some of my favorite quotes of yours from this thread.

“I believe people should be given the chance to prove themselves. If they can’t make the grade, they can’t make the grade. I went through reserve Marine basic. Same thing guys did. I passed. No special privileges. I got yelled at just the same, ate the same mud, repelled off cliffs like them, the whole scene. My dad was a Marine pilot in Vietnam, I have two brothers that served in Iraq One and my mom is a military brat. I’ve been there and done that.”

“I’m a pilot. I fly jets. I had a bf who was a pilot (is a a pilot). I waxed his butt so many times when we flew air combat sim’s in real planes it wasn’t funny.”

“Later I joined the Marine reserve and went through boot camp. I did everything the guys did. I came home, became an FAA certified pilot flying jets. I now work in Australia flying planes into the outback where any Marine pilot would crap his or her pants landing on the strips I do. Don’t tell me I don’t know what Ranger or infantry combat is like.....”I’ll go up against any Marine Recon anytime anywhere anyplace. And I’m only 5’6 and weigh in at 110lbs.
Have a nice day, Regards, Janey”

“There are also people who have meth labs up there as well as guys who’ve gone bush. I’ve run into several of them and never had a problem if you know what I mean.”

“Was just saying ... all things considered. You bring on one of your Marine Force Recon to where I live and I’ll have his butt spray painted before he knew what happened”

“See, only a guy would think of that. Why carry an MG twenty miles? You’ve been watching too many WWII movies. You let the enemy come to you. In modern war you don’t fight it like it was WWII or even Vietnam ....An MG is a defensive weapon. “

“Ummm - educated me as to what? One of the things I used to do was to sneak up on the guys barracks, take pictures and get back without being seen. And yes, I’m the FreePer known as Skydancer and I’ve been here since 2005. I think there’s a bit of jealousy on your part that I should have learned the guy stuff and are upset that I can outclass you in various areas.”


509 posted on 06/17/2012 1:50:32 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 459 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
What are you talking about?

You have posted so many posts stating that women can't handle Military life. So, when I tell you that when I was young I followed that train of thought you are upset with me. What the heck?

Instead I went to college, held two jobs while competing in swimming, graduated from two separate colleges simultaneously which just floored the university because to date that had never been done that before so they gave me two degrees, one from the College of Business and one from the College of Liberal Arts. I then got a job. Did well and retired early. Now, exactly how am I left wing?

510 posted on 06/17/2012 2:04:16 AM PDT by Chgogal (WSJ, Coulter, Kristol, Krauthammer, Rove et al., STFU. TY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
What are you talking about?

You have posted so many posts stating that women can't handle Military life. So, when I tell you that when I was young I followed that train of thought you are upset with me. What the heck?

Instead I went to college, held two jobs while competing in swimming, graduated from two separate colleges simultaneously which just floored the university because to date that had never been done that before so they gave me two degrees, one from the College of Business and one from the College of Liberal Arts. I then got a job. Did well and retired early. Now, exactly how am I left wing?

511 posted on 06/17/2012 2:04:16 AM PDT by Chgogal (WSJ, Coulter, Kristol, Krauthammer, Rove et al., STFU. TY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 508 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

So you couldn’t cut it, didn’t even want to try it 40 years ago, yet you want to support politicians that will bring us down today?

How do your “politics” support the American Military and the Navy SEALS?


512 posted on 06/17/2012 2:15:09 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 511 | View Replies]

To: DuncanWaring

Well put sir!


513 posted on 06/17/2012 2:15:29 AM PDT by Covenantor ("Men are ruled...by liars who refuse them news, and by fools who cannot govern." Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 400 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

I was a soldierette. I handled it.


514 posted on 06/17/2012 2:17:43 AM PDT by bannie ("The gov't that robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend upon the support of Paul.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 510 | View Replies]

To: bannie
I was a soldierette. I handled it.

No one wants to hurt soldiers, especially a girl soldier, no matter what their politics.

515 posted on 06/17/2012 2:35:05 AM PDT by ansel12 (Massachusetts Governors, where the GOP now goes for it's Presidential candidates.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 514 | View Replies]

To: antceecee

“Wow, how threatened are you that you cannot acknowledge the service of another, that happens to be a woman?”

You mean the “sub-standards” service of another, that’s what we are talking about here. Not the service of someone equal to others but someone that had the standards lowered for them then claiming they met standards when they didn’t. That’s a waste of my taxpayer dollars, places our nation’s security at risk, and is nothing but a political action designed to gain votes of those the sub-standards were applied. “Affirmative Action”.

How does it feel to know they wasted taxpayer dollars living on political welfare in the military?


516 posted on 06/17/2012 6:05:14 AM PDT by CodeToad (Homosexuals are homophobes. They insist on being called 'gay' instead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: antceecee

Where did you get that idea? Quote, please.


517 posted on 06/17/2012 6:43:14 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer; ansel12

Ansell brings up some interesting questions about your USMC training. So I’d like to add my own simple question.

Did you go through USMC basic training in San Diego or Parris Island? As far as I know, those are the only two venues for Marine Corps basic training.

So, which was it? When?


518 posted on 06/17/2012 6:53:47 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 448 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

I’ve flown out of the airfield at the Blue Zoo, and done touch-and-go landings at the airfield at Ft. Carson.


519 posted on 06/17/2012 7:03:04 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 451 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

Once women are given slots at Ranger School, they WILL pass, in numbers and proportions that were dictated very clearly to all of the officers in the chain of command.

This WILL happen. In the military, career-minded officers follow legal orders, or they quit. If they quit, their replacement will follow the orders.

And that is how we will have female Rangers. By orders coming down the chain from the political side. And to hide the dilution of the standard, the standard will also be lowered for men, leading to faint-hearted homosexuals and others passing.

And in ten years, a Ranger tab won’t mean shit.

But that’s not the worst of it. Who cares about pride in tradition? Move on! Okay, I get that.

But if we are forced to fight a REAL WAR, not on our terms, not where we own the air and battle space, (think Korea, 1950), we are going to get SLAUGHTERED when unit integrity totally breaks down, when boyfriends are busy protecting girlfriends (and boyfriends!), instead of running toward the sound of the guns with weapon in hand.

Our military in the field will get SLAUGHTERED when the unit cohesion crumbles to dust. When it’s enemy aircraft and missiles flying overhead, not our own, all the time.

In 1950 our Army broke in Korea, and was almost run out of the country, but in hte end it reformed and held until reinforcements arrived, But Just Barely.

When the next Korea 1950 happens, our military will break completely.

That’s why this PC fantasy bullshit is so dangerous. It doesn’t matter in little wars where we control and shape the battle space. It will mean utter destruction under the suddenly imposed total combat conditions of VN Tet, Korea 1950, etc.


520 posted on 06/17/2012 7:04:32 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 456 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

Thank you, sir.


521 posted on 06/17/2012 7:08:02 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 376 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; Travis McGee
It is my understanding that your hypothetical enemy is long fighting men and our side is short qualified Troopers, correct?

That's a policy problem, not a demographic problem.

The guys who complete Ranger school are probably in the top 0.1% of the male population in endurance and the top 1% in strength.

The number of women who can meet those (male) standards is effectively zero.

522 posted on 06/17/2012 7:10:20 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 458 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
did you see post#457?
523 posted on 06/17/2012 7:11:35 AM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 520 | View Replies]

To: Chode

I’m sure the enemy will allow time for battlefield shower facilities for the women.


524 posted on 06/17/2012 7:16:56 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 457 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

As long as we can always fight little wars on our terms, with full control of the battle space....

I hope our future enemies always cooperate with our fantasies and delusions.

For some reason, I’m reminded of the Children’s Crusades. Or unarmed Quakers crossing Comanche territory, sure in their faith and the goodness of all mankind.

These stories never end well, when PC fantasies strike the reef of reality.


525 posted on 06/17/2012 7:20:32 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 516 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal
How do costs go up by allowing an eligible f soldier to compete against an eligible m soldier in Ranger School?

The likelihood of an "eligible f" soldier successfully completing Ranger school is effectively zero.

Therefore, dividing the cost of operating the school by the number of graduates, to compute a "cost per graduate", increases the cost per graduate.

Sending a male instead, who at least has a chance of graduating, lowers the cost per graduate.

A pound of coffee used to cost $3. Now, 11 ounces of coffee costs $3. Certainly you wouldn't say that since both containers cost $3, the cost hasn't increased.

526 posted on 06/17/2012 7:22:46 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 482 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal
Fine.

Let her try and fail. When she fails, she will then not be serving with the Rangers, SEALs or any other Special Forces.

In my youth there were God Damned few males who could better me. They tried and they failed.

Like you they were not only ignorant they were arrogant. But me being a God Damned cunning female managed to beat them at their game not only physically but mentally and emotionally as well. They went home with their tales between their legs.

Now, there are many awesome males who are my better and I will gladly bow to them. Unfortunately, you are not one of them

Now take your testosterone laced idiocy and leave me alone you stupid stupid man.

****************************

Your thinking is worse than naive. It is dangerously naive and frighteningly hostile.

527 posted on 06/17/2012 7:23:11 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 478 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Chgogal

Hello ansell2: “Weak Link: The Feminization of the American Military” by Brian Mitchell documents your points very well.

The Center for Military Readiness is an excellent organization that presents facts examining the issue of females in combat: http://cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp.

Hello Chgogal: Maintaining the same physical standards is not the only issue regarding females in combat: see Post 271.


528 posted on 06/17/2012 7:24:31 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 444 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal
Do you remember the day we left Vietnam.

I happened to be the guy at Wing Headquarters who was sent over to the Comm Center to pick up a classified message which happened to be the one announcing that Saigon had just fallen.

529 posted on 06/17/2012 7:31:28 AM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 449 | View Replies]

To: Covenantor

Excellent post. Thank you.


530 posted on 06/17/2012 7:33:09 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 414 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; rlmorel; ansel12

“I hope men don’t mind visiting a f medic in combat should they need their private parts examined.”

From Post 463, “Create a simple kit that allows women to self-test for urinary or vaginal infections without having to approach a company medic, often a man, about symptoms.”

One can say “back at ya” but that would be petty.


531 posted on 06/17/2012 7:38:51 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 468 | View Replies]

To: ansel12; Chgogal

“the question posed tonight is already answered—yes, women may serve in combat duty—but that a correlative point has also been made, namely that anyone who disagrees with this position is backward, uncommitted to equal rights, something of a male chauvinist, a Tailhook type. And to the extent that he does not believe in gender equality, he or she is an undeveloped, metaphysical fetus. And of course, we all know what we do with unwelcome fetuses.”

“The first point is utilitarian: Given that combat duty exacts the most that the human body can deliver, does it make sense to admit to combat duty a gender whose members are physically weaker than males?

“The second point is sociological: In combat conditions, is it realistic to suppose that traditional deferences to sexual identity and derivative customs relating to privacy can simply be ignored? Isn’t it likelier that any such assumption is an invitation to distractions which in tight and anxious military situations could prove lethal?

“And finally, third, are we not, in suggesting that the male predisposition to protect the female should be ignored, sticking our meddling little fingers into the chemistry of biological relationships from which much that is concededly civilized issues? For instance, the call to protect the hearth, to honor the mother and care for the child, to shoulder that burden that corresponds with the incremental capacity of the male to carry greater physical burden, even as the woman bears so many burdens distinctive to her own sex? We plant our flag on a sound tradition, ladies and gentlemen, and warn our dogged adversaries that whatever sophistries they hurl up against it, that flag will continue, bruised but proud, to stand high over the madding crowd.”

William F. Buckley
http://cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp?docID=328

I encourage reading the entire debate at the link.


532 posted on 06/17/2012 7:44:38 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 473 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; wardaddy

“I am not advocating social engineering. You are mistaken.”

But you are.

See Post 532, William F Buckley’s third point.


533 posted on 06/17/2012 7:47:48 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 492 | View Replies]

To: trisham; Chgogal

“Now take your testosterone laced idiocy and leave me alone you stupid stupid man.”

Wow. . .I called it. . . (Post 271).


534 posted on 06/17/2012 7:53:59 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 527 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal; wardaddy

Heck, that would be his second point.

Heck, Buckely’s entire argument covers it.


535 posted on 06/17/2012 7:57:26 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 533 | View Replies]

To: Hulka; Chgogal

What I’ve learned from this thread: feminists are angry, perpetual victims who don’t like men.


536 posted on 06/17/2012 8:06:21 AM PDT by trisham (Zen is not easy. It takes effort to attain nothingness. And then what do you have? Bupkis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 534 | View Replies]

To: trisham

I learned that decades before reading this thread. It does prove the point, though.


537 posted on 06/17/2012 8:17:43 AM PDT by eartrumpet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 536 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

“when PC fantasies strike the reef of reality.”

Such as when 30% of women become pregnant, something men cannot do, when required to deploy to get out of service? Or when another 30% come up with “female problems” to also get out of deployment? Nothing like having 2/3rds of the troops unfit for deployment from the start.


538 posted on 06/17/2012 8:24:06 AM PDT by CodeToad (Homosexuals are homophobes. They insist on being called 'gay' instead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 525 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

Or this: A few days before we were to deploy for Operation Desert Shield, I was in the outer office of the brigade commander. Needed to discuss some logistics support issues for my Air Force team and I. A VERY pregnant female Army soldier was waiting to speak with the First Sergeant in the next office.

She was called into the First Sergeants office and began to make her case (loudly) that she wanted to deploy, that she would induce labor, have a c-section, whatever, just so she would not miss the deployment.

Gawd.

Something is not right when the mother thinks nothing of carving out her baby just so she could go to war.

Thing is, I’m sure there are many feminists in this world that would fully support her decision.

Needless to say, she did not deploy.

Hmmm. . .I wonder who was sent in her place. . .


539 posted on 06/17/2012 8:44:47 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 538 | View Replies]

To: Hulka

Deployments can add points to promotions and fitness reports, so many people want them. There are not simply reserve troops in the closet waiting to be activated to deploy. If she didn’t go then in effect no one went. This is why our taxpayer dollars are wasted, we have females and males in non-combat positions getting training such as jump school such as to add to their promotion points. They don’t need the training for their job, they are simply military welfare recipients.


540 posted on 06/17/2012 9:19:17 AM PDT by CodeToad (Homosexuals are homophobes. They insist on being called 'gay' instead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 539 | View Replies]

To: Chgogal

Chgogal, I think it is unfair to place this burden on the heads of officers within the military in charge of various programs facing this type of issue. I don’t think they should be put in that position. It shouldn’t come to that.

In a perfect world, with a military containing no “Perfumed Princes” and a civilian leadership that is not inclined to meddle in the details of running things, that would be the responsibility of the military leadership to ensure that standards are met.

But whether you want to admit it or not, neither of these situations above is the case.

The military takes their direction from the civilian leadership. Their only options (other than simply saluting and obeying) are to sabotage the wishes of the civilian leadership, or to resign. And those are the only choices: Obey, Obstruct, or Out (Leave). (Liberals might read these “Three O’s” and grin with the knowledge that it is EXACTLY what they want. Because they know that obstruction will not prevent them from reaching their objective. Nobody can obstruct forever, and obstruction can be just as damaging to the military as to the individual doing the obstructing. Liberals would call that “a twofer”...)

(Note: the same options of Obey, Obstruct or Out are being presented for opponents of homosexuals in the military as well. I want to emphasize that I do not in any way view these situations as having anything in common except for the two things: The method being used to implement the “desired” changes, and the impact on the military’s ability to perform a mission in the end. That is all. While I view the homosexual lobby and the feminist lobby in the same way because I do believe they have the same goals with respect to the military, I do not view the situation with women and homosexuals in the military at all in the same way. (Note that I will more closely group women in the military with homosexuals in the military who have no interest in pushing a homosexual agenda over the goals of the military) Again to reiterate: I don’t view women in the military in this respect, because I do believe the majority of them are patriotic and hardworking with the end goal of an effective military.

Anyway, all three of those options accomplish the goals of those who do not have the best interests of a cohesive and capable military at heart.

You may have read “Once an Eagle” by Anton Myrer. We have a good number of Sam Damons in our military, still. Principled leaders who want to do what is right for the country, the mission, and the men.

But for every Sam Damon, there are many who will do the right thing until it impacts their career, and there are always many more Courtney Massengales who will embrace what is needed to advance their career, regardless of the country, the mission, or the men. The reason this is so is because of human nature. The founders recognized this when devising a Constitution, to protect the people from men like Massengale and his ilk.

However, there is no such limiting mechanism inside the military other than the precepts of honor and tradition. The firewall is the government itself. Once that is breached, there is no saving recourse. One can attempt to argue along the lines of orders must be followed unless they are immoral or clearly wrong, but these pressures and edicts issuing forth from the civilian leadership do not fall into those categories, at least according to the civilian leadership. (Personally, I do think it is immoral and wrong (not because of women entering the Rangers, per se, but because of the loss of life and failures of the missions I see in the future)

So our commanders have no choice but to obey, sabotage the process or resign. The people in the “civilian leadership” have no intention of changing their views, barring a massive shift in values and electoral engagement.

The electorate can be broken into multiple parts: Those who think we should have a military, and those who don’t. Of those who do think we should have a military, they can be divided into those who know almost nothing about it, those who view it as a jobs program and those who understand what the military is all about. And even those who understand what the military is all about can be further broken down into those who want to achieve the goals of a successful military but think women in the military are being shortchanged from a career advancement point and want to change that by making the military gender-neutral, and those who want to achieve the goals of a successful military by focusing resources to maximize their application regardless of whether it alienates people because they understand that many of the rules in the military were written in blood, and to disregard those rules is to devalue the blood shed.

There are enough people in the electorate who view the military variously as a jobs program, an equal opportunity program, an unwanted necessity and an abomination that diverts money from social programs, that the groundswell to resist this is not going to come from the electorate.

And those in the government who make decisions? That speaks for itself. The Democrat party long ago stopped being responsible in this role, and there are too many in the Republican party who are indifferent to this. And we all know what the media wants. They want what the Democrats want.

Bottom line: This is a done deal.


541 posted on 06/17/2012 9:32:40 AM PDT by rlmorel ("The safest road to Hell is the gradual one." Screwtape (C.S. Lewis))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 472 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Great post, thanks for taking the time.


542 posted on 06/17/2012 10:02:23 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
Thanks, Travis McGee. It pains me that in many cases, one cannot discuss this without being painted as a troglodyte at best, or a misogynist at worst.

I admit, I am pessimistic about this. I guess realistic might be a better term. But as I stated in my initial post:

In 5 years after women join the Rangers/SEALS/Delta, you will hear talking heads in and out of the military who will say things like:

NEWS ANCHOR/POLITICIAN/MILITARY COMMANDER: "When we integrated women and homosexuals into these units, people were saying it was going to be a disaster, that it would hurt mission capability, morale and such. We are more capable now than we have ever been, and have the moral buttress of diversity and equality. Remember how they said the same thing about the military when blacks were going to be integrated back in 1946? Same result here...the world didn't end, and it won't. It was the right thing to do, and we can all be proud of the diversity we now see."

543 posted on 06/17/2012 10:47:52 AM PDT by rlmorel ("The safest road to Hell is the gradual one." Screwtape (C.S. Lewis))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: scbison
"If anybody ever watches military channel and shows on special forces there is no way in hell any woman could make it through based on physical standards required to get t hrough.. If they allow women, they then have to lower standards and that means people will die. Ultimtely, the repupblic dies."

The republic died almost four years ago.

544 posted on 06/17/2012 10:53:17 AM PDT by Godebert (NO PERSON EXCEPT A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

I’ve already posted enough personal information.


545 posted on 06/17/2012 11:01:41 AM PDT by SkyDancer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 518 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

Superb post.

End of thread.

Nothing left to say.


546 posted on 06/17/2012 11:05:35 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 541 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee

By the way, Travis, I bought all three of your EnemiesForeignAndDomestic e-books.

Good job.

Like the ending. Well done.


547 posted on 06/17/2012 11:07:32 AM PDT by Hulka
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 542 | View Replies]

To: SkyDancer

So, did you really go to USMC boot camp, or not? Which one, Parris Island, or San Diego?


548 posted on 06/17/2012 11:26:10 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 545 | View Replies]

To: Hulka

Thanks. I wish I believed in real-world happy endings like the end of Foreign Enemies And Traitors.


549 posted on 06/17/2012 11:28:30 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 547 | View Replies]

To: rlmorel

The MSM can spin it that way, as long as we don’t get pulled into a war not of our choosing, not on our terrain, without air superiority.

As long as it’s mainly a remote-control UAV war, we’ll do fine.

But if it’s a modern version of Korea 1950, we’ll get slaughtered, and no MSM lies to the contrary will be able to hide the facts on the ground.


550 posted on 06/17/2012 11:30:58 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 543 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-50 ... 401-450451-500501-550551-589 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