Marshall Foundation celebrating women in combat

[whitehall]

For a woman to die in combat is horrendous

For a young man to die is cause for a parade and a bbq

"Horrendus", interesting choice of words to characterize the courage and heroism of an American Soldier who died in combat. It kind of sounds like the Westborough people. The preamble of the US Constitution states the duty of the government in a single sentence to "provide for the common defense". Women were protected from combat roles since civilization was established. Only left wing anarchists and ignorant sexist criminals would suggest using American women in combat roles and yet ....here we are thanks to the most degenerate (Clinton) administration in history.

It's always tragic to lose a soldier; the courage and honor that led to the loss makes it more so. It's not glorious, not on that level, just a sad sacrifice. Dying is easy; so is killing; it's living with the losses that's the hardest thing. Of all the things I had to do, the one I hated most, was writing that letter to a man's wife or parents, explaining why why I couldn't bring him back to them. If there are any right words for that, I never found them.

I think you are not only full of crap but you are full of crap on a criminal despicable way gadfly. You never wrote a letter to a family of a KIA Soldier or you would know the procedure. You are a fraud.

 

[The Gadfly]

"Horrendus", interesting choice of words to characterize the courage and heroism of an American Soldier who died in combat. It kind of sounds like the Westborough people. The preamble of the US Constitution states the duty of the government in a single sentence to "provide for the common defense". Women were protected from combat roles since civilization was established. Only left wing anarchists and ignorant sexist criminals would suggest using American women in combat roles and yet ....here we are thanks to the most degenerate (Clinton) administration in history.

It's always tragic to lose a soldier; the courage and honor that led to the loss makes it more so. It's not glorious, not on that level, just a sad sacrifice. Dying is easy; so is killing; it's living with the losses that's the hardest thing. Of all the things I had to do, the one I hated most, was writing that letter to a man's wife or parents, explaining why why I couldn't bring him back to them. If there are any right words for that, I never found them.

I think you are not only full of crap but you are full of crap on a criminal despicable way gadfly. You never wrote a letter to a family of a KIA Soldier or you would know the procedure. You are a fraud.

Well, excuse me for speaking metaphorically, whitehall. I know the prescribed form guidelines, quite short and to the point. It felt cold, impersonal and empty, a terse expression of condolence, neatly phrased. It necessarily leaves a lot unsaid. So, I'd write another letter too, one I never sent, in my mind. I'd try to imagine what I would say, if I could talk to them; how I'd answer their questions.. I had a comparatively small unit, so I knew my men; it would have been impossible not to, really. Maybe running words of comfort through my head was an outlet for my own grief, or my own guilt. None of them ever seemed any more adequate, than that notification of casualty, or CO's letter does; there's really nothing more to say than those few words, but the exercise gave me some feeling of having tried, inside, to think of them. Which still may make no sense to you...but I do know the rules, and where the letter goes for approval before it is actually sent; beyond that, you are free to believe whatever you like.

 

[waltky]

Gonna take a couple of years to place womens inna elite combat units...

Military plans would put women in most combat jobs
June 17, 2013 WASHINGTON -- Women may be able to start training as Army Rangers by mid-2015 and as Navy SEALs a year later under plans set to be announced by the Pentagon that would slowly bring women into thousands of combat jobs, including those in elite special operations forces.

Details of the plans were obtained by The Associated Press. They call for requiring women and men to meet the same physical and mental standards to qualify for certain infantry, armor, commando and other front-line positions across the Army, Navy, Air Force and Marines. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel reviewed the plans and has ordered the services to move ahead. The move, expected to be announced Tuesday, follows revelations of a startling number of sexual assaults in the armed forces. Earlier this year, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Gen. Martin Dempsey said the sexual assaults might be linked to the longstanding ban on women serving in combat because the disparity between the roles of men and women creates separate classes of personnel - male "warriors" versus the rest of the force.

While the sexual assault problem is more complicated than that, he said, the disparity has created a psychology that lends itself to disrespect for women. Under the schedules military leaders delivered to Hagel, the Army will develop standards by July 2015 to allow women to train and potentially serve as Rangers, and qualified women could begin training as Navy SEALS by March 2016 if senior leaders agree. Military leaders have suggested bringing senior women from the officer and enlisted ranks into special forces units first to ensure that younger, lower-ranking women have a support system to help them get through the transition.

U.S. Army soldiers with the 92nd Engineer Battalion stand guard at Forward Operating Base Hadrian in Uruzgan province, Afghanistan

The Navy intends to open up its Riverine force and begin training women next month, with the goal of assigning women to the units by October. While not part of the special operations forces, the coastal Riverine squadrons do close combat and security operations in small boats. The Navy plans to have studies finished by July 2014 on allowing women to serve as SEALs, and has set October 2015 as the date when women could begin Navy boot camp with the expressed intention of becoming SEALs eventually. U.S. Special Operations Command is coordinating the matter of what commando jobs could be opened to women, what exceptions might be requested and when the transition would take place.

The proposals leave the door open for continued exclusion of women from some jobs, if research and testing find that women could not be successful in sufficient numbers, but the services would have to defend such decisions to top Pentagon leaders. Army officials plan to complete gender-neutral standards for the Ranger course by July 2015. Army Rangers are one of the service's special operations units, but many soldiers who go through Ranger training and wear the coveted tab on their shoulders never actually serve in the 75th Ranger Regiment. To be considered a true Ranger, soldiers must serve in the regiment.

MORE

See also:

Could be two years until women can train for elite combat
June 17th, 2013 > It may be another two years before women can start training for jobs in Army Ranger and Navy SEAL units under plans to be announced by the Pentagon on Tuesday, a Defense Department official familiar with the matter said.

The official declined to be named because the plans are not yet announced. It is part of the next step in a longstanding effort to open as many combat jobs as possible to women. The plan now is for jobs in special operations to be available to women possibly in mid-2015. The official argued the latest development is not a delay, but is more of an acknowledgment by the military that it needs more time to study the issue.

Full implementation of women into combat positions, including infantry and armor units, is to be completed by January 2016. The military has gradually been opening more jobs to women. But in January, then-Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta ordered all jobs open to women unless a specific "exception" was requested by the military services. The Pentagon since has been working on plans to implement those orders with the plans expected to be announced on Tuesday. Baseline physical fitness requirements will continue to vary on the basis of gender and age.

The services are determining job performance standards that everyone equally will have to meet, such as the ability to reload tanks, artillery and other heavy weapons. This had the impact of now allowing women to serve in frontline Army and Marine combat units, as well as unique jobs such as putting enlisted women on submarines. In 2012, the Army opened over 14,000 positions to women. The latest move, to be announced Tuesday, could open approximately another 6,000 jobs to women in the Army.

Could be two years until women can train for elite combat ? CNN Security Clearance - CNN.com Blogs

 

[whitehall]

Do women have the capability to fight in combat? Yes.
Should women be put into combat? No.
Does that make me a sexist? No, it makes me, Cain.

"The capability to fight in combat". We should be ashamed to even consider the concept.

I do not believe it is shameful to see women as capable of combat, I think it is shameful to have a woman fight your battles, but I think it is shameful for anyone to have someone else fight their battles. That is one reason I dislike politicians who encourage war, but are not willing to shed their own blood for their cause.

What a freaking pop-culture cop out.

 

[Vikrant]

‘No girls allowed’: Iraq war vet Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on opening combat missions to women

?No girls allowed?: Iraq war vet Rep. Tulsi Gabbard on opening combat missions to women