re: First FEMALE Marines Join Infantry Battalion

I am a veteran that served in the Navy.

When I went to "shore duty" it was infested with pregnant females, chronic pain sufferers, and system experts that had never been to sea.

Having been on a cruise with Marines I can't honestly believe these WOMEN would last very long.

Huge liability. They will be fricked in a fan room at some point of their choice.

quote:

---

You understand the main argument is physical aptitude, not some argument about having a physical male or female genitalia

---

Nope. No it doesn't. From the OP:

quote:

---

Gonna be hard to respond to crisis and be ready when a shitload of them are pregnant and a shitload of male Marines are in trouble due to "sexual harassment/assault

---

It's about these guys' limited medical knowldge and their in the field social sciences experiments.

I'm pretty positive he's either trolling or just never left his basement

Serious question: you frick anything this side of 2000? To actually think birth control is limited to the pill is comical.

I'm out guys. I'm going read up on bone density.

quote:

---

you frick anything this side of 2000? To actually think birth control is limited to the pill is comical.

---

why the hell are you making this about birth control??

i wouldnt have given 2 fricks if the WM was on the pill or not while she was trying to cover my arse in Khafji

This PC bullshite is to make snowflakes like yourself "identify" with what you think the Corp should be
and your liberal social experiments are disgusting to watch
i have all the faith that Mad Dog will make this shite go away

quote:

---

Yes I'm well aware of all that. What part of "future" do y'all not understand?

---

You're talking about items though, that may not ever make it to the battlefield. Can you imagine the price tag to put every single person, even just the ones close to the front lines, in one of those exoskeletons or whatever? My personal opinion is that those exoskeletons and similar items will end up in the rear, used by the support folks so they can lift pallets of stuff and not need a forklift. You could transport a platoon of loggies and their exoskeletons on a flat bed and establish a supply point and never need a forklift. They could also be helpful for maintenance tasks.

I believe combat will remain the realm of individuals carry stuff into the fight, rather than being carried throughout the fight.

I have no issue with the initiative to place females in combat roles because I feel it's going to force the DoD to come up true fitness tests for combat roles that will not factor in gender. This is something that has been needed for a long time. So, I'm hoping that is the end result of all of this.

If it stays a social engineering project though, we have serious problems heading our way. We can't tell men and women to do the same job, carry the same gear, fire the same weapon, but get evaluated on physical fitness by different standards. If the standards are different you will see males out perform females but get left behind in terms of promotion and leadership etc. That will, unequivocally, destroy a unit.

Similar to this story with the USMC is the females that went through Ranger School. The commanding general at Ft. Benning made this a special project and made a personal visit to the training pipeline when this was going down. For anyone familiar with the military, this does a lot more than 'beg the question' - it suggests outright tampering. Hopefully that didn't take place. The Ranger community is tight and those guys do not rotate in and out of that Regiment. So, it will take some time before anyone that was around that situation to leave / retire and perhaps spill the beans - assuming anything untoward happened.

This raises another issue: who are the experts and who should be believed. Everyone has to make his own decision on whether or not our GOs should be believed or if they've been corrupted by politicization. But, this makes the issue even more complicated.

I've known females that I would gladly want to see given a chance to prove themselves. But, unfortunately I've known and seen females that want special treatment when integrated with males. For example, senior NCO said she would have her soldiers carry extra items so that females could have more privacy.

That said, I know males out there that want special treatment as well. This happens with officers and senior NCOs.

So, what I want to see is a healthy course correction all the way around.

Women in Combat Zoe Bedell

This is a video, TED talk at Harvard. Zoe is/was USMC officer that oversaw some FETs in AFG. I disagree with most of what she has to say. To be concise though: she does not have perspective on what differentiated her FETs from the infantry in terms of tasks performed, loads carried, and so forth. She also does not factor in the months of training Marines and Soldiers go through in leading up to a deployment. Every training iteration is another opportunity to put heavy loads on one's spine and joints. She states while on patrol they carried the same gear and so on. I don't believe this is true. I have gone on patrol with 3 radios before. I doubt any of her FET Marines even carried one. I doubt they hauled extra 60mm mortar rounds or extra belts of 7.62 etc. The females I did see on patrol were absolutely rolling light because they were attachments so they had basic load, water, food, but no radios, frags, smoke and so forth. That's not their fault, but it is worth noting.

GEN Barrow 1991 CMC Testimony
Former Commandant USMC delivers some unfiltered messages to Congress. He also makes an excellent point that if Congress leaves the issue up to the Executive, the political winds will drive policy, which can be changed on a whim, whereas the law cannot (we would assume) be ignored.


What's most disturbing about this issue for me at the moment is that the current administration has done exactly what GEN Barrow told Congress would happen: they used civilian oversight of the military to force the military to change, to force the military to bend and write new policy, and the policies have by & large been crafted so as to meet an agenda, not a mission. If Trump and Mattis reverse this, they will be blasted for the next four years heading into the 2020 election. Trump is probably in a position where he must allow this policy to remain for at least 3 years. At that time he can present data and say it stays or goes. In the meantime, it will likely be a divisive issue and if it had been handled correctly to begin with, it would not be that way.

Combat vet, Army, Kunar province 2010. Women will be useless and get people killed in this role. Fighting isn't like the movies and video games.

Wow. And I thought DefJam's post were moronic.