Started By
Message

re: Women in Combat Arms: The Master Thread

Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:32 am to
Posted by Wolfhound45
Member since Nov 2009
127401 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:32 am to
quote:

WE IN DIS BITCH
Seventh page breh















Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:34 am to
quote:

Have you read about the recent changes to the USMC PFT?


Briefly. The bullshite with pushups and fatter females pissed me off and I stopped reading it.
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:35 am to
quote:

The PFT is nothing but a measurement of fitness


And it barely accomplishes that.
Posted by FightinTigersDammit
Louisiana North
Member since Mar 2006
46425 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:36 am to
quote:

He's indicated that he wants to get political correctness out of the pentagon.


This is a given if he truly wants to MAGA.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:36 am to


Another really good article:

What’s The Business Case For Integrating Women Into Combat Arms Units?

LINK
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
55351 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:36 am to
quote:

I know he's playing Devil's Advocate, too, but I'll chime in on this one. One of my favorite points: The 2 armies with the most significant institutional experience with women in direct, traditional combat roles are the Russian Army (as successors to the Soviet Red Army) and the IDF, and neither continue the practice in any significant way. Why do you suppose that is?


Great point. I didn't know that. DoD or someone with power in the DoD should thoroughly research that to find out why they curtailed or eliminated the practice. It might provide all of the right reasons and proof that women in the Infantry is a bad idea.

No, I'm not trying to be contrarian or play devil's advocate. I'm just doing S2 work by laying out the other side's "order of battle" and revealing their own "commander's intent" so that we can approach the problem in a well-informed and structured manner.

Our objective: roll back Obama's "females in combat" misdeeds to pre-Obama levels. Roll back Obama's "Transgenders in the Military" misdeeds to pre-Obama levels.

Subject of another thread, repeat, some other thread: Obama's "gays in the military" deeds.

This post was edited on 11/17/16 at 9:42 am
Posted by Wolfhound45
Member since Nov 2009
127401 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:40 am to
quote:

Champagne
Red Teaming like a mofo.
Posted by cajunangelle
Member since Oct 2012
167605 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:41 am to
Mabus was leaving in 2017 anyway...

quote:

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus announced Tuesday to Congress that he plans to resign and step down from his role.

Mabus has served as Navy Secretary for a total of eight years after being appointed by President Barack Obama in 2009, which is the longest any Navy head has served since World War I. He revealed during a House Committee on Appropriations subcommittee hearing his plans to step down in 2017, The Sun Herald reports.

His tenure hasn’t been without considerable controversy, and will likely see more before he makes his exodus. GOP Rep. Duncan Hunter has called for Mabus’ resignation multiple times over his attempts to “socially engineer” the Navy and Marine Corps at seemingly any cost. That social change has mainly been the integration of women into all ground combat roles, which includes access to elite units like the Navy SEALs. Integration has moved far beyond mere access.

The Navy has proposed deep social change associated with the new move, including removing the word “man” from job titles to make the environment more hospitable to women. There are a total of 21 job titles with the word “man” in them, namely fireman and legalman, among others. Navy officials will shoot a report out to Mabus by April 1 on what should be done about male job titles.

quote:

Randy Forbes is the Favorite for Trump's Secretary of the Navy
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
90801 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:47 am to
quote:

The PFT is nothing but a measurement of fitness, if it weeds people out so be it.
Okay so let me ask you this. The surgeon at Walter Reed should be held to the same standard as a line grunt?
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
90801 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:48 am to
quote:

Absolutely. Passing the PFT/CFT is ridiculously easy with minimal effort. If you're (collective you) only active enough to pass, or even only enough to do well, you're failing. In my opinion, of course.
Fair enough.

I had a fellow pilot, USAFA graduate, played football at the academy was a offensive lineman. Maxxed out pushups, setups, and run time.

Failed for waist measurement because he is built like a fricking 6'3 barrel.
This post was edited on 11/17/16 at 9:51 am
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:50 am to
quote:

The surgeon at Walter Reed should be held to the same standard as a line grunt?


Yes.
Posted by GeauxxxTigers23
TeamBunt General Manager
Member since Apr 2013
62514 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:51 am to
quote:

The surgeon at Walter Reed should be held to the same standard as a line grunt?


It's not like the standards are that high to begin with so sure
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
90801 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:51 am to
quote:

The surgeon at Walter Reed should be held to the same standard as a line grunt? Yes.
Which is more important for effectiveness to the surgical unit, his skills or his run time?
Posted by Champagne
Sabine Free State.
Member since Oct 2007
55351 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:52 am to
This article in Wiki does a great job of fully explaining what the big brained*, high pay grade military folks think about when they think about the relationship between the military and civilian society.

Civil-Military Relations

* Cut me some slack. You all know darn well that these folks need to be "ego stroked" on a daily basis.
Posted by Wolfhound45
Member since Nov 2009
127401 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:52 am to
quote:

Yes.
Breh, no

The goal is to save lives. We do not need a studly version of Frank Burns.



Strike a balance Marine. I am watching you. From 101 yards.
Posted by FightinTigersDammit
Louisiana North
Member since Mar 2006
46425 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:53 am to
quote:

Failed for waist measurement because he is built like a fricking 6'3 barrel.


fricking ridiculous.
Posted by DisplacedBuckeye
Member since Dec 2013
76732 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:53 am to
quote:

Which is more important for effectiveness to the surgical unit, his skills or his run time?


If he can't hit Army/Navy standards, I'd say both. If that's a problem, make him a civilian.
This post was edited on 11/17/16 at 9:55 am
Posted by Jbird
Shoot the tires out!
Member since Oct 2012
90801 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:54 am to
quote:

Failed for waist measurement because he is built like a fricking 6'3 barrel. fricking ridiculous.
I wish I had a copy of the strongly worded letter he pumped off to the USAF Chief of Staff it was epic. Great pilot and no longer in uniform.
Posted by WhiskeyPapa
Member since Aug 2016
9277 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:55 am to
quote:

Which is more important for effectiveness to the surgical unit, his skills or his run time?


What if he becomes a battalion surgeon?

Our battalion surgeon in 3/6 was nicknamed 'combat doc'. He had either been in the Israeli Army or attached to it. Shot in the chest 3 times by some Syrian. He had the scars to prove it.
Posted by StraightCashHomey21
Aberdeen,NC
Member since Jul 2009
126745 posts
Posted on 11/17/16 at 9:55 am to
I been busy.....
Jump to page
Page First 6 7 8 9 10 ... 17
Jump to page
first pageprev pagePage 8 of 17Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram