the new enemy

[Ivanhoe]

Things are hotting up at the Puzzle Palace;

https://www.defense.gov/Explore/News/Article/Article/2534159/press-secretary-smites-host-that-dissed-diversity-in-us-military/

One thing to be noticed is that there are no actual quotes of Carlson, only assertions from the DoD press secretary. Here is an exact quote;

https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/10/tucker-carlson-changes-mockery-us-military/

Quote

“So we’ve got new hairstyles and new maternity flight suits, pregnant women are going to fight our wars,” Carlson continued. “It’s a mockery of the U.S. military. While China’s military becomes more masculine as it assembles the world’s largest Navy, our military needs to become more feminine, whatever feminine means anymore because men and women no longer exist. The bottom line is it’s out of control. And the Pentagon’s going along with this. This is a mockery of the U.S. Military and its core mission which is winning wars.”

 

https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/bryan-preston/2021/03/12/feel-the-unity-pentagons-official-news-site-offers-buzzfeed-esque-ragebait-now-n1432033

 

https://sofrep.com/news/a-war-between-diversity-and-standards-is-coming-for-the-army/

 

And, of course, they need some white supremacists to trot out;

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/policy/defense-national-security/extremists-and-white-supremacists-tiny-fraction-of-us-military-but-have-outsized-impact-says-defense-secretary
 

Quote

 

On Fox News yesterday, Kash Patel, who was installed as chief of staff to acting Defense Secretary Chris Miller by President Donald Trump after he fired Mark Esper in the waning days of his presidency, argued the extremist problem was a myth.

“They have self-admitted that the problem doesn't exist, to their knowledge, and that's because it doesn't,” Patel told Fox’s Maria Bartiromo. “White supremacy is not rampant throughout the Department of Defense. That is outrageous and offensive to our men and women in uniform.”

Patel says the Biden Pentagon is “trading in politics” instead of “logic and fact.”

 

 

Quote

 

Austin continues to cite his experience as a young lieutenant colonel in the 82nd Airborne division in the 1990s when he had to deal with neo-Nazi skinheads among the soldiers he commanded. “We couldn't tell that story of what we were doing and how great we were because nobody wanted to hear it, they wanted to hear about the skinheads,” Austin said. “And so that had an outsized impact on that organization.”

Austin also recounted his memory of then Lt. Gen. Mark Milley, now Joint Chiefs chairman, having to address the aftermath of a mass shooting at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2014, in which a soldier who had become radicalized killed three fellow soldiers who were preparing for deployment and wounded 16 others before taking his own life. “That nearly crippled the organization for a period of time. So, an incredible, an outsized impact on the organization.”

 

So a mentally-ill Islamist kills soldiers, therefore white supremacy has an outsized impact?

 

Fortunately for me, the email blasts warning people about the menace of problematic protests have waned. I think a potential problem is that if DOD's investigation doesn't turn up enough neo-Nazis, there will be a "round up the usual suspects" campaign to create some.

I've no doubt that .mil is going to experience similar or worse recruiting challenges as they had in the 1990s.

 

 

[JasonJ]

Iraq and Afghanistan probably put a dent on new aspiring that would want to serve. General worsened diet and health condition on the average added another dent. From tbe military perspective, they probably need women and ethnic diversity to help achieve recruitment target. Alot of the service is driving vehicles and pushing buttons so male muscle is not such a priority. Only sticky issue is in roles like infantry where male muscle takes advantage. So for different reasons, it aligned the recruitment process with the leftist agenda about privileged/deprived sentiment creation. Thus the lash back from the right is triggered by typical leftest agenda and consequently on military itself as well while overlooking the recruitment needs in the changing recruitment environment. 

Edited March 13, 2021 by JasonJ

[Rick]

Women should never be in the front lines. Physical limitations not withstanding, it is a further moral degradation of society. 

[bojan]

People who don't want to should not be in front lines also. Yet... there is a thing called conscription, widely used all around the world. When hard reality slaps you into face and you have a real war of national survival you do not care what gender (out of 42 ) it is that is willing to fight.

Edited March 13, 2021 by bojan

[Stuart Galbraith]

4 hours ago, Rick said:

Women should never be in the front lines. Physical limitations not withstanding, it is a further moral degradation of society. 

This lady fought in the front lines with her daughters, slaughtered lots of Romans, even burned Londinium to the ground. Her statue stands outside Parliament.

It's also worth remembering, the Vikings had shield maidens that there was some evidence took part in battle, and the Romans had Female Gladiators. Yet, somehow society as survived.

The Royal Navy even had a Female captain for HMS Duncan. And ultimately, why not? There were women in HMS Victory and many other ships when they fought at Trafalgar.

 

Edited March 13, 2021 by Stuart Galbraith

[NickM]

On 3/13/2021 at 6:36 AM, Stuart Galbraith said:

This lady fought in the front lines with her daughters, slaughtered lots of Romans, even burned Londinium to the ground. Her statue stands outside Parliament.

It's also worth remembering, the Vikings had shield maidens that there was some evidence took part in battle, and the Romans had Female Gladiators. Yet, somehow society as survived.

The Royal Navy even had a Female captain for HMS Duncan. And ultimately, why not? There were women in HMS Victory and many other ships when they fought at Trafalgar.

 

Golly, Gee! How many kilos of a rucksack and body armor you think SHE can haul on her back and for how long? How many 120mm rounds could she lug or jam into the breech of an Abrams main gun?

[Stuart Galbraith]

Nick, do you know ANYTHING about the life history of Queen Boudica?  Whatever issues she may have had as a woman, judging her by our simplistic standards simply wont do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica

Then of course there is Joan of Arc...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Arc

The Armagnacs then attacked and captured an English fortress built around a monastery called Les Augustins. That night, Armagnac troops maintained positions on the south bank of the river before attacking the main English stronghold, called "les Tourelles", on the morning of 7 May.^[51] Contemporaries acknowledged Joan as the heroine of the engagement. She was wounded by an arrow between the neck and shoulder while holding her banner in the trench outside les Tourelles, but later returned to encourage a final assault that succeeded in taking the fortress. The English retreated from Orléans the next day, and the siege was over.^[52]

As for women in tanks, the Israelis have been using them for years, albeit refusing to put them in combat which seems somewhat ridiculous. We do.

 

You know, I remember having this exact same discussion some 20 years ago when I joined what was then the Heavy Metal Tankers forum. The world has clear changed but attitudes seemingly have not.

Edited March 15, 2021 by Stuart Galbraith

[Rick]

On 3/13/2021 at 8:06 AM, bojan said:

People who don't want to should not be in front lines also. Yet... there is a thing called conscription, widely used all around the world. When hard reality slaps you into face and you have a real war of national survival you do not care what gender (out of 42 ) it is that is willing to fight.

There are other military jobs that women can do in place of men. The front line is not one of them. 

[Rick]

40 minutes ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Nick, do you know ANYTHING about the life history of Queen Bodeceia?  Whatever issues she may have had as a woman, judging her by our simplistic standards simply wont do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica

Then of course there is Joan of Arc...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Arc

The Armagnacs then attacked and captured an English fortress built around a monastery called Les Augustins. That night, Armagnac troops maintained positions on the south bank of the river before attacking the main English stronghold, called "les Tourelles", on the morning of 7 May.^[51] Contemporaries acknowledged Joan as the heroine of the engagement. She was wounded by an arrow between the neck and shoulder while holding her banner in the trench outside les Tourelles, but later returned to encourage a final assault that succeeded in taking the fortress. The English retreated from Orléans the next day, and the siege was over.^[52]

As for women in tanks, the Israelis have been using them for years, albeit refusing to put them in combat which seems somewhat ridiculous. We do.

 

You know, I remember having this exact same discussion some 20 years ago when I joined what was then the Heavy Metal Tankers forum. The world has clear changed but attitudes seemingly have not.

Some attitudes are so correct they need not change. There are a plethora of videos out there documenting the fact of the physical limitations of women in the front lines. Women are not men and each of the two genders have their complimentary roles in society. It is the man's responsibility for protection of home and country with women in support.

[RETAC21]

1 hour ago, Rick said:

There are other military jobs that women can do in place of men. The front line is not one of them. 

Where have you been in the last 20 years? there are no frontlines anymore, so women better be able to fight and be willing to die. 

[bojan]

1 hour ago, Rick said:

There are other military jobs that women can do in place of men. The front line is not one of them. 

Yet there are examples of numerous of women fighting in front lines successfully if needed.

[DB]

47 minutes ago, RETAC21 said:

Where have you been in the last 20 years? there are no frontlines anymore, so women better be able to fight and be willing to die. 

I'd much prefer them to do unto others but do it first, and that applies to all soldiers on "our" side. Nobody should be willing to die, but they should be prepared to.

[Markus Becker]

On 3/13/2021 at 2:06 PM, bojan said:

... you do not care what gender (out of 42 ) it is that is willing to fight.

 

🤣🤣

 

Jokes aside, the use of womanpower in the military usually had less to do with gender equality and more with a shortage of manpower. 

Edited March 15, 2021 by Markus Becker

[bojan]

...

Edited March 15, 2021 by bojan

[Stuart Galbraith]

2 hours ago, Rick said:

There are other military jobs that women can do in place of men. The front line is not one of them. 

You have female police officers. You have female firefighters. You have female Ambulance crews. So whats the difference?

It surely isnt bravery when there are examples like this.

https://www.standard.co.uk/hp/front/teenage-army-medic-becomes-first-woman-to-win-military-cross-7197591.html

[Stuart Galbraith]

2 hours ago, Rick said:

Some attitudes are so correct they need not change. There are a plethora of videos out there documenting the fact of the physical limitations of women in the front lines. Women are not men and each of the two genders have their complimentary roles in society. It is the man's responsibility for protection of home and country with women in support.

Rick, you and your fellow on this site Republicans regularly cite the Democrats for treating everyone all the same, right? You might even be right about that. So how can it be right when you assume ALL women cannot do a particular job. A female friend of mine was so tough she once knocked some guy out. Yes, its not typical, but then people arent.

It was not THAT long ago we refused to allow women combat pilots because of some bilge about not being able to handle the g. Considering there have been female cosmonauts since the 1960's, this clearly is not an argument that held water,yet it was held to for decades, because some people couldnt stand seeing the world change.

[Yama]

Is it us?

But no, seriously, without again going to tiresome, repetive arguments about the subject of women in military, I think it amusing to say that 'Chinese military is becoming more masculine' when they have always had women in combat duties. I don't know if they have women in infantry units, but they do have female fighter and chopper pilots, tank drivers etc.

 

[NickM]

5 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

Nick, do you know ANYTHING about the life history of Queen Boudica?  Whatever issues she may have had as a woman, judging her by our simplistic standards simply wont do.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boudica

Then of course there is Joan of Arc...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joan_of_Arc

The Armagnacs then attacked and captured an English fortress built around a monastery called Les Augustins. That night, Armagnac troops maintained positions on the south bank of the river before attacking the main English stronghold, called "les Tourelles", on the morning of 7 May.^[51] Contemporaries acknowledged Joan as the heroine of the engagement. She was wounded by an arrow between the neck and shoulder while holding her banner in the trench outside les Tourelles, but later returned to encourage a final assault that succeeded in taking the fortress. The English retreated from Orléans the next day, and the siege was over.^[52]

As for women in tanks, the Israelis have been using them for years, albeit refusing to put them in combat which seems somewhat ridiculous. We do.

 

You know, I remember having this exact same discussion some 20 years ago when I joined what was then the Heavy Metal Tankers forum. The world has clear changed but attitudes seemingly have not.

don't care

[NickM]

1 hour ago, Yama said:

Is it us?

But no, seriously, without again going to tiresome, repetive arguments about the subject of women in military, I think it amusing to say that 'Chinese military is becoming more masculine' when they have always had women in combat duties. I don't know if they have women in infantry units, but they do have female fighter and chopper pilots, tank drivers etc.

 

fighter and chopper pilots make more sense as they usually have the fixed base to return to after the mission and flying is often a question of reflexes and dexterity rather than muscle power. 

[Ssnake]

2 hours ago, Stuart Galbraith said:

You have female police officers. You have female firefighters. You have female Ambulance crews. So whats the difference?

It surely isnt bravery

No, bravery it is not.

I have no problem with women in any capacity as long as they meet the standards for the job.

It's just that leadership usually imposes recruiting quotas however indirect, even if it's a weasel-y phrase that looks like an outright lie such as "we aspire to have 15% women in this job by 2030". By 2027, if that long-forgotten "guideline" has not been revised, personnel managers panic because the then current quota is only 7%, and the easiest way to "fix" this "problem" is by reducing admittance standards so that enough women can pass the entry bar. The next step is to offer sign-up premiums and launch a marketing campaign that points out how incredibly important job X is and that it needs more women, because [spin the wheel for made-up reason Y, as long as it's not "we have to meet that quota"].

I say "inevitable" because the short-term brownie points that you gain with political leaders pretty much all the time override any consideration of the long-term consequences. Also, the people who make these decisions never have to bear the potentially dire consequences of their decisions.

 

Firefighters and the police are only partially suitable for comparison. In 99% of all cases they are dealing with a standard situation for which a procedure exists. So you can assign women to roles that do not overtax their physical capabilities. In a warzone, the predictable situations are only like 90% or so. The essence of a soldier's job is that you are confronted with a vast array of different and only partially predictable challenges that have only one thing in common, the possibility of turning highly dangerous and violent at any moment, of the kind where only "most" situations can be solved with pushing buttons and pulling ropes that don't overtax the physical limitations that the female biology simply incurs.

Some types of SJWs don't want to hear that. Their entire worldview hinges on the absurdist concept of Gender being nothing but a social construct. Which is tolerable as long as you're in a white collar environment where you have the luxury to pretend that reality doesn't exist. But the reality is that only the strongest 5% of women match or surpass the weakest 5% of men in certain feats of strength. That doesn't mean that women are inferior, it just means that they are different, a statement that would already force the graduates from Judith Butler School to roll up in a corner, sobbing uncontrollably.

[Calvinb1nav]

I suspect most of the people who were outraged about Tucker Carlson's piece never actually watched the segment.  Rather, they were stirred into outrage by the Leftist smear pieces published by CNN, et al.  I myself didn't find anything objectionable about what he said.  Predictably, the smear pieces twisted what he said...

Edited March 15, 2021 by Calvinb1nav

[Stuart Galbraith]

1 hour ago, NickM said:

don't care

Then live in ignorance, but don't try and sell it to me as knowing what you are talking about.

 

1 hour ago, Ssnake said:

No, bravery it is not.

I have no problem with women in any capacity as long as they meet the standards for the job.

It's just that leadership usually imposes recruiting quotas however indirect, even if it's a weasel-y phrase that looks like an outright lie such as "we aspire to have 15% women in this job by 2030". By 2027, if that long-forgotten "guideline" has not been revised, personnel managers panic because the then current quota is only 7%, and the easiest way to "fix" this "problem" is by reducing admittance standards so that enough women can pass the entry bar. The next step is to offer sign-up premiums and launch a marketing campaign that points out how incredibly important job X is and that it needs more women, because [spin the wheel for made-up reason Y, as long as it's not "we have to meet that quota"].

I say "inevitable" because the short-term brownie points that you gain with political leaders pretty much all the time override any consideration of the long-term consequences. Also, the people who make these decisions never have to bear the potentially dire consequences of their decisions.

 

Firefighters and the police are only partially suitable for comparison. In 99% of all cases they are dealing with a standard situation for which a procedure exists. So you can assign women to roles that do not overtax their physical capabilities. In a warzone, the predictable situations are only like 90% or so. The essence of a soldier's job is that you are confronted with a vast array of different and only partially predictable challenges that have only one thing in common, the possibility of turning highly dangerous and violent at any moment, of the kind where only "most" situations can be solved with pushing buttons and pulling ropes that don't overtax the physical limitations that the female biology simply incurs.

Some types of SJWs don't want to hear that. Their entire worldview hinges on the absurdist concept of Gender being nothing but a social construct. Which is tolerable as long as you're in a white collar environment where you have the luxury to pretend that reality doesn't exist. But the reality is that only the strongest 5% of women match or surpass the weakest 5% of men in certain feats of strength. That doesn't mean that women are inferior, it just means that they are different, a statement that would already force the graduates from Judith Butler School to roll up in a corner, sobbing uncontrollably.

That's exactly my point. Not everyone is suitable to be a carrier pilot, but nobody would use that as an assertion no men can fulfil the role.

I'm not in favour of box ticking, but when people assert a gender can't do a job due to assumptions on their part, they are the issue.

 I know for a fact id be a lousy kick boxer. Gina Carano would kick my ass. People are not typical.

[bojan]

Problem is that view is colored by US army (and most other...) having different PT standards for females. If you remove that, a lot of arguments die... 

[Stuart Galbraith]

Yes, but that was not the assertion. The assertion was no women should be in the front line, no women are capable of fulfilling those roles.

Im not defending efforts to grease the rails to get more women into roles they cant fulfill, which is what that amounts to.  Im just irritated at the ability of some people to mentally airbrush evidence of women fulfilling some of those roles as well as men.

After all, how many women do they think were in the Viet Cong?

 

[bojan]

Less than advertised. Yugoslav partisans had about 15% female members, but most were nurses and such, through due the nature of fighting that was also often a frontline.