Scrumpy on January 25, 2013 at 11:18 AM

Sinister’s the right word. Diabolical is too .

quikstrike98 on January 25, 2013 at 2:55 PM

quiksrtike, did you read that address to the graduating class of West Ppint by Ayn Rand? Particularly the last few paragraphs.

So the likely outcome of those tests is to find which jobs will remain excluded to women. An example a senior Marine official cited involved a loader on a tank crew. Loading a tank round requires a certain degree of upper body strength. You need to hoist a 50-odd pound, 120-mm round, removing it from its rack and loading it into the breach — here’s a video demonstration — all in a space that doesn’t really allow a lot of lower body strength to supplement. When the Army and Marine Corps explore job openings for women, that’s what they’ll test — whether a soldier or marine can do that, repeatedly, in relevant and realistic conditions, regardless of gender. (Although Dempsey mentioned one of his tank gunners when he was a division commander in Iraq was named Amanda.)

NO, SHE WAS NOT A TANK GUNNER. She was the turret gunner on a HMMWV, likely firing a M-240, M2 .50 cal, or a Mk19 automatic grenade launcher. NOT a 120mm tank gun.

And this sounds just marrrrrrrvvveeellllouuussss. So, women won’t be able to function as loaders, but it’s just skippy for them to be drivers, gunners or tank commanders? Well, let’s just see how that will work in the REAL WORLD. I was not on a USMC tank crew, but I served on Light Armored Vehicles, with a crew of three, not four. First off: the US Army has eschewed automated loaders on its tank not just for technical reasons, but because it’s damned difficult to maintain a tank with only three crew members. When you figure that frequently the Tank Commander is going to be off doing leadership functions while the rest of the crew is pulling maintenance, that instantly reduces you to a crew of three. Figure other crew may be off doing other chores as well, the number of people free to do the work of keeping the tank in fighting shape rapidly reduces. I’m very interested to see how a female tank crew member will handle breaking track. Let me guess: the men in the unit will be forced to do extra work not only on their own tanks, but on fellow soldiers’ tanks when there are only women available to work on those.
So, women can’t be loaders? Here’s how things work in the REAL WORLD, people. When you arrive at an armor unit from school, you are made a loader. It’s a sh!t job, but it allows a period of breaking in, and learning the vehicle. Kind of an apprenticeship program. The loader does all the crap odd jobs nobody else wants. Then, he graduates to being a driver, eventually a gunner. So, we’re going to put women on tank crews, but forbid them being loaders? That means that men who have been serving as loaders for a long time and DESERVE a promotion to driver or gunner, will be forced to continue to serve as loaders while newbie females come in from school and immediately move to the driver’s seat. What a great f***ing idea, Panetta.

Cleombrotus on January 25, 2013 at 6:57 AM

I love to see others points of view, and you’re take on things, is very poignant!!

FirelandsO3 on January 25, 2013 at 10:25 AM

Very well said!

There is somthing seriously sinister behind everything the dems do.

Most of you have figured it out!

I am lagging behind, it was 0′s first election that peaked my interest in politics, before then, I truly wasn’t bothered.

Since then I have seen a pattern emerge, it’s one of destruction, in my mind.

The left will say and do anything and make it sound so benign, the true harm of it will not be fully known for a few more years yet!

I have discovered much by being here and conversing and reading the comments… I thank you all!!

Women are and have been the civilizing and stabilizing factor in social structures. If you want to corrupt a society, corrupt their women FIRST.

Cleombrotus on January 25, 2013 at 9:54 AM

Women’s Lib has done its job well. I figured out how inane they really were in my 20s, but only after having my first child. The importance of being pro-abortion in our society surfaces… If you want to find a bitter demented liberal, talk to a childless woman now in her 50s or 60s.

Because there isn’t one..
Just the same ol’ line..fairness and equality.
Hmmm..that always works out well.
See-aff action.

The Military is not the same as the civilian world. The more the left tries to make it that way the worse shape the Military will be for it.

Bmore on January 25, 2013 at 9:50 AM

And, that appears to be the end result the left is looking for, a military in disarray.

Cleombrotus on January 25, 2013 at 9:05 AM

Additional thought:

Women are and have been the civilizing and stabilizing factor in social structures. If you want to corrupt a society, corrupt their women FIRST.

You’re too nice, too enamored of history and tradition to realize that the rules have changed. Remember, I live and work in a town where, “Hello, he lied,” isn’t a joke; we men of the Left are perfectly comfortable lying, cheating, and stealing — hello, Senator Franken! — in order to attain and keep political power. Not for nothing is one of our mottos, “By Any Means Necessary.” You see, we’re the good guys, and for us the ends always justify the means. We are, literally, shameless, which is why Bill Clinton is now a multi-millionaire and Eliot Spitzer is already on the comeback trail.

This is a good peek behind the curtain. We are playing tennis and they are playing “knock out.”

I spent more than 28 years in and around the military, mostly as a member of the Army Officer Corps. I saw what women think they must do in order to fit in with their male counterparts and feel a part of the male bastion of control. Sarah Palin is cut from the same mold as these women who were desperate to fit in with male colleagues – desperately trying to prove herself as tough as, or tougher than, “the boys” who are competing with her. Palin sets the stage with stories of her prowess in murdering wolves, moose and caribou from a helicopter platform vantage point, begging the question, “C’mon boys, don’t you think I am tough enough?”

The above is from a leftie trying to savage Sarah Palin. Like many other commenters here, he is a chauvinist — but he has no excuse. He’s a leftie, and chauvinists are always righties — right?

DrMagnolias on January 25, 2013 at 8:32 AM

Well, thank you for that, Dr.

One of the problems I have with women in combat roles (remember, we’re talking about hunting down and killing other human beings and/or being hunted down and killed by others) is that it is inconsistent with the fundamental psychic makeup of women. Granted, it takes a psychic toll on a man as well, but God, in His infinite wisdom has designed the male human differently than He has the female, and when we mess with this order, the consequences are unknown.

Additionally, the acceptance of this development by a growing segment of the female population only demonstrates the success the Left has already made in conditioning women to continue behaviors and practices that will further undermine their capacity for contentment as women.

I have never seen our young women as confused and as discontented about their roles in life as I do today. And their role models are, for the most part, horrendous.

The current Secretary of State is a prime example.

Cleombrotus on January 25, 2013 at 6:57 AM

It seems every time I come across one of your posts, I find myself nodding in agreement. Women have no place in combat–frankly, the entire military should be sex-segregated, as it once was, to avoid the problems that have become so commonplace that no one stops to think about the fact that putting men and women together in close quarters on long deployments is asking for all kinds of trouble.

However, given that we are not going to separate the sexes, we need to have an honest way of evaluating what works. If women are going to be in combat, they need to be in all-female combat units so we can accurately measure their effectiveness.

Accurate.

my take.

True.

Chump will lose his feeble mind…

kingsjester on January 25, 2013 at 7:26 AM

Can’t lose what you don’t have.

kingsjester on January 25, 2013 at 7:26 AM

I hear you, KJ. Actually, I’m surprised it even got THIS far.

Yeah, it is. But, at this point, I don’t see her and/or her boss being tried for treason….unfortunately.

Chump will lose his feeble mind…again, because I called her a liar…again.

kingsjester on January 25, 2013 at 7:15 AM

Don’t you think “She should be ashamed” is a little mild?

Thank you, ma’am!

And wild beasts shall meet with hyenas,
the satyr shall cry to his fellow;
yea, there shall the night hag alight,
and find for herself a resting place.

Isaiah 34:14 RSV