http://news.yahoo.com/first-women-graduate-us-armys-ranger-school-174241078.html





First Lt. Shaye Haver (C) and Capt. Kristen Griest (C-R) are surrounded by a group of friends and supporters after receiving their Ranger tab at Fort Benning, Georgia on August 21, 2015 (AFP Photo/Jessica McGowan)

Next

How much did they have to water it down for them to pass?

Kara Spears Hultgreen (5 October 1965 – 25 October 1994), was a Lieutenant and Naval Aviator in the United States Navy and the first female carrier-based fighter pilot in the U.S. Navy. She died just months after she was certified for combat, when she crashed her F-14 Tomcat into the sea on final approach to USS Abraham Lincoln (CVN-72).

An Accuracy in Media report quotes CDR Tom Sobiek, commanding officer of Fighter Squadron VF-124, as saying of the 4 female pilots in his squadron that "the women are going to graduate regardless of how they performed" and reports that "the Navy was in a race with the Air Force to get the first female fighter pilot".

from the article

Mass Media will have this televised for the next 5 years

I sincerely hope this ain't a big stinky pile of PC make believe.


Combat will tell.


PS I been lied to before. By the same crowd.

There are a lot of conflicting reports out there right now. It will be interesting to see what stories start filtering out after everyone gets back to their units.

Lower standards before the course even started. Their tab should have an asterisk.

The graduation of women from this warrior school is a sad, ignorant new low for our society.

As usual, the MSM is not telling us "the rest of the story". And the rest of that story is, that the women candidates (not these two who succeeded) fell out (failed) at a far, far greater rate then the men. What these two female success stories show is that very exceptional female athletes (meaning, the top 1-3%) might be able to compete with the top 25% of male athletes---for a short period of time (eg., the amount of time of the Ranger school).

What remains to be seen (and actually we already know the answer) is whether these two exceptional females will be as effective as fighters as their male counterparts and they will not be. There is nothing wrong with that; its just a fact of nature. Women can contribute to the military in many ways (they already do). But on balance they will not and cannot enhance the fighting effectiveness of the special forces.

Jordan

All the same "combat, survival, and stamina challenges"? Does that include strength challenges?

Look, I have no doubt these ladies are in better shape than I am. However, would you want your 6' 2" 200 lb son to rely on a 5'4" 140 lb female if injured in combat?

If females want "equal rights", then meet the same standards (and, who knows, did they in this case?). Also, where are all the feminists pushing to require females to sign up for Selective Service at age 18, like the guys have to?? Nope, they want females to be able to pick and choose whether they want a combat role, meanwhile, guys go where they are told.....

I'll accept they did the same course as the previous class.

As long as everybody else accepts bleeders make schitty cops, firemen, soldiers, sailors, pilots, politicians, and opinion givers.

(This list is not all inclusive.)

Dave

Drivers, you forgot drivers.

According to Gen. Mcinerney interview today, all 8 women who made it to the finals washed out in the Darby Patrol phase twice.
Three were given a third chance.
The two above, made it the 3rd time.

A few of the men were given just 1 re-cycle and were washed out. Male students who had women in their patrols also failed at an unusually high rate...

I'd best caveat that post.

Thank you.

And GFY.



Travis

DeFlave announcing yet again (for those one or two folks here who did not already know ) why he is single, divorced man with whom women will have absolutely nothing to do.

Jordan

The idea that two out of 100+ hand-picked officers with an incredible level of fitness for a woman can physically hang with men in a course after being given an incredible amount of prep shouldn't amaze anyone.

The idea that this somehow should change any discussion about women in ground-combat MOS's on the other hand.....

Until/unless the military is willing to simply have one PT test and cut the gender crap altogether, anything they say about equality is just ignoring the elephant in the room.

And we know they ain't gonna do that, because, in the end, men and women are not equal. Not saying either gender is "better," just that we damn sure are different.

I left the military years ago when they started lowering standards just like the did to force women into Leo positions and fire Depts . Jump school became a joke because of lowered standards for bleeders.

Lost track the number of these super females could not stay for long periods of time in the field and pull their fair share due to female problems. Really destroyed unit cohesion.

More fundamental change and some on here are actually applauding it.

I'm married.

But in your defense, she is Polish.



Dave

Exactly.




Travis

Their new trick is to keep the standards the same so that they can truthfully say they didn't lower the standards. BUT, they lower the scores necessary to pass for the women.

For serious?




Travis

Yes, I'm serious, Travis. These people play fast and loose with the truth.

I ask for serious because I have wondered what sort of loophole the femichunts would find to show they're doing "the same."

When I was in the service their standards were different. But I knew they'd somehow find a way to change that too. Like they did in the law enforcement profession.



Travis

I'm just flat amazed it took until Saturday for someone to find this info and rag on it, since its been around the news places for a week now...

Maybe the guys are just slower....

They should ALL be held to the same standards that were always there.

Beyond, the flave thing applies.

Thankfully the females are good for sex, can't quite see them as useful for much else to many. Well maybe making sammiches.

Are we caveating things that are outside reality now?




Travis

In a limited way they can. At the height of the insurgency in Northern Ireland, female soldiers were recruited into 14th Int to do undercover work.

14th Int specialised in doing deep cover close quarter recce of hard core Provisional IRA targets. Initially it was one aspect of the work carried out by the SAS, but 14 Int was formed to specialise in it. They were trained by the SAS in recce and close quarter combat, plus a number of other related skills that were mission specific.

The simple fact was that two young woman in civvies pushing strollers (they used the strollers to conceal their MP5's) would attract a lot less attention than two guys...same with a young couple, rather than two guys out and about in vehicle..

So yes there is a definite niche for woman in SF but they should be there on merit not because of some PC bullshit..

Spies ain't soldiers.




Travis

In todays SF, that distinction is often blurred...

It was blurred in the 1700's as well.

Soldiers they ain't.




Travis

If they are determined to push the women in combat agenda, I would like to see an Amazon battalion on their own.

As long as everybody else accepts bleeders make schitty cops, firemen, soldiers, sailors, pilots, politicians, and opinion givers.

(This list is not all inclusive.)

Dave [/quote]


To refer to women as bleeders is rude and offensive as hell to the very few women members of this forum. Women have bled, menstruated, and had a monthly period for as long as they have existed, just as men have had a swinging d1ck and saggy hairy wrinkled nut sacks. Maybe you should start thinking with your brain instead of your little roundheaded willy.

Your pretty little daughter will soon be a "bleeder", if she isn't already, and your wife, mother, grandmother, aunts, sisters (if any) were all "bleeders". To use the term as you do is extremely misogynist, offensive, and disrespectful, but you are obviously a sorry piece of c.h.it nut sack.

The military is just becoming a social experiment. Between woman in combat roles, gays, transgender studies, etc. it's a damn shame.

That got Jordy all soft.

Travis-

Would you like to reply?




To refer to women as bleeders is rude and offensive as hell to the very few women members of this forum. Women have bled, menstruated, and had a monthly period for as long as they have existed, just as men have had a swinging d1ck and saggy hairy wrinkled nut sacks. Maybe you should start thinking with your brain instead of your little roundheaded willy.

Your pretty little daughter will soon be a "bleeder", if she isn't already, and your wife, mother, grandmother, aunts, sisters (if any) were all "bleeders". To use the term as you do is extremely misogynist, offensive, and disrespectful, but you are obviously a sorry piece of c.h.it nut sack.

[/quote]

The pace with which our society's new lows are coming is rapidly accelerating.

I don't know how much help these women got but I suspect there was some.

My boss is a West Point grad and a Ranger school grad. Dave said he was told on good authority that these two women are the real deal.

The description of Ranger school I got from Dave formed my opinion that luck of the draw, good attitude, leadership ability and unwavering determination are big factors for any candidates success.

I guess it's possible that these gals got through.

couple of tough gals, anyway.

glad they passed, they will be better officers for it.

better than those who didn't even try.

If you are going to have women in the Army at all, you are going to have some that want to test themselves.

If they finished West Point and Ranger School, they have already shown themselves high performers.

Sycamore

Spoken like a true bleeder.

I'll text you a picture of my dick for $5.00.

PM sent.



Travis

IT is. Guaranteed. and even if PC wasn't involved, it still changes the whole dynamics of the warrior culture. Both the Israelis and Soviets tried it and move away from it. Hard to change the interaction of 200,000 years of male/female behavior.

I think the creep-factor just hit a solid TEN.




Travis

No point in even trying to explain this schit.

Anybody that thinks a bleeder belongs in a non-bleeder position will end up exactly where they belong.



Travis

Thanks for the chuckle.



Travis

Of course it is.



Travis

bwaaahaaaa

You're a classy broad eh?

There was an article on the Fox news website this past week, or maybe last. Was talking about all the weird noises our bodies make. What you just did was what Fox called a "vaginal queef".

Hey, you really think WP and Ranger School has not been screwed by the PC crowd and your Hero's tool?

Now that liberal/progressive society has mandated that women and men are completely equal, I'm assuming all young women when they turn 18 will be required to register with Selective Service?

Was listening to the news today and heard the story. A female retired (rank?) commented that this was just half of the story.

The rest of the story is that women have a MUCH higher rate of injury in the Ranger course then their male counter parts.

While a major accomplishment for this women, from a stragic standpoint, it has very little significance.

However, from a social engineering standpoint.....

GITsum!!!

Laughin' my ass off...


Clark

Spoken like a real swinging d1ck....got you stirred up about your daughter being a bleeder, eh?

I've seen your picture, laffin, ugly mofo,you ain't worth $5

Spot on! My sons yes...my daughter no.

You just proved two points.

1.) You're a liar.

2.) You're a bleeder. (envious type)



Travis

Study after study has shown putting women mixed with men in combat is a very bad idea. Men take chances that they wouldn't if in the same position with other men, the result is higher casualties and a less effective force. There are duties which are non MOS related like emergency drills where evacuation of troops/sailors by manual strength is compromised. Male bonding and camaraderie is also compromised and favoritism towards the female takes place, deadly. Hygiene presents problems in extended and isolated scenarios. The costs to build quarters and separate sexes isn't cost effective.

Other issues also arise:

http://www.stripes.com/news/navy-seeks-to-combat-high-rate-of-unplanned-pregnancies-1.203122

http://www.cmrlink.org/content/ship...of_health_issues_for_women_on_submarines

Leftist dopes don't understand our military is for fighting and winning wars, period. It isn't about social experiments and equal opportunity. And again, how about the draft? Women at 18 should be forced to sign up for Selective Service, right?

Eyeball,

they could cut the standards in half twice, and either one would still be more of an accomplishment than your Associate of Arts in phlebotomy and lab science.

Any Ranger grad would leave your ass in the dirt, including these two gals.

Now with your 33,500 posts, you might make queen of the typing pool, but I doubt even that, because your spelling is so schidtty!

Sycamore

Awaiting the 1st woman to play in the NFL, and not as the kicker...

Now, now. Bleeders are the same as you and I. They just get paid less for the same amount of work.

(Dumb fugk font)



Travis

Imagine how happy the Muslims would be if we fielded an entire army of homosexual and women against them. And we still whip there azzes. lOl

To refer to women as bleeders is rude and offensive as hell to the very few women members of this forum. Women have bled, menstruated, and had a monthly period for as long as they have existed, just as men have had a swinging d1ck and saggy hairy wrinkled nut sacks. Maybe you should start thinking with your brain instead of your little roundheaded willy.

Your pretty little daughter will soon be a "bleeder", if she isn't already, and your wife, mother, grandmother, aunts, sisters (if any) were all "bleeders". To use the term as you do is extremely misogynist, offensive, and disrespectful, but you are obviously a sorry piece of c.h.it nut sack.

[/quote]

^^^^+1000 You really have to feel sorry for any woman who has the misfortune to come in contact with DeFlave. At least his wife can leave if she wants. I sincerely hope no daughter has the misfortune of being born to him.

So many facts! Wow, like any of this crap is going to change things.

Wonder if this qualifies as non-penis envy?

Like I said, lay your mo on that from that which you blow.

This pretty well sums up the whole deal in a nut shell. And IMO the same problem would/can/does occur with the gay pop. as well.

Im beginning to understand now. Sheep dont talk back.

I can live without mutton, but not without a woman.

Not saying they should be in a fox hole with a bunch of horny suckers trying to get in the sugar bowl.

Be some fraggin going on for sure.

I have no issue with them going to the course. Going to Indian country with a Spec Ops unit is a different story.

I know of the LT that made it, she sat at the table next to me when she went thru the Instrument phase of flight school. Her IP was a retired 160th pilot, had nothing but good things to say about her. A good friend of mine went to PLDC and flight school with her dad, a -64 driver. Jerry said he is a hard charger as well.

Even if they did lower the standards for the chicks to get thru, they still made it thru things that almost none of you could get thru.

Flame me all you want, I dont really care. I dont necessarily agree with cracks on the front lines, but its not my decision.

Which one gets pregnant first? Is there a pool?

Looks like you are the liar:

No PM sent, and
I am no longer a bleeder.

GFY.

The cunnys are out en masse tonight

My unit spent 6 MONTHS in the field. Jorge,Kamo Gari Webster Parish and Woody and 4ager can attest to how much combat we were in,they read the reports. Stress levels are off any known scales and tensions between us were high as it was. Water was for drinking. Showers were monsoon rain or a waterfall,otw hygiene was very difficult. 100 lb+ rucksacks were our "house on yer back". WOMEN would NOT been welcome and a SEVERE detriment to unit morale and cohesiveness.

Hawk, i really would like to know if you think many of the male apps who were scrubbed out are physically inferior, or is the scoring based on physical and intellectual capability.

I have difficulty believing there werent several male applicants scrubbed who arent superior physically.
Im smelling PC BS.
Thanks, eye.

Well I'll make this distinction, I admire these gals for giving it a go, I'm sure they play no part in the politics of it all, rather they are just reaching as high as they can reach. If they did water down the course to make it easier to pass for these women, then that is wrong, no less than when fire depts and police depts do the same. But I give these two credit, they want to serve with some of the best, and they were willing to endure punishment, I'll give them my admiration for that, I'm sure they neither asked for or wanted any special treatment.

Most of the scoring is based on how well they do while in a leadership position during an infantry patrol and while under serious sleep deprivation. It used to be fairly common for a young healthy 11B to lose 20 or more pounds during the course.
Peer evaluations are a big part of it too. Every member is graded by the other members of his platoon. If you're a dirtbag who goes to sleep on guard or steals food or doesn't pull your weight the peer evals will get you.

This leads me to believe some regard cunnies with distaste, and makes me wonder what kind of cunnies some been tasting.

Well said. But as was mentioned I don't see them enhancing a unit. But I admire them nonetheless

There's only one way this is going to play out.

They'll be put in the field. They will not do well.

In flight school, we flew down to Eglin and picked up the Ranger candidates after they finished the swamp phase. A grimier, smellier bunch you can not imagine crawling into a Huey.

Dont know the particulars on the standards for women while at the RTB. You guys can sit back and laugh at them taking 2 or 3 tries to get thru. These chicks attempted to do something that a very small percentage of the population will ever attempt to do. The 1LT, since graduating high school, spent 4 years at West Point, went thru flight school and went to the Ranger course. She is a hard charger. Its easy to sit back and throw darts when your ass is sitting on a couch or in front of a computer.

I dont agree with lower standards for chicks or minorities. But, its the world we live in, I didnt make the rules or care for it. I certainly dont agree with having chicks at the FLOT or beyond.

your going to go and hurt Peter puffers feelings. Bet one more surgery and he will be an honorary bleeder.


My money is on the bleeder on the left she's kinda cute.

Jorge, were you still flying when Lt. Hultgreen was killed...?

No idea, how do the Israeli women do?

Really? You can't understand the difference betwixt our military and Israel's.

If the women made it through the same standards as the men, same standards as it was before, congrats to both women and all the men. They earned it.

You hit it on the head 99% of these would wash out the first day... These Ladies did something in my 17yrs in the Army I never had a desire to do, these guy sitting here talking tough don't know half the truths. As of now the word on the street the guys that graduated said it was extremely hard some are saying probably one of the hardest ranger schools cause the RI were trying to get everyone to quit. They tried and tried and out of that class 90 plus guys 2 girls made it through... Also Deflave don't forget about the girls on the hot-shot crews fighting fires...

Ya, women in good shape in their prime estrogen years working in close proximity to exceptional and in-shape young men. What could possibly go wrong?


Over at Lackland AFB not far from where I'm at I'm told they had to put cameras in the stairwells of the training barracks, it seems these has become hot spots for quick hook-ups between the residents of different floors.

Birdwatcher

And the sick bastards want to watch?

The casualty rates for units with women were SIGNIFICANTLY higher as the men exposed themselves more to protect the women when they should not and need not have. The women didn't set the world on fire with their combat abilities either. The Russians used them in WWII and canned the idea of women as frontline combat troops fairly quickly. The VC used women in indirect fire units (mortars and rockets) but not as frontline fighters. They learned early on.

I took the local firefighter test and they had it dumbed down the first time and by the second it was just stupid. They got what they were set out to get. My BIL said they stood guard on the engine at a fire pretty good. He's since changed his mind after they told him to shut up.

I'm not qualified to criticize the standards because I have never served in the military. That being said....

I attended a graduation ceremony at Fort Leonard Wood this past summer, my nephew, a newly-commissioned 1st Lt. in the Reserves, was graduating from an officer's field training course. Several women in the group of maybe thirty.

I'm recalling six sets of jump wings, four of them were worn by women. My nephew told me that, while he wanted to do it, he would have a hard time getting approved due to budget constraints as it is not essential for his MOS.


(FWIW, he's already been skydiving with my 82 yo mom )

Birdwatcher

They even went so far as to search for a lesbo woman of Indian heritage that was most unqualified for the job.

Hey! I have a great, money-saving idea!

Instead of springing for expensive electric or natural gas to heat you home this Winter, just start burning pieces of your house. It's FREE!

That makes about as much sense as women in combat.

Wouldn't it work just fine if they had an all-female unit of Rangers to fight together?

Impressive accomplishment ladies.

I expect my sandwich to be perfect and on my plate in under one minute from now on. No excuses.

If females are ever allowed to actively participate in direct combat I can foresee a lot more medals being awarded to male soldiers posthumously.

Sounds like a lot of pee pee on the parade. I am proud of, and support ALL of our soliders. To these women I say WELL DONE.

They are full fledged participants in it. They are willing tools.

Isn't that what Obummer is doing when he pushes for this agenda.

I am not saying that the women did not deserve the positions but it does fit the current agenda of our goobrtment

Destroy from within.

Congrats to the gals. That's a big accomplishment.

I did some training with a gal on a hot shot crew from CA this year. I'm not in shape to speak of really, and I had 30 years or so on her.... but even in our heat and humidity, she never looked like her pulse ever rose..... while me, I held out all revolutions, and could keep going but was not enjoying it.

Audie Murphy was turned down by both the Navy and the Marines.
The Army was the only outfit that would take his enlistment.
Doubt he would have made it though Ranger training except on the rifle range, but he was one-hell-of a combat soldier.

Everyone keeps saying god help us when they allow women in combat arms units. Hell their been 31B females for yrs and I seen them in Afghanistan on patrols. Back in 09 one the Troops was coming from Deysie to Gardez they got caught up in a TIC they had a Female troop with them she got out of the truck and was laying down fire with the boys. ol 1Sg was telling her shoot over their shoot there she was rocking and rolling. Hell she got more trigger time than half the U.S Army does right now, in that incident one guy lost his leg and another lost his arm. I tell you those Cav boys were pretty damn proud of her... Now rewind to Iraq 2007 that same unit had a medic (male) freeze on them they hit an IED then a TIC Soldier's were down guys yelling for doc and this medic sat in the truck like a little bitch telling people he wasn't going to get out he wasn't going to die. They left him the truck but once they got back to the COP he was relegated to clinic duty.

Rangers on PMS would be a terrible thing to face.

Kurds have found this to be no problem at all.

This is an Army thread, lets keep the pictures of Coasties out!

I can't wait for the Sealettes. I am woman hear me roar.
Patricia Schroeder must be having an orgasm right now.

When I went through AIT, it was on a post that included female trainee's.

During the 15 mile road march, male soldiers were required to hump a 60lb pack. Females did the road march with no pack.

I have to wonder if on their third time through the march, these girls carried the same packs as their male counterparts.

I have no problem with these women putting their asses on the line and will probly out do some of the men, because they have more to prove.

That would make too much sense and not create the lack of cohesiveness and stress and in service pregancy rates the liberals are wanting.

Well done in what? Getting hired. Have they gotten the job done in a safe and effective and efficient manner already?

You detractors are knuckleheads.

Most of the women I know in roles like this worked twice as hard to get there as the men, and I've been in the service for nearly 40 years.

I notice you're not talking smack about all of the men eliminated due to the "lower standards."

These two are trailblazers, and I welcome them into the leadership roles that they have earned.

2x4s burn real good, especially if your house is old and you rip them out of an inside wall.

Maybe the 24 Hour Campfire can do a groupbuy on a bumper sticker that reads:

Oh yeah. It is not unusual for female sailors leaving ship after 6 mo at sea to have $20-30 thousand in their duffle bags. One enterprising young lady had $70,000 in cash. Very lucrative for some to be on ship nowdays.

http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/014590.html

those of you bitchers and moaners that actually have Ranger Tab, sound off.

Others, STFU.

I dont have one, I think these women are certified bad a$$es

Based on your in depth knowledge of todays Navy?

Gained as an oilman in Texas?

Or wait, no, you were a commissioned Peace Officer, right?

Or was it a Doctor?

I forget, you post so much.

Quit running down the troops and re-posting crap you have no knowledge of.

Sycamore

Yeah, i just foot part of the $47,000 dollar cost of training a swabby. Why should i care if its a waste in the cases of the preggies on board.


http://rhrealitycheck.org/article/2...tes-unplanned-pregnancies-among-sailors/

Jesus God that was a stupid post.

Let them have their own submarine full of women for all i care.

God said to mix male and female soldiers on front lines?

What is wrong with them having their own battalions?

Good read here that was written before the women started the course.
http://weaponsman.com/?p=2814

I like to hear of more great and wonderful things the liberal PC crowd has led our country into.

Motor voter registration? F and F? NSA and the IRS intimidating us? Free health care? Free flights from central America for illegals? Releasing illegal alien felons back in the general population? Free sex change operations for the mentslly ill and free abortions while within 5-10 years hip and knee replacements- real health care- will be rationed? Free condoms in prison? Free needles?

Im waiting.

F facts Dodge, get with the program. Getting nookie on the front lines is important and exciting. This is serious. I mean, its not a joke like our national debt or Iran getting the bomb or something like that.

Coming from a man who has, "been there and done that!" Right on David!

Meanwhile, back at the facts, the Israelis have had women in the front lines pretty much from "go," and are largely considered one of the best fighting forces in the world.

My experience is guys who don't want women in traditionally "male" roles are afraid of being shown up by "girls," and I've seen enough of it to be certain of my statement.

All I know is that due to some physical limitations I was born with, I could never even make at least a good showing before being cut! I don't know if there was any political pressure or not, i am inclined to give the Army the benefit of doubt here. My own though's of on the matter is what is the point? Since they can't go to a Ranger Regiment or to the Green Beret's, its seems to me the tap is being reduced down to a merit badge. Ok I understand that there is a pecking order and thay you have to do things along the way when promotion time comes along! I can live with it since what I think of the matter is a moot point, since I am just an old has been. As long as they keep the standards were they should be fine, if they end up with two sets of rules and standards, then the nation will really be ill served! War and War fighting is a serious business! You would think our leaders and the Generals would know that!

One's in Aviation, the other's an MP.

Not exactly MOS's normally associated with Ranger School.

First, let me say I'm not arguing either way since I don't know exactly what they had to do relative to what the the standards were before they were there.

That said, there are problems with your logic. If your logic holds, then by your own standard you have no right to sound off either.

But does your logic hold anyway? Does someone personally have to be a first rate singer to say Pavarotti was better then William Hung?

http://nation.time.com/2013/03/21/it-may-be-time-for-navy-bootie-camp/

I'm not complaining about Rangers who are not women. I'm telling those who are not Rangers to stand down and let the Rangers have a say on the Rangers.

On the subject of guys complaining about "girls," I stand by my earlier post.

David, your is a strategy common to someone loosing the argument. You become a bully in an attempt to exclude others from the argument instead of addressing the actual arguments themselves. Considering you are what, a Lt. Colonel or Colonel in the Guard, it doesn't surprise me that you would attempt to pull rank and bully the members when the conversation was not going your way.

Well I have news for you. Your authority to quell dissent just because it's your will does not extend to public forums.

As for myself, I do not hold the tab, but I did serve 7 years, most of it in mixed units. During the time I did meet some fine female warriors, but not many. I could count them all on one hand. And even those fine female warriors, not one of them every volunteered to hump the M-60, and not one could not pass the male PT standards. NOT ONE OF THEM.

In the real world, the realities are even more start. When you are in an environment that requires extensive marching, 80% of the females couldn't even march with the men due to pelvic stress fractures They had medical profiles, which basically divided the platoon into two marching orders, one male, and one female. The female pelvis is much lighter and wider them the male pelvis to facilitate child birth. This lighter structure make it more susceptible to stress fracture, which affects their capability to even march with male soldiers.

It was always fun, male soldiers would arrive on time, and then we would have to wait around for the females.

Don't get me wrong. Females can be useful in defensive and mounted operations where they don't need to carry anything, but when it time to dismount for long range patrols in Injun country, it's time to leave the females at home.

As for these girls passing the "same standards", I guarantee they did not pass the male ranger PT standards, and the males soldiers didn't get the same three tries either. This just goes to beg the question, how much of their passing was political, and how much was merit?

In the real world, gender has little to do with accomplishment.

I'm stating factually what I have observed in the device since 1976.

Gender and capability are not tied in any reasonable manner that I have observed.

Pulling rank? Never have, don't think I ever will.

I'm asking those who have BTDT to comment.

I've had 40-ish years of "they" can't do it and only "we" can.

My observations, stated clearly, are that these positions and views are false.

Of course you were trying to pull rank. You tried to tell me to shut up. Are you going to apologize?

When was the last time one of the females under your command volunteered to hump the M-60 and 400 rounds of ball ammo on a long range patrol?

And, didn't the guys who graduated with them state the standards were not lowered? Are those Soldiers liars?

Did they pass the male Range PT standards, which is around 60 push-ups?

When was the last time one of the females under your command volunteered to hump the M-60 and 400 rounds of ball ammo on a long range patrol?

Those soldiers said they did. I believe them.

My wing commander, the only woman to command an Air Guard wing, ever, and the first in the USAF, was in the first group of women to win and air assault badge as a CAPT When she was a Soldier. She is also a triathlete.

And I have a friend who was an enlisted Soldier in the second class with females. She can do a hundred push-ups any day.

So, yes, I know one who can, and the EOD major who works for me, and Mrs Walter who was a fire fighter, and tens of others....

I guess I just hang out with the tough women.

I have some familiarity with Rangers as my father was one. Standards have indeed slipped since my fathers time. It used to be, you had one additional chance to re-pass a section, period. After that, the CO sent you elsewhere.

Women are mentally tough, cooler under fire than males, and can withstand a TON of pain - all of this is documented, not hearsay.

But they simply do NOT have the strength of a man, and that is critical in CQ, infil, and exfil. They WILL slow the squad down, and that risks the mission. So they do not belong in ground combat roles, period.

Also, earning a Ranger tab is impressive. However, "Army Rangers" serve in the 75th Ranger Regiment and complete RASP, which is one hell of a lot tougher than Ranger School...

Show me in the article where is says the passed the MALE pt standards. You've been in 40 years, you now females have a much lower standard. In addition, those push ups have to be done in 2 minutes. The world record for consecutive female push-ups is only 50. I was unable to find an official 2 minute record.

As for your friend that earned her Air Assault badge, that's great. Of course Air Assault school is a walk in the park compared to Ranger School.

Maybe some of you (ok, most of you) should read a little more on this story...

http://www.businessinsider.com/first-women-to-earn-army-ranger-tab-2015-8

I can say this, if the SHTF I would take either of those two over any single one of the mostly fat, old, pathetic white dudes mouthing off on here...

The Baby Boomer Male Mindset lives on!

Where are all the 'thank you for your service' comments that everyone here throws out to any and everyone who 'served'???

According to the article, one humped the M240 on day one of patrols, and the radio on day two, and switched these off with another female, and passed the same PT standards, including 49 push-ups.

If that's the case, I'll give credit where credit it due.

However another article noted that patrols with female members had a higher failure rate then those without. Of course I could say the same about certain male soldiers I trained with.

This

In the real World, decisions have consequences. Sacrificing your productive capacity has bad effects.

Well, I think that's the point AS.

What they accomplished was impressive. The fact that so many (male and female) counterparts failed only accentuates that fact. I don't see percentages having much to do with their feats.

Kudos to them, and the guys, who made it through an incredibly demanding course.

It doesn't matter what they passed. This is just another nihilistic, Marxist deconstruction of society.

The only deconstruction of society and the world comes from retards such as yourself and many of the posters here...

Stupidity is the greatest threat to mankind...not vaginas in war zones.

BTW, feel free to take their place. Oh wait...

I can say this, if the SHTF I would take either of those two over any single one of the mostly fat, old, pathetic white dudes mouthing off on here...



So, if they are tougher than old fat farts that qualifies them as the nations finest fighters.

My bet is Westmoreland and Patton would have called you a real d.a.

Im sure we will soon see them holding long handeled axes in the Vatican now that the Pope has gone PC, but Im not going to
be holding my breath. Feel free.

http://articles.latimes.com/2003/apr/05/news/war-nofrat5

I heard a radio interview when this happened and had she been a male aviator, she would have washed out of the air corp 7 times previous to the accident. Her life was lost, not to mention the aircraft and the carrier that was put in jeopardy, all for the sake of equalizing sexes.

Yes, you can put me in the detractors side of this idiocy...

And that's the bottom line.

Obviously exceptional women are capable of exceptional performance. I see young women in the gym all the time who can run rings around my 62 year old ass, and a very few of them could have probably outdone me in certain areas when I was 21. But even now as an old man only a couple of amazon body builders there can lift as much weight as I can as many times as I can, and only ten years ago at 52 I would have far outclassed them.

But wars are not fought by only the exceptional performers, they are fought by the rank and file. If you take 50 random male recruits and 50 random female recruits right out of basic and throw them into a free for all wrestling match, I will give 99 to 1 odds that when it's all over there will be far more men standing than women, every single time.

If some women can perform exceptionaly, great for them. I don't wish to denigrate their accomplishments. 8 weeks of basic followed immediately by 8 weeks of Infantry AIT followed close on by three weeks of jump school kicked my 19 year old butt so to those who complete Ranger training - a hearty oorah for all of them, male and female.

But mixing a bunch of average (some will be above and some will be below average) 18-21 year old males and females together for extended periods under harsh physical conditions, expecting them to carry the same weight and expecting them to fight and kill a bunch of other tough-ass and dedicated 18-21 year old men, sometimes in hand to hand combat - is a recipe for disaster.

I'm unqualified to talk about Ranger tabs but I'm very qualified to talk about Hulk and knew her when she was in her prior squadron and I flew in some the same exercises. All the reports about her being rushed through the RAG and the "standards" being altered in pursuit of the USN having the first woman fighter pilot are true.

She damn near killed me and my crew in W-291 day coming off the tanker the wrong way.

Just because Generals (and Admirals) say that everything was above board doesn't mean it's so. They are political beasts by their nature and read their words carefully.

Desert Storm, a few yesrs ago. A vehicle driven by one of Americas finest women im sure but maybe not one of americas finest fighters got lost and when the Arabs opened fire she dove to the floor board of the moving humvee, wrapping her head in her arms and screaming hysterically.

The real fighting men in the back were killed trying to return fire as the humvee ran into a canal and rolled over crushing them.

One "girl" got busted up pretty bad and was captured with two broken legs and subsequently taken to a hospital rather than being head shot so she could possibly be saved so she could be used to satisfy the sexual desires of her officer captors. So, during her ordeal the lives of other real fighters were risked to prevent her suffering the untold horrors she faced and indeed did suffer. That truth was squelched to prevent folks with some decency from turning against this PC stupidity.

For a while the PC crowd called her a brave world class hero until Jessica told them to fugg off.

How many times will this happen until would be rescuers pay the ultimate price.

Those guys who died in that cluster fugg werent killed by the enemy. They were killed by suckers who swallowed the kool aid labeled "PC BS".

Those of you who support this insanity should have sons riding in the back of such a humvee or have daughters driving same.

Youre right, since i had no kid there or skin in the game why should i give a chitt.

Maybe because im not a hypocrite.

Give the women their own unit, and it would work out just fine.

Wait! Are you claiming that guys never got lost in combat and it was because she was a female? What a crock of $hit!

And what does the female naval aviator have to do with these two female Rangers, except nothing?

This^^^.

Who with any sense wants their son sharing a fox hole with some chick they are infatuated or in love with and having to turn their head while listening to her fill a pot with piss after going months or years without having gotten any, or hear her having the big one in the bushes or next room with HER crush, or seeing her get a leg or face or arm blown off?

It took less than that in other conflicts to screw some men's minds up forever.

Kudos to the women who achieved this.

I disagree with the concept of women in combat units, but it takes away nothing from their achievement.

The Jessica Lynch convoy was lead by Caption TROY KING. Not a very female sounding name. If the fault for getting lost lies with anyone, it is with him, not some spec 4.

I will agree with that John. My concern is with the ultimate aim.
As far as them being as tough as the Rangers, well, it seems there would be a lot more financial reward to becoming a kicking ass pro football player.

Let me know when some woman becomes an NFL tackle, line backer or QB.

Maybe some can make it as a tight end or wide reciever.

And what is this ultimate aim of which you speak?

amazing how many male chauvanists remain these days. Guess having pigs around annoys the muslims at least.

Women proclaimed "equal to men in due to "being" in front line conflict with men, AS.

The wonderment of this news is that the "toughest" of women are equal to thr toughest of men. That is the truth of the implication.

I'll say women are better than men, but they feel they have to prove it in all ways.

The convoy you speak of that got lost at An Nasiriyah wasn't during Desert Storm.

The combat operations involving Jessica Lynch happened during OIF-1, in 2003.


2003.

Thank you for the clarification.


The ultimate object of this is nothing more than a continuation of the emasculation of men with the ultimate aim being to prove them to be inferior humans.

We still arguing about bleeders? Where'd Splittail and her husband run off to?





Travis

So, guys not wanting women killed in front line battle in war situations are male chauvinists, Rost?

Im thinking that will include most Christian pastors.

So thinking we wont see female NFL hall of famers is chauvanistic?

Hell, they can make babies, make men happy, own half the wealth and all the good stuff and they have to be as tough as men too?

Ok, they are better than us in all things.

Amazing how many people think bleeders can cover all the bases these days.

Guess having retards around keeps the wrong people in office.



Travis

That demographic is almost as worthless as a bleeder.

Almost.



Travis

Please browse away from the conspiracy theory websites.

What's really behind this is promotion opportunities.

A Ranger Tab = promotion points.
Combat = opportunity to earn medals = promotion points.

In many commands, real combat experience is highly valued during the promotion process.

So part of pushing the equality agenda it opening up these experiences to women, and the points that go along with them.

I believe these women are the exception to the rule, and are personally driven to 'prove a point'. I commend their toughness.

Most female (and male) soldiers have no interest in going to Ranger School. That trend will continue.

Eat it up guys.

The Israelis used them in direct combat during the 1948 war because they had no choice. Those units with women suffered casualty rates in excess of 60% higher than all male units, for the simple reason men spent an inordinate amount of time trying to rescue wounded females and ostensibly "protecting " them in firefights. The Soviets had the same issue and BOTH stopped the practice and in fact I was present at the conference where they advise us against it.

Pregnancy rates in the US Navy for females E-4s and below during their first enlistment is as high as 64% and six months prior to a deployment it would spike as high as 80. And of course not enough time to replace them so men had to take up the slack. When I was on the JFK, in the two years I was there, we had 423 pregnancies, including officers. I can tell you without reservation, Naval Aviation cut back physical performance requirements as well as academic and flight standards in order for them to make it. Do some research on the Kara Hultgren incident and that is but one. GUARANTEED, books were cooked for these two...

eyeball, here's a news story that will cheer you up,


"MOOSE, Wyo. — Two women died when they fell about 200 feet while trying to climb a mountain at Grand Teton National Park....."


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/2-...on-national-park/ar-BBm1vBG?ocid=DELLDHP

Whether or not the standards were lowed or not is not the issue or the point of the media hype here. What you phuggs are too stupid to realize, is that all of this media attention is a prep show. And why? Prepping everyone for Hillary.

The DoD lifting of DADT was a precursor to allowing gay marriages nationwide.

Truman did the same thing prior to the Civil Rights movement.

DoD is and has been a big social experiment for many years.

They have all you numbnuts worked up about a couple of chicks wearing a Ranger tab, meanwhile, they are trying to figure out how to get Hildabeast in the WH.

Dont loose focus on the real issue here.

East Texas

Jorge,

A lot women not in college the age of an E-4 and below are having babies. Just observing out loud.

So are their Navy spouses. However, only the women show the physical signs.

So, what's the point???

Sorry, i abhor the thought of our men suffering at the hands of muzzy enemies and that pales in comparison to what i feel with regard to our service women will and hsve suffered at the hands of arab men.

I guess if you fell you have the license to mischaracterize me i can do the same for you, you slandering pos.

Why do you get your kicks wanting to ser our women suffer unspeakable horrors at the hands of our enemies? Do you get off on it.

How can you have insanity to the point of thinking i would be happy to hear of women falling and being hurt or kilked. I woupd much prefer it have been men.

My argument, you imbecile, is made with respect to protecting our women, while all you are concerned with is allowing them to have their PC pushers gush over how women can contribute and suffer as much as men can.

Kiss my rosey red you mischaracterizing ass.

You sound as if marines like you would like to get women involved to take up some slack, or do you just figure it would help you get a female subordinate in the sack?

eyeball,

here's some unsolicited advice. switch to the smallest smoothest iphone you can find. If you are using a full size ipad, it is going to really hurt when someone shoves it up your fundament!

Read jorges post. You got the nuts to call him a liar. Of course, with libs like you, facts dont matter.

Wow.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/07/16/military-sexual-assault-cost_n_3606413.html

http://sofrep.com/42761/really-happened-women-ranger-school-class-06-15/#ixzz3jh5fXBNh

The following was written by Rudy Mac, a Ranger-qualified, company-grade infantry officer serving on active duty in a light unit in the U.S. Army.
Related Posts



By the time most of you read this story, 96 newly tabbed Rangers and their friends and families will be celebrating the completion of one of the most arduous and demanding courses that the Army has to offer. For them, this coming weekend will undoubtedly involve hours of some of the most satisfying sleep of their lives, interspersed with exorbitant feasts of all of the foods that they have been dreaming about, talking about, and listing in their Rite In The Rain notebooks for weeks and weeks.

They will return to their units with a few new skills and a better understanding of small-unit tactics, but more importantly with a new confidence in themselves and their fellow tabbed Rangers. They will be marked for the rest of their careers with a $1.80 strip of cloth that tells whomever they meet that when tested with adversity, pain, and discomfort, they can be trusted to find a way to get the job done and complete the mission. For the first time in history, two women will pin on this badge of survival and perseverance, and you know what? They f*****g earned it. Every last thread of it.

I started and finished Ranger School this year with Class 06-15, although since I neither recycled nor had to endure a winter phase of the course, my tab should probably be just a little bit smaller than the tabs that many of my peers wear. We were the first gender-integrated Ranger School class, starting on April 19th, with 19 female and 381 male students.

Since my graduation, I have followed the progress of these remaining female Rangers with interest. Although virtually all of the discussion I have heard surrounding their advancement through the course has been pretty positive up to this week, since the Washington Post broke the story of Ranger Griest and Ranger Haver getting their go’s in Florida, I have read and heard an increasing amount of bad-mouthing from a plethora of haters, dismissing their accomplishment as the product of slipping standards or some ultra-liberal, feminist plot by the government and Army leadership. I am speaking out to tell you that these insinuations could not be further from the truth. Ranger School is still hard, and these women earned their tabs.

Before I discuss my own subjective opinions, let’s talk about the numbers, starting with my class (Class 06-15). In 06-15, we started 400 Ranger students in April and graduated fewer than 100 in June. Twenty-eight of us (that’s seven percent), went straight through the course without recycling. In Darby Phase, our recycle rate was almost 75 percent—the highest for the phase in over five years. In my squad of 17 Ranger students, only four of us went forward to Mountain Phase. Another squad in my company (Alpha Company) sent only two of 17 forward. In Mountain and again in Florida, we only had enough students for one platoon in my company. I believe the same was true of Bravo and Charlie.

For those who have claimed that the packing list was reduced for this year to make patrols easier: We weighed our rucks before the Mountains FTX and the Florida FTX. My ruck was 85 pounds at the start of Mountains as a team leader and over 100 pounds at the start of Florida as a SAW gunner. For the past three classes of the course (06-15, 07-15, and 08-15), the course graduation rate has been about 30 percent, much lower than the average for FY10-FY14 of 42 percent, and significantly lower than the historical average of nearly 50 percent. If you believe that the standards at Ranger School have been lowered for recent classes in order to pass the women who attended, you are simply wrong. The numbers reflect what the Ranger Training Brigade officers and NCOs have been saying for months now: The standards at Ranger School are as high or higher right now than they have been in many, many years.

Now, let’s discuss the process that the Infantry School went through to select and prepare female soldiers to attend the course. After the Army sent out the ALARACT message looking for female Ranger School volunteers, they had nearly 400 female soldiers express a desire to attend the course. One hundred and nine of those female soldiers eventually attended the RTAC, the ARNG Warrior Training Center’s two week Pre-Ranger Course, which is second only to the 75th Ranger Regiment’s SURT (Small Unit Ranger Tactics) Pre-Ranger Course in terms of success rate at Ranger School. Several of the women who failed RTAC went back and tried again, for a total of 138 attempts by female students.

Twenty female Ranger Students eventually passed RTAC, and 19 of those 20 started Ranger School with Class 06-15 on April 19th. From this point on, anyone who has followed the story probably knows what transpired. Eight of those 19 female students passed RAP (Ranger Assessment Phase) Week at Camp Rogers, where about 60 percent of Ranger School failures historically occur. All eight went to Camp Darby with Class 06-15 and were either recycled into Class 07-15 or dropped from training. After another Darby Phase with Class 07-15, again, none of the female students received their go’s, and three remained in the course to start over as day one recycles with class 08-15. As an aside, during RAP week with class 08-15, Ranger Kristen Griest finished second out of the entire class on the 12 mile ruck—an astounding achievement, especially considering that she had just gone through RAP week, two Darby phases, and another RAP week, all back-to-back. CPT Griest and 1LT Haver went straight through the rest of the course with class 08-15, finally earning their Ranger Tabs today after 124 days in Ranger School.

Lastly, for what it’s worth, I would like to offer my own impressions of what our class was like with female students in RAP week and at Darby. Unlike many, I didn’t doubt that some female soldiers in our Army would at least have a decent shot at getting their tabs. There are a whole lot of female collegiate, professional, and Olympic athletes who can PT a whole lot better than me, so why shouldn’t they be able to at least come close to passing a course like Ranger School? Like many, however, I was somewhat skeptical that the cadre at RTB could successfully administer a course with extremely close living quarters and significant field time like Ranger School without compromising the integrity of the training.

I quickly found, however, that the gender issue was a non-issue. The barracks at Camp Rogers are shaped like a ‘U’, with a latrine and shower facilities forming the center of the U, connecting two long bays of bunk beds and wall lockers, with doors at the end of the bays. The female students in our company slept towards one end of the bay, where an enclave of wall lockers formed an area for them to hurriedly change in when the need arose. In the latrines, during the absurdly short time hacks we were given to use the bathroom, the women simply walked past the men and used the stalls. After the first real smoke session of the week on day one, nobody cared much about using the same latrine. We were all just Ranger students.

During the few times we were able to take showers, the cadre dedicated the showers on one side of the bay to female students for one quarter of the shower period, and a Ranger instructor and female NCO stood in the center of the ‘U’ to avoid confusion. RAP week passed and we were on to Darby. In Darby, the female students in our company dispelled any doubts of their ability to hump weight on patrols during the first few days in the field. If I remember correctly, Ranger Griest carried the M240 for her squad on day one of patrols and another female in her squad carried the radio as the RTO. The next day of patrols, they switched, with Ranger Griest humping the radio and the other female student carrying the M240. Physically, they were studs. They carried their own weight and then some.

In the two months since I have graduated, I have spoken with countless fellow tabbed Rangers on the topic, both from my class and from previous classes. Every morning, my Facebook news feed is filled with statuses from my peers, with links to articles on the topic and discussions on the progress of the females left in the course. We are universally in awe of what these two female Rangers have accomplished. Everyone I have talked to is of one mind. They earned it. Without the same wide shoulders, large frames, and high testosterone levels of their brother Rangers, they earned it. Unfortunately, the naysayers will continue to talk trash and belittle CPT Griest and 1LT Haver’s historic accomplishment. In response, I would like to close with a recent quote from MAJ Jim Hathaway, the current RTB executive officer:




Read more: http://sofrep.com/42761/really-happened-women-ranger-school-class-06-15/#ixzz3jh5fXBNh

Zackly

Gerrrrrrate. With libs the exception always proves the rule.

If one did it, that means they all can, right?

And, if they all can, they all will, right?

All you gotta do is believe, right?

Or, Rangers they have earned and Rangers they are and any simple-minded talk of lower standards just shows how wrong you are.

Cheerios made them a lot tougher than the pioneer women, im sure.

So both of you figure jorge id lying?

Id trust what he says a lot more thsn either of you PC crew, heart directed suckers.

Does anyone honestly think that the army would allow any stories that contradicted the narrative without repercussion? I spent a few years in and my guess is no.
Personally I don't know if they made it through without some help or not. Although TBH from what I've read I think there was a whole lot of command influence on their passing.
I also think that in a few years when some of the RI's have retired we'll hear some more stories.

Good night. If only Washington had known of the strength he could have conscripted.

I have heard nothing but praise for the Israeli military on this site.

Bark, women on the front lines will provide the, uh, stimulus many have been looking for.

I don't think he's lying. I'm just not sure what it has to do with these two Rangers?

Nothing?

I think nothing is what it has to do with the Rangers.

Me? PC? you mucking four iron. I'm as not PC as you can get. I just observe what is, and don't listen to the whiny bullshit of people who know nothing about that which they speak...

Hmmm, you are very sensitive.

Doesn't matter which century or which continent, you will always find men fighting about bleeders.



Travis

This has nothing to do with compassion.

EB has this big psychological hang up about white women having sex with anything other then white men.

Travis, I reckon we're programmed at the molecular level.

BINGO! ^ This.

1. Israelis don't deploy. Big Difference!
2. What is your MOS?
3. You really think this is about being "shown up"? Delusional!
4. 128 Days to complete a 58 day course? Hmmm...
5. I bet their peer reviews are never released. I wonder why? Maybe it doesn't fit the agenda David?

He doesn't have one, he's Air Force, so he doesn't have a real PT standard either.

Chicks ain't dudes.



'Flave 2016

Ok thanks, it all makes sense now....

I wonder if these tools (Ranger babes) will ever reflect on the damage their selfish actions will have inflicted on others?

Reality. These 2 just may have passed real Ranger course. Long range damage is real. As in any other politically correct move, in order to get more "career enhancements" the standards WILL be relaxed. Soon enuff women WILL be forced on the Infantry,Armor,Combat Engineers and FA and the worst of the worst will occur. We had at LEAST seven officers relieved by the Battalion Commander because they fuqked up. Women would be nearly impossible to get rid of without SecDef clearance. Firing a man for incompetence is easy. women not so much. Long range this is a very bad idea.

Oh GOD NO!

not the artillery....

There's a ringing endorsement...



Dave

I expected more critical and strategic thinking from a senior officer or at least it was expected of me when I was one.

This is not about two very capable female officers and their admirable achievement. This is about how the country runs the armed services. To say that females do not bring capability to the fight is silly. In my experience serving with them they ranged from really good to really awful, just like men. From a training matrix standpoint they can do the job and increase the readiness of the unit from a paperwork/reporting standpoint.

When the train runs off the rails is the burden to accommodate them into the unique environments. This means more berthing and sectioning the ship into increasingly small segments. I'm sure in the ground-based services this is not an issue in battalion but when you get to the field it gets much harder. In addition, it means that you are now mixing sexes of 18-30 year olds in remote stressful environments far away from home. I know what was on my mind when I was 18 (OK, to be fair it's on my mind at 51 too! ) So ask oneself, does that make us more capable or less capable? Feel free to not like the pregnancy numbers Jorge posted but that does not make them any less true and it's just biology that woman bear the burden of that. It has a very real effect on readiness.

That's really the bottom line. Is it worth the benefit to have woman in the deployed services? I can certainly see it in some roles and locations but I find it hard to believe it is worth it as deployed Rangers or in Attack Submarines or some other close quarter isolation scenarios. I'm no bigot here but the Military isn't there to be "fair" or "equal". It's there to be a irresistible force. In some cases woman add to that equation, in some cases they don't.

While it's cool to think about that tip of the spear, the reality is the logistics and undercarriage of the military have to support that tip and that gets much harder the further you get in the field. With a few women it gets a lot harder and the benefit is much smaller than the burden.

One can never downplay the role of sex here, and there is no denying, you get prego, you are out of the loop.

YOu won't rid the service of sex, they find it at that age and those circumstances one way or another.

That being said, I"ve always said need to be judged by your performance and nothing else.

Unfortunately how things roll with .gov, that has not happened and won't happen in the future I suspect.

THere are many good points here, I just hate all the derogatory comments about bleeders and such..

There are more than a few women capable, they should have a chance, there are more than a few men that are never capable, they should be weeded out also.

Might be a flip flop of 80/20- 20/80 or such, but to be faulted for your sex is as bad as to be faulted for your race.

Well, i guess that means youre just another male chauvanist for wanting to hold women back, Pugs.

My replies here might seem quick and trivial, but I have had for some time, women up and down my chain of command.

My observation is and will be, after 40 years of critical analysis, that women bring more to the fight than they take away from the fight.

Simply stated, but critically analyzed, they are worth the extra effort.

I'm all about critical analysis, based solely on observed facts.

The point? the point is the get to stay home and BTW, most are single parent. The Navy, and for that matter the armed forces isn't the place for social experimentation and until someone produces valid and measurable data the services' combat readiness has improved because of females, then we can start to discuss this and even then, you will never get rid of the man/woman dynamic. Women don't belong in the combat arms and had they been any good, we would have been using them since we started fighting wars.

[/quote]

With that comment, I can only assume you have zero knowledge of the combat arms and the physical standards that USED to be a requirement for Naval Aviation. I suggest you read up on the nightmare our flyers, from all branches went through as POWs, evasion escape during Vietnam and other wars and oh yes, what happened to the three (3) females that became POWs during Desert Storm and OIF

I have better than working knowledge of "Combat Arms." I've had troops in combat and command in combat.

What I know is that under 1% of the population of the US serves in the military, and I can't exclude over 50% of the population from participation if I wish to adequately defend the Republic and the Constitution.

Like it or not, we have to fight with the tools we are given, and improvise and adapt to the realities of now, not of yesterday.

As Jeff Cooper was quoted "The past is a different country. They do things differently there."

I have to fight today's fight with the realities of today. Reflection on yesterday, while a useful tool to prevent repeated mishaps or misadventure, is just that.

The way forward includes women in combat. You'd do better to fight the rising tide than to think you're going to change this reality.

What is it that women bring to a fight that men lack?

Until we get into a real war. They would have been a BIG help at Bastogne, Iwo Jima, or Khe Sahn.... At least the "rising tide" means we have to accept it even at the expense of combat readiness, sacrificed on the altar of political correctness. Had they been any good civilization would have incorporated them ten thousand years ago.

As to fighting it, I KNOW the facts, I was in the middle of the issue when it first came to light thanks to Clinton, most experts as well as historical data told us not to do it, and we did it anyway with predicted results; Lower standards to include discipline and social experimentation with men carrying the water. A stroke of a pen doesn't make them warriors. Besides, I'm retired, and given what is going on today, I'm 61 and IDGAF...

Jorge,

Obviously, you do GAF or you would not have commented. I GAF, too. My reality is making this work. Have I critically assessed the pluses and minuses? Yup.

I still have to make it work.

Barry,

Women have better long term stamina and a higher pain threshold, among other things.

Great post Pugs....though points off for not mentioning sandwiches anywhere.

9.6

Please spell out your plus's vs. minuses of these 2 women Rangers in Combat? You might be a good Air Force Officer, but you have no clue what you are talking about regarding SOC.

"make it work" say it all. Work with less than optimum factors. I also find it telling you didn't address any of the facts I presented, or at most, answered with irrelevancy, like "women get pregnant in the civilian side too". They bring NOTHING to the fight other than distractions and overall MUCH less survivability in sustained combat operations.

How do you square that with this woman's experience? https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/i...says-battle-tested-female-marine-captain



What advantage has that been in combat? Can you tell us about any mission that would have failed without a woman's higher pain threshold?

This man, who is a Ranger and Green Beret of long service, encapsulates this situation very well in my opinion:

In my experience, women are less likely to always use only the brute force solution. Brute force is good when it's good, but predictable when overused, and that's bad.

I know jack [bleep] about the Special Operations world or the requirements.

Except, women are now a fact in Spec Ops, and you'd better learn how to adapt to that and incorporate whatever strengths they bring.

Ditto ground combat. It's going to happen, how can you best use them to add to your combat power?

I don't know. But someone better.

Never served in the military, but have had to manage disputes between genders at the office.

I can point out, in many private businesses and corporations, it's policy that people in relationships can not work together in the same office. It's done to prevent conflicts of interest and favoritism.

In the military, where the stakes are much higher, I would think that would be a policy as well. Woman gets pregnant by someone in her unit, both she & the father get kicked out.

I can see that in some cases, a woman could be an asset to a combat unit, for example when they have to interact with civilian women who can't or won't talk to men. But women who could hold their own in hand-to-hand combat are going to be quite rare, even more rare than specs ops types.

If anyone really paid attention to the 2 posts I made, they MAY have a clue. I have fought in 4 battles and more damn firefights than I care to remember. We STAYED in the field. Our BC at that time was sharp. He relieved Platoon leaders and Company Commanders on the spot for making stupid moves that got MANY men killed-stupidly. Sometimes the Gooks would make the on the spot corrections but that usually meant other men died too. There are NO recycles, alibis or excuses. You are there for a long run and you either live or die. You kill or be killed. INSTANT removal of incompetence HAS to be the norm. Political correctness CANNOT EVER BE A FACTOR and "ring knocker" female Ranger qualified would give that phrase a whole new meaning Just TRY to relieve one of them for fuqking up.

Agreed. Like it or not, they're here. Time to figure out how best to make it work.

To the bold statements, research, factual data as well as testimonials say the bring nothing to the table except distractions and biological pressures not conducive to combat readiness or good order and discipline..

Apparently they have not, brother. But at least the "we have to make it works with what we have comments" they admit it has nothing to do with enhanced combat power, just social experimentation.

Now we can breathe a lot easier. Bring on the real war. I'm sure Patton would find a way. Brute force in war is the BEST.

Why not develop a position that suits their strong points, instead of twisting long derived standards of current positions to fit them?

Don't exclude the butt-fugkers. We get to sort that out as well.




Dave

Why would anybody consider a bleeder to be equal to a man?

The very notion is absurd.




Clark

Shrapnel needs to go stand in the misogynist corner.




Travis

I got a couple ideas.




Travis

I would love to see an all female ranger regiment.

Get a group of angry women together, and look out. They'll destroy the world over the wrong shade of lipstick.

Whoever said the world would be a more gentle place if women were in charge, must have been living alone in a cave.

They'd destroy themselves long before they found the enemy.




Travis

insert cat fight sound.

Exactly. How long untill he feels he has to make it work with transvestites and downs patients?

I guess its good that I can remember the times I was worried about staying alive and not whether or not I was getting a piece of ass later, or my RTO wasn't trying to hand job me.

Life or death was so much easier back then....

Leave your family out of it, ball.

Now for the haymaker. It would change forever how men would have to actually think and behave. Enemy female soldier is coming. hand to hand combat has arrived. All of the old ways of thinking of chivalrous behavior and striking women would be destroyed. You will bayonet her in the guts or throat or smash her face in with a rifle butt or your helmet. You may have to disembowel her with you e-tool or combat knife and smash her face and head into mush with your boot then be ready to do it again to the next one coming. You would have to adjust thinking to what would happen if your daughter was the soldier in question. WTF do you think battle/combat is???? I could do it. Could you?? Would you??

Was that your answer to my 2 questions?

Do you have anything better than that and more specific to my questions?

This is one of the many reasons I am a proponent of domestic violence.




Travis

Relive a few choice moments with my first wife first, then....yes, I could do it.

Don’t feel bad, they have a higher pain threshold.

Barry,

Are you implying that one woman's experience is representative of all women?

Is so, do you further "deduce" that since the washout rate among men in Ranger school is very high, that men are not cut out to be Rangers?

Your "logic" is idiotic.

I think women will be intimidating in combat.

I seen one bleed for 5 days without dying.

David, thank's for demonstrating that you are not even capable of doing simple math.

Prior to this class, the wash out rate for women in Ranger School was 100%. In this class that graduated 2 it was still 89%. If you can't see the difference between these washout rates and that of men, you powers of observation are seriously lacking.

You still haven't answered my question regarding the last time a woman under your command volunteered to hump the M-60/M240. I wonder if that's because you don't have any in your TOE?

So what you are saying is its not as much the women in combat thats the issue with women in combat, its how the .gov side in command handles the situations with them in a combat role.

Makes sense to me.

Dave,
You said they had advantages over men. I asked you to provide specific instances of where we lost fewer American lives in combat than otherwise.

You also said women are more durable. Please cite evidence.

Please cite evidence of how their supposed higher pain threshold saved American lives in combat.

As far as my example, how does that woman differ from other women? Do most other women lack feminine parts? How would another woman's outcome be different? Are you saying the example was a poor exception?

Many don't get that life is life. I"d have no problem killing a women with a rock if need be.

If the ones that apply and are chosen are done correctly, then those women could kill with a rock or be killed with a rock, matters not one bit.

I don't get the fact that so many hold the women in some form or fashion of higher esteem and then demand a sammich.

Anyone demanding a sammich is not holding them in any kind of "esteem".

There are myriad writings out there, both foreign and domestic on the subject. That said I invite you to read this book:

Weak Link, The Femenization of the US Military.

Why Women Can't Fight, James Webb Naval Institute Proceedings

"On Board the USS Mike Boorda" Proceedings, 1996/

There are (obviously) some women that can meet physical standards at the bare end of the bell curve. But that is academic. What you fail to understand is the DYNAMIC, based in biology they bring into the mix, completely eradincating unit cohesion, interaction and discipline. That said, why do I feel I'm pissing up a rope...

Trump: I Would Support Women in Combat Roles
8/23/15 Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump said Friday that he would support women in military combat roles, but would follow that advice from his military advisers "because I would want to hear that without a political bent."

"The answer is yes because they're really into it," the billionaire businessman told Chris Cuomo on CNN. "And some of them are really, really good at it.

"I would really speak to the generals, because I would want to hear that without a political bent," Trump cautioned. "To the public, they say, 'yes, yes, yes,' but I would want to hear it without the political bent."

Read Latest Breaking News from Newsmax.com http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/Donald-Trump-Women-in-Combat/2015/08/21/id/671325/#ixzz3jkwXkguK

'Sniper,

There are no m60s in my current TOE.

However, in the last unit I commanded, we had an EOD flight with those and the Barrett light 50.

My EOD flight commander, a 4'11" woman, used to hump them all the time.

Does that prove or disprove anything?

And my math skills are fine. Barry's implication was that women are unsuitable because large numbers wash out. Large numbers of men wash out, too.

I think you're all missing the point, perhaps purposely. While you have the luxury of disparaging these Rangers, I have the reality of having to make these and any other women effective in the roles to which they are assigned.

You're talking. I'm doing. And it doesn't matter what you say, I'm going to give these ladies, these volunteers while 99% of the male population does not volunteer, every opportunity to prove themselves and to succeed.

I'm going to switch off of this thread now. As the Ranger Major said earlier, you could have been there the whole time and still would not have given these officers the courtesy of recognizing their accomplishment.

That's pathetic.

Classic!

Its certainly saying that you don't have the intelligence or capability to make said sammich, and as such have to defer to them for the process to be completed satisfactorily.

David, again you obfuscate. There was an earlier class with 19 female Ranger Candidates, and all 19 failed. Out of this class of 18, only 2 passes.

2/37 is 5%. That is a full magnitude different then the near 50% pass rate for men.

Since you are an officer, let me break this down for you.

5% does not equal 50%.

So explain to me how sending 10 times the number of women through Ranger School to get the same number of graduates as their male counter parts is a reasonable expenditure of our tax dollar? Again, you've become such a political creature as you rose though the officer ranks you are no longer capable of doing a simple cost/benefit analysis.

As for volunteering, you seem to forget. I did volunteer.

As for you making the most with what you have, you don't have a choice in the matter. You have to play the hand you are dealt. If the Air Force decided to send you tangled mess of misfits, it might suck to be you, but it doesn't change your mission, just your opportunities for success.

"Come out, come out Hadji! Me love you long time!"

I guess deception is a legitimate part of spec ops warfare. You gotta work with what you got after all.

Finally gettin' somewhere in this conversation.




Travis

it is quite interesting to see the different viewpoints as i was having this discussion last week with a retired senior grade officer been all over the world in various capacities that i won't disclose, a lot of time in the middle east. Another one in the discussion was a retired captain in the navy, and a subguy. The senior grade officer commented on the female officer that was with him all over the middle east. All said the sex part wasn't as important as the ability to do the job. That also extended over to the gay thing, in that in the sub role people knew part of the crew was gay, but if they were doing the job, they were doing the job.
I would'nt expect many women, but some, could complete these courses, but if they can, they can.
I will always remember years ago running into this good looking blonde teaching a emt course through a local fire department. She was a firefighter too. She was pretty impressive and i am pretty sure would have made short work of most people reading these words, if pressed to a physical competition or otherwise. There aren't a lot of men that can pass these physical tests, probably by far a lot fewer woman. But as all three guys said, if they can, who cares?
They have been in some cases already in combat. Such as the shorter than five foot female m.p. we were sending cookies too in iraq a few years ago, that was a m.p. in falluagh(sorry for the spelling). She was already taking a role you wouldn't expect for the average female.

As far as the captain, as i understand it, she has already been in combat prior to ranger school.
I know it's a t.v. program but i have to think of the t.v. program "the vikings" and the term shield maiden. The point of it is that it is a t.v. program based somewhat on even a thousand years ago of women going into combat. nothing new.

There is absolutely no comparison between the dynamics of fighting a fire for a few hours, and being in a remote hostile location for months on end.

Our military should be focused on how they can field the most effective forces on the ground, in the air and by sea. Anything other than that is either a grossly misguided social experiment, or an active attempt to compromise our military.

If *any* females can pass the Ranger PT test, then the standards are too low. And I mean females not taking PEDs. And I mean females, not intersex male/female people.

I think a little shepherd boy with a goat would be more effective.

Except "Shield Maidens" are largely a fiction.

99.9% of all viking warriors were male.

That show has the historical accuracy of a GI Joe Cartoon.

And it sucks.



Travis

THIS. This post and others, like from ET, clearly shows the price of freedom and what men like him endure is a value the protected shall never know, and these social experiments are eventually paid off in blood...

A close friend of mine and Ret. former wing commander at Luke told me recently that the F16 pilots at Luke don't trust anyone Col or above!
They will have a target on their backs. They meet secretly to talk among themselves.

For this reason........

"Anna Simons, a professor of defense analysis at the U.S. Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California, said she recently met with a group of officers reluctant to share their women-in-combat views.

“Officers who balk at the idea of women serving in ground infantry units or on Special Forces Operational Detachments Alpha (ODAs) won’t publicly say so, let alone publicly explain why,” she wrote April 15 at WarOnTheRocks.com, a forum for national security commentary. “They worry about retaliation that could hurt their careers. "







Marines are next. Unfortunately

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news...s-lower-standards-for-women-afte/?page=1




A close friend of mine and Ret. former wing commander at Luke told me recently that the F16 pilots at Luke don't trust anyone Col or above! They will have a target on their backs. They meet secretly to talk among themselves.

Sadly,this has not unfolded as a discussion about how to have the most formidable fighting force in the world, which should, IMO, be the goal.

Instead, I see stuff about career opportunity and personal accomplishment, and other PC crap etc, blah, blah, blah. Me thinks those proffering such perspectives have some close estrogen in the fight. Just sayin.

Pure entertainment aside, one of the most dangerous things in the world is make-believe. Changing standards is ALL about make-believe. Kinda like progressive utopian dreams. ALL, deadly make-believe.

on the other hand, just talking to a friend of mine multiple deployments in various bad places, over a number of years. marine corp.
He doesn't think much of it.
His comment was sometimes he would go 30days without a shower, having to poop in a plastic bag, and use whatever to get rid of crotch rot. How wondered how the average woman would deal with that? His comment being going through a school is one thing where portapotties were set up, but being in the field is different.
His other comment was that the services have gotten very politically correct, where having a vagina, or the right color, or both fast tracked you on advancement. His comment being passed over as sargent 8 times, and having the right sex or color then giving you orders when they don't have the same experience level. Which is probably a big reason why people are leaving the military.
And two woman out of all those ranger qualified, what does that really prove? A couple of super atheletes don't translate well aginst the great body, and how much in special accomodations are done for this politically correct goal?

Actually these numbers are wrong 138 started RTAC. Numbers are here. http://weaponsman.com/?p=23048

Eviltwin has seen more ground combat then anyone else on here. I think I'll go along with his opinion as it reinforces what I saw on 21 years active.

Same thing when I was in Misawa. There was a general mistrust of any AF officer O-6 or above.

...women are allowed to do fewer pullups than men in the basic physical fitness tests. It’s called “gender norming” to account for male-female physiological differences.

Skip the minimums all together and pass out Participation ribbons and bars.

RTAC is the Ranger Training Assessment Course. It's a 16 day "pre-ranger school" course designed to weed out those wwho are not up to the physicality of the Ranger Course, and those who can't read maps etc. Generally about 55-60% oof males soldiers can pass this pre-course, but as you mentioned, the success rate for females is significantly lower, with over 80% failing. All total this means that only 1.5% of the hand selected women were able to complete the course.

So the top 1% of females can equal an ordinary male soldiers. How would they compare with the top 1% of male soldiers, and which would you rather have with you in combat?

This!

Back in January 2000 I attended an Army 3 week "land nav course" and about 255 +- started the course only 56 finished it with 52 allowed to go to more advanced training. I always thought that was a poor graduation rate.

I know women in combat arms jobs (Infantry, Armor, FA and SOF) is coming I just think it's unnecessary and stupid.

Don't know if this is the same article, but if not, it may be close.

http://www.washingtonian.com/articles/people/jim-webb-women-cant-fight/

Most Army Aviation Warrants dont trust anyone above O-1!

I'm glad you have found it so in the roles you have had. I have indeed found them of value in some of my roles too but that does not mean it is a good idea for the whole military.

The military rightly falls under civilian control and will march forward as ordered. Sometimes that direction makes sense for the military and sometimes it's because the politicians have an agenda. Flag officers of all branches have, with rare exception, largely become politicians. It is virtually impossible for them to advance to that grade without compromise of their own beliefs.

Again, there are exceptions but very few. Sitting as a recorder and member on promotion and non-statutary boards gave me insights into the sausage making that made it clear that agendas will be served and they are not always to the betterment of the service.

You guys MUST be wrong...

THere are more women out there than you think, that can handle all that... wife goes with me for a couple weeks as a start, no shower, nothing, roughing it on the ground, often without tent, off trail and so on...

If the 30 days thing is an issue.

And I have NO idea, and wont take the time to research, but are the Israeli's using women in combat? Would they if they are not?

But I know to many here, Israel doesn't count.

Would your numbers not reflect what we've been saying, the course will sort it out.

Once again, let the results speak. I wouldn't want the guys that failed to be with me..... same same.

Jeff,

Do you concede that introducing a bleeder to 11 men in the middle of nowhere changes the dynamics of the entire situation?

Or do you not concede that?




Travis

Rost, those schools are not free. That's your and my tax dollars they are spending to get minimal results out of their PC agenda. Of DW and the likes don't care how many of our tax dollars they waste in pursuit of their PC agenda so long as it helps him toward his next promotion.

So you have one group with a 1% pass rate, and another with a 50% pass rate. So by your reasoning we should send more of the one percent group so we can spend more tax dollars and have fewer new Rangers, and fewer that can actually be in a Ranger Battalion, at the end of they year.

Sure, as guys we like babe's with guns, but I"m not in favor of wasting tax dollars on high failure rate, and limited opportunities to use the skills imparted.

Travis

Yes, because most folks cannot even come close to controlling themselves I agree.

Wouldn't have phased me in the least, there to do a job, not screw a gal....

I don't much care if its her that gets shot or him, or if I shoot a her or him or it.

There are times and places for everything.

I agree on dynamics quite a bit. But to say they are not capable of anything but a sammich maker and kid squirter is beyond stupid.

Not all women are what most male chauvanists desire.... I would not marry what one of those pigs desires...

[/quote]

Rost, those schools are not free. That's your and my tax dollars they are spending to get minimal results out of their PC agenda. Of DW and the likes don't care how many of our tax dollars they waste in pursuit of their PC agenda so long as it helps him toward his next promotion.

So you have one group with a 1% pass rate, and another with a 50% pass rate. So by your reasoning we should send more of the one percent group so we can spend more tax dollars and have fewer new Rangers, and fewer that can actually be in a Ranger Battalion, at the end of they year.

Sure, as guys we like babe's with guns, but I"m not in favor of wasting tax dollars on high failure rate, and limited opportunities to use the skills imparted. [/quote]

Nope, I don't think we should waste money, but there should be allowed a weed out system, if you pass the prelims and they should not be easy, then ANYONE should have a chance.

The schools don't cost more or less, they are paid for already. I pay for them all the time with my taxes. I only think fair should be blind.

Would you get away with not allowing blacks for instance to apply? Only because they are black? Why apply same same to women?

The 50 percent pass rate gives you one student for every 2 apply.

The 1 percent fixes itself, it gives you one for every 100 that apply.

Flip the numbers.

You are showing your age my friend. I know it's a long time ago, but you need to remember what it was like when you were 18 and single.

Rost495
You're getting hung up on fair. The only thing that matters is effective. As Antelope stated it's not cost effective, and an infantry platoon made up primarily of women is not combat effective.
There is a world of difference between an infantry movement to contact and a deer hunt. Think about it like this throw about 1/2 a mule deer on your ruck move 12 miles or so through fairly rugged terrain drop about 1/2 that weight and then go run (short sprints 50-100 meters)around for 2-5 hours taking occasional breaks. 4-6 hours of broken sleep (have to pull security) then wake up and do it again the next day and the next day and the next. Think that will break a body down? Sorry but it's a fact a woman isn't built for that kind of punishment. They might be able to handle that over the short run, but what about 2-3 years down the line?

Jeff, unfortunately the pregnancy rates of our "sailors" at sea show people what seem not to be as trustworthy as thee. As Davib says, he has to work with what hes got, and with todays society, he aint getting people like there used to be.

I think these gals deserve the honor which they have earned. However, I would not want to go into battle with them, because women are just wired different. Men are logical and women are illogical. By that I mean, almost every single woman I have ever met, can't prioritize between the important and the unimportant. They multitask very well, but it may be a bunch of stuff that doesn't matter. I can see them now packing for the battlefield: weapon, ammunition, vest, birthday cards, anniversary cards, lipstick, flashlight, combat boots, knife, etc. To a woman, all that crap is necessary and they cannot distinguish between the two. Just my opinion.

"Gender norming" = Swinging from the "ladies tees"

I remember that. I"m not that old... I stand by my statement.

Cool. I can't do any much of that. My wife can, she is a triathlete..... has been for years....about to get into some kind of 120 mile runs where they run, rest, run etc.. until they've done 4-5 marathons in a weekend... phug that.

I'm not ashamed to say she is tougher than I am mentally. THe only thing that gets her is pure muscle use, she is 4/2 and about 110 and just doesnt' have the muscle mass...

But I do get all of you, but still say let them prove it just like every guy has to do. NO one is going to know if they can perform in combat until that day comes..... it should be a blind test.

How long will it be until they put Summers Eve inside MRE's?

Its been said, give them their own regiment. Let those who wish fight against men, or give them a submarine for deep diving.

Not long ago the Army was having a problem with rampant sexual assaults. I knew a female who held Captain rank and was dating a subordinate. Her friend was a Major who was married and getting a little too close to the subordinates, like loaning a dryer, going to lunch with this one subordinate who received the dryer of course this could all be subjective?

Anyhow the Army was always good for some good "stories", that usually were true!!

In Iraq, women soldiers were prostituting themselves to their male counter parts for a little more money...True Story!

Women are a great idea in the military.

Ummm... ok.




Travis

Rost495 your wife sounds like a tough gal and you mentioned muscle mass and her weight of 110. Buddy of mine jumped into Panama (with a Ranger Batt) said his ruck was about 150 lbs, personally I've never jumped a ruck that heavy 118lb was the heaviest I ever jumped with, I was supposed to jump with 125ish once but the jump was canceled enroute. Once the rucks start getting up to that range there is no substitute for size and strength. IMO 170lbs (assuming good physical condition)or so was about where you could start seeing a difference between guys who were good heavy ruckers (100+ lb ruck) and the ones who weren't. Guys under that weight generally couldn't handle it over several days.

Bad idea. It tastes horrible.




Dave

And that is the driving force behind this PC bs as it was in making college dorms start housing males and females together. PC liberal agenda, Esox.

I'd call a recruiter.




Dave

It does, but it makes snapper taste better.

Yes, we all know you have vagina envy, sweet Jesus.

Now please enlighten me about your military experience,

Misogynist.




Travis

Alum and sugar douche, makes it tighter for the peter and sweeter for the eater.

Fresh squeezed lemon and vodka make snapper taste better.

Youse guys would ruin good whiskey with water, well Coke anyway.

Listen to these women - pure commies - calling everyone who disagrees with having women participate in combat "haters". There is nothing genuinely patriotic or good about them.

http://launch.newsinc.com/share.htm...pp_nws_pol_non_ppap&videoId=29584038

Is anybody looking at this in a non media frenzy practical manner?

ON THE AVERAGE, how many women can do it, without sacrificing criteria?

ON THE AVERAGE, how many red blooded youthful men are going to be able to properly, without effort, resist any behavior associated with women in a stressful, and non stressful environment? Likewise for the women? Not just sex, but posturing, chivalry, and other assorted issues.

Supporters can collectively say, "Well I could do that." but I'm talking about private E-3 Jones, who had enough time remembering what [bleep] frequency we were on without thinking about his girl back home, but we managed to make it out alive because the E-4 with us wasn't a chick...

I'm happy like hell that after 100's? of tries they got 2 that could "break down the wall" and let all the other 100's that couldn't get over the wall come through the break?

That's just fuggin stupid.

Lol!!!!!

Lol!!!
Once again.....

https://www.24hourcampfire.com/ubbt...5957/first-woman-to-become-a-green-beret