The Cowards Pushing Women Into Combat

Women in Combat 300x224 The Cowards Pushing Women into Combat

Retired Lt. Col. Robert Macginnis’ book DEADLY CONSEQUENCES: How Cowards Are Pushing Women into Combat, presents the facts, studies and the history of why women should not be allowed into ground combat units. Despite the modern perception of the military fighting a high tech, Nintendo-type war, any prolonged action will require face to face encounters with the enemy. The experienced infantry officer argues with facts that women should not be placed in situations where they may have to fight in close quarters or serve in Special Forces.

And our “society at large” doesn’t have a clue. The political correctness crowd believe that women can fight on the front line as efficiently as any man.  In order to appease the liberal forces of Congress and members of an Obama White House staff who never served a day in their life in the American military, the Armed Services will be compelled to weaken physical standards in order to allow women to serve in front line situations and in special forces.

Unfortunately, this is not an opinion but a fact. General Martin Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has admitted as much. In a press conference announcing the rescission of the 1994 rule excluding women from ground combat units Dempsey said, “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high?” (4)

Military readiness should never be compromised to serve the ends of political correctness or appease its cowardly proponents. And that is what so many of these people are–cowards. Spare me the ever-present anecdotes from people who “served in the military.” Fewer than ten percent of those who served have been on the ground, in-country and up close with the enemy. If any soldier, regardless of sex, can’t satisfy the same physical demands as the war fighter in a unit they need to be moved to a support position. And that is certainly nothing to be ashamed of.

The greatest insult to someone on the front line is being questioned or second guessed by a REMF (Rear Echelon Mother F’r). Today we have REMFs in Washington D.C. who believe that they are so damn smart they can dictate policy for the entire military based on theory. Yes, women can shoot a weapon and kill but the Col. argues that women lack the killer instinct needed to kill the enemy in squalid situations for a sustained combat operation. (2) “The Joint Chiefs have stopped being soldiers and are now just well-trained ‘yes men’ to whatever administration occupies the White House.” (1)

England and Russia experimented with women in combat. Low information cowards may argue that Russians had success with female combatants during World War II. Well then why, as Macginnis points out, did the Soviets stop using women in combat units after the Second World War? The British Army recently came to the conclusion that women do not work well in combat situations. (1)  As Col. Maginnis points out it has everything to do with a natural deficit of physical capabilities; a potential that is limited by the nature of their sex.

Women in the military perform their duties professionally and honorably.  But to lower standards and thereby risk the lives of soldiers fighting on the front line does a disservice both to those females who will be made to look incompetent and to those males who might be killed as a result.   

"Loophole" from Obama's IRS: Protect your IRA or 401(k) with gold and silver... click here to get a NO-COST Info Guide >

Speak Your Mind