Posted on Nov 17, 2015
I believe there is a lot of truth to this article. Your thoughts?
8.05K
38
21
15
15
0
Politics
Pentagon
Leadership
Posted 9 y ago
Responses: 17
3
3
0
SSgt (Join to see)
COL Mikel J. Burroughs I think so as well and bookmarked it... good read! Plus the first thing done by the new Sec'y of the AF was to put transgender issues as the most important thing to do..
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
COL Jean (John) F. B. the article was funny. And points light on the unfortunate truth of "yesmen" at the top.
I'd find it a miss though to be able to take the writing and make any credible argument with.
What people fail to commonly separate and explain (Not only for civilians looking in, but disconnected military leadership) is the difference between "women in combat" and "women working in combat MOS roles.
Women time and again over the past 14 years and every campaign before that they are no different in combat. They don't have less accuracy on the enemy. They don't have less capability for valor and bravery. Rounds and IEDs are indiscriminate of sexes. They don't hurt anymore or less when they have to recover a fallen brother/sister to send them home for final resting.
No difference in combat.
Instead it's the lifestyle that shows the difference. The "combat arms mos" lifestyle. Even in garrison infantry units live a more regorious life physically than non combat Mos. -which is how it should be. Such a lifestyle would only be medically disastrous to females in that role due to the biological differences of structure between men and women. Something the Armed Forces prove they acknowledge with the different standards on PFTs
I'd find it a miss though to be able to take the writing and make any credible argument with.
What people fail to commonly separate and explain (Not only for civilians looking in, but disconnected military leadership) is the difference between "women in combat" and "women working in combat MOS roles.
Women time and again over the past 14 years and every campaign before that they are no different in combat. They don't have less accuracy on the enemy. They don't have less capability for valor and bravery. Rounds and IEDs are indiscriminate of sexes. They don't hurt anymore or less when they have to recover a fallen brother/sister to send them home for final resting.
No difference in combat.
Instead it's the lifestyle that shows the difference. The "combat arms mos" lifestyle. Even in garrison infantry units live a more regorious life physically than non combat Mos. -which is how it should be. Such a lifestyle would only be medically disastrous to females in that role due to the biological differences of structure between men and women. Something the Armed Forces prove they acknowledge with the different standards on PFTs
(2)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
SPC (Join to see) - There is a lot of truth to what you said.
I have served with a great many outstanding women in my almost 25 years in the Military Police Corps, but that is not to say that there were not periodic issues related to their gender/biology. I also spent 5 years in the Infantry (straight leg/non-mechanized) and know that females would not have been as successful in many of our missions/requirements as they were in MP missions.
I have served with a great many outstanding women in my almost 25 years in the Military Police Corps, but that is not to say that there were not periodic issues related to their gender/biology. I also spent 5 years in the Infantry (straight leg/non-mechanized) and know that females would not have been as successful in many of our missions/requirements as they were in MP missions.
(0)
(0)
SPC (Join to see)
COL Jean (John) F. B. -
Yep. As a medic I've served with outstanding females. Who handled themselves impecibly in combat and with combat casualties. My wife being an example of one.
She's a PT stud, running sub 12 2 miles. She'll be the first say "F that sh$t" when she used to hear or see what my infantry platoon would be out doing what we do best.
I don't say these things to be sexist or anything else. It's just a fact. The weight we carry on our bodies will only lead to having hordes of female soldiers with career ending injuries early out the gate.
Yep. As a medic I've served with outstanding females. Who handled themselves impecibly in combat and with combat casualties. My wife being an example of one.
She's a PT stud, running sub 12 2 miles. She'll be the first say "F that sh$t" when she used to hear or see what my infantry platoon would be out doing what we do best.
I don't say these things to be sexist or anything else. It's just a fact. The weight we carry on our bodies will only lead to having hordes of female soldiers with career ending injuries early out the gate.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
As I recall, my job was to advise my superiors of the situation as I see it. If my boss disagreed it was fair to argue my point hard and long. BUT, when the final determination remained, even if I disagreed, it was my job to support and implement the decision.
It was certainly NOT my job to publicly demean my boss nor the decision.
It was certainly NOT my job to publicly demean my boss nor the decision.
(2)
(0)
COL Jean (John) F. B.
Capt (Join to see) - Yes, but people at that level have a moral obligation to ensure the well-being of our country and our troops, not blindly salute and implement policies they know are wrong. Resignation in protest or retirement, followed by public disclosure is severely lacking by the "yes men" in the highest levels of our military.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google