Page 1 of 2

Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:07 pm
by Vonz90
They need to stop trying to wedge women into combat specialties..

https://www.marinecorpstimes.com/news/y ... rnization/

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Thu Sep 13, 2018 10:54 pm
by Netpackrat
Shit, why didn't anyone warn them this would happen?

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:25 am
by Jered
What a surprise...

SAID NO ONE EVER.

How much damn money did they waste training her?

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 12:59 am
by skb12172
How about that ridiculous statement from her lawyer? Yeah, she's earned a place in Marine Corps history already.

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:23 am
by Langenator
Honestly, this is, IMO, entirely a moral failing on the part of both Marines. (Yes, I know, legally the blame falls entirely on her, since she had more rank. But I'm pretty sure there are things in most religions about not enabling the sins of others.)

It could have happened in an MP unit. It could have happened in an aviation unit. It could have happened in a supply unit, or a maintenance unit. All of those type units have been co-ed for decades.

Unless you're going to completely remove women from the military - which is completely unfeasible from a personnel and manning perspective - this kind of stuff is going to happen. Although usually the sexes tend to be reversed. (Usually, but not always. A buddy of mine loved to tell the story of the time he was the duty officer for his unit while at Camp Buehring in Kuwait. He was doing a check of the motor pool and heard noises coming from the back of a 5-ton. He lifted the canvas to find a LTC (male) with a COL's (female) legs up over his shoulders, going to town. "Carry on sir, ma'am." Flap back down. Walk away. He was assigned to a division HQ, maybe corps, IIRC.)

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Fri Sep 14, 2018 7:37 pm
by Vonz90
Langenator wrote:
Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:23 am
Honestly, this is, IMO, entirely a moral failing on the part of both Marines. (Yes, I know, legally the blame falls entirely on her, since she had more rank. But I'm pretty sure there are things in most religions about not enabling the sins of others.)

It could have happened in an MP unit. It could have happened in an aviation unit. It could have happened in a supply unit, or a maintenance unit. All of those type units have been co-ed for decades.
I don't condone it in support units either (I will not repeat my general rant on that subject), but the only place in Western society where someone can be ordered to do something that is guaranteed to result in their own death (and be subject to the death penalty if they refuse) is combat. So we better be holding units with unique requirements to higher standards that recognize those requirements.

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Wed Sep 19, 2018 9:27 pm
by D5CAV
I'm all for it. Along with all the LGBT (and whatever other letters they've added for perversions I'm unfamiliar with).

I figure the more combat-ineffective the us.gov enforcement elements are when SHTF, the easier it will be for my friends and family.

Let's just say I'm not counting on Posse Comitatus lasting much longer than Glass-Steagall

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 12:02 am
by skb12172
Langenator wrote:
Fri Sep 14, 2018 1:23 am
Honestly, this is, IMO, entirely a moral failing on the part of both Marines. (Yes, I know, legally the blame falls entirely on her, since she had more rank. But I'm pretty sure there are things in most religions about not enabling the sins of others.)

It could have happened in an MP unit. It could have happened in an aviation unit. It could have happened in a supply unit, or a maintenance unit. All of those type units have been co-ed for decades.

Unless you're going to completely remove women from the military - which is completely unfeasible from a personnel and manning perspective - this kind of stuff is going to happen. Although usually the sexes tend to be reversed. (Usually, but not always. A buddy of mine loved to tell the story of the time he was the duty officer for his unit while at Camp Buehring in Kuwait. He was doing a check of the motor pool and heard noises coming from the back of a 5-ton. He lifted the canvas to find a LTC (male) with a COL's (female) legs up over his shoulders, going to town. "Carry on sir, ma'am." Flap back down. Walk away. He was assigned to a division HQ, maybe corps, IIRC.)
What is a COL?

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Tue Sep 25, 2018 12:58 am
by MiddleAgedKen
Full colonel, I think?

Re: Reason 346,780,221 why...

Posted: Wed Sep 26, 2018 4:45 pm
by D5CAV
Probably deserves another heading, but it's another reason why women in the military doesn't matter: https://straightlinelogic.com/2018/09/2 ... bert-gore/

Here is the money quote:
most US military spending is the welfare state with epaulets
The women (COL and LTC) want their place at the trough.

The Samurai class in Japan held a similar position, long after their effectiveness as a combat force became irrelevant. Hollywood, of course, loves to idolize the Samurai sword, but as a combat weapon it is only good for terrorizing unarmed peasants. To protect the Samurai and their precious swords, the definition of "armed" became so constrained that fighting styles with rice flails developed (nanchuk's anyone?). Once a real foreign force showed up, they folded without a fight.

We're probably looking at the same in the US, until some foreign force shows up to instigate some real change.