Who, in their right mind, seriously thinks a woman has an equal chance to survive in a physical battle with a man?

Why, oh why, with one foot out the door, did Secretary of Defense Leon Pannetta announce on January 24, that he was opening all combat jobs to women?  What was he thinking?

Senator John McCain, a war hero who is long past retirement age, applauded the move.  What was he thinking?

Both of these men have stood tall in support of a strong national defense.  Why would they throw in the towel on an issue that is a lose-lose for our fighting forces as well as women in general?

Do they honestly think we will be better off as a nation when women are used as cannon fodder?

No, I think they just want to be liked by their friends on the left, their liberal friends with whom they rub elbows in the Capitol day after day.  They also want to be admired by the overwhelmingly left-of-center journalists, whom they hope will write nice things about them as they bid adieu to Washington and head off into the sunset.

At one time these were brave men.  Not anymore!  They are cowards!

Both of these guys have prided themselves in walking a thin line down the middle of the road.

McCain has done the political two-step better than most. Foot in left:  McCain announced he “supports lifting the ban on women serving in combat, pointing out that women are already serving in harm’s way.”  Foot in right: McCain says,  “As this new rule is implemented, it is critical that we maintain the same high standards that have made the American military the most feared and admired fighting force in the world. . . ”

This wasn’t McCain’s best move but it was calculated.  Feminists on the left are a small but vocal bunch.  Women on the right are soft-spoken and polite, ignored by the mainstream media and, for the most part, ignored by their representatives in Washington.

Panetta, on the other hand, long ago, cast his lot with Democrats.  Recently, he has rubbed them the wrong way.  Not only has he has been outspoken on their proposed cuts to the military, he has acknowledged that critical information was, indeed, obtained through waterboarding.

What possibility could he do to get back in their good graces before making his departure?  He lifted the ban on women in combat.  The left swooned.

Most enlisted women, who want the honor of serving their country, don’t want the honor of dying in a battle against enemy soldiers.   It’s a suicide mission and they know it.

It is angry feminists, who have no use for the military but are out to prove that women and men are interchangeable fungibles, who have driven this debate.  At the tip of this spear is a handful of women officers who want to run things (safely out of harm’s way) and feel they need to step over the dead bodies of women soldiers in order to get their advancement.

For the last couple of decades, our military leaders have given in to this pressure and slowly blurred the lines between combat and combat support.   As a result, some enlisted women who were injured joined lawsuits suing for the combat pay that is due.  Who can blame them?

As the rhetoric goes, “Let the women who can qualify be admitted to these jobs.”  Sure!  The average man is six inches taller, 30 pounds heavier and, more importantly, has 42 percent more upper body strength than the average woman.  It may not be fair, but that is reality.

It is a sad fact that the physical standards in our service academies and at many levels of the military already have been relaxed to allow women to compete with men.  We are about to see more of this as the battlefront positions are opened to women. This is a disservice to both genders.

Let us not forget that military personnel don’t pick their positions.  They are assigned to those positions.  Also, if the current change is implemented, women will be subject to the draft.

These are just some of the reasons the Pentagon must notify Congress as each job or unit is opened to women. Then, the Defense Department must wait 30 days while Congress is in session before these changes go into effect.   That is because Congress makes the rules that govern military personnel.

Your elected representatives have the power to stop this nonsense!   Will they stand tall or will they also be cowards?


7 thoughts on “Cowards!

  1. Hmmm! We dumbed down our education system with “No child left Behind” meaning we cannot hurt a child feelings by saying they have failed or not first in the class, so we teach to the LCD not to hurt a childs feelings.

    Now we want women on the front lines will, the Brass have to drop physical requirments to meet the lower strength ability of women? Dealing with the strength needed to haul a wounded comrade out of a dangerous situation may well be more than a woman can manage. Women we are not physically equal to men, I have never been able to equal my husband in lifting ability though I am fit and worked by his side on many projects.

    To sum up our Government is slowly working at breaking the foundations of what was a great and strong America. America is rapidly becoming a weak force in the world as government common sense is lacking.


  2. Jane,
    I puts women at a disadvantage because of the wider target in combat, besides if there is interrogation then you have to call it waterbroading.


  3. At one point in my training as a USAF ROTC cadet, they awakened us at three in the morning after a whole two hours of sleep and I was made to do 75 situps and a total of 79 vertical pushups, which means I was upside down with my feet braced against a wall. I have never met a woman who could even do one vertical pushup. And this was just in the Air Force…SEALs, Rangers, and the like endure training far, far more arduous.
    And women will now be allowed to join infantry and even spec ops units. Maybe one woman in a hundred could handle infantry training and one in a thousand could make it through Ranger School.Maybe.
    Standards will be lowered, at least for the women and maybe for all. As a result, since the Obaminable Antichrist is continuing our unending war, battles will be lost and more people will be maimed or killed. Morale (already low) and discipline (already tenuous) will suffer.


  4. Great subject and analysis, Jane. The idiots who endorse this humongous insanity are beyond my ability to further describe them or their decision. (And my apologies to the genuine idiots for including these with your group.) I was proud to serve in the U S military (USAF 6 yrs active & 6 years Ready Reserve) but I am embarrassed about what the military has become – “Reserves” serving 2 or 3 (or more) tours in war zones, and those uniforms are a disgrace. Where are the class A dress uniforms that add a touch of pride in serving? Even the generals wear those silly suits. This decision further reduces my impression of our current military and its “leaders.” Good article and word selection. Example: “fungible” Haven’t seen that used often. Good word. Blessings and stay well, W.


  5. Panetta and RINO McCain have lost their minds long ago. Add any other Dimwitcrat to the mix, and you’ll have the new McCain’s Navy! Unlike the TV series McHale’s Navy, it won’t be funny. Even the movie GI Jane will pale in comparison to the consequences of putting women in harm’s way. Most likely, the men will be taking the risks by dragging the women out of harm’s way, resulting in unnecessary deaths.


  6. The people doing the yelling for women to be in combat have watched way too many TV cops shows, NCIS and action movies about women.

    Combat has become a whole lot less physically challenging than it has been in the past because of new technology and the method of fighting wars.

    However, that does not mean the rigors of combat situations should be taken any less lightly than in the past. For the very reason that it is putting other peoples lives on the line for the purpose of being politically correct.

    A soldier whose life depends on others as well as himself doesn’t want or need any one less than the best that can be put beside him.


  7. The ones “yelling” for women to be in combat are the women themselves. Military officers and enlisted alike have asked to have combat positions opened… As a veteran of the US Army, I would have no problem with a woman covering me in battle. Its a shame that most consevatives would rather see women barefoot and pregnant than trying to make a career for themselves.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s