On April 27, liberals on the House Armed Services Committee attached an amendment to the 2017 Defense Authorization Act that would require our young women age 18-26 to be subject to the draft should we face a real war and an all-volunteer force prove inadequate.
Due to some smart maneuvering by Pete Sessions (R-TX), the chairman of the House Rules Committee, that amendment was stripped from the House bill, but now the Senate Armed Services Committee has adopted it. The upper chamber will soon vote on the measure and it’s likely to pass, barring a huge public outcry.
It is therefore imperative that every concerned citizen contact their two senators and put them on notice that this action is unacceptable for the following reasons:
- This will create an administrative nightmare for the military, which will have to train and cull through all eligible females in order to find a few minimally qualified women who could make it into a combat unit under gender-neutral standards which the Pentagon insists will remain high.
- This wastes time which, during a national emergency, the nation cannot afford.
- This wastes money at a time we can least afford it.
- This will result in a lot of minimally-qualified women being placed in combat in order to fill these positions as quickly as possible.
- Gender-neutral standards based on minimal fitness tests leave women vulnerable and men less prepared for combat.
- Minimally-qualified soldiers are more likely to be killed or injured which is not only expensive, it is unconscionable.
- In the event of a national emergency, we need the most potent fighting force possible, not a minimally-qualified one.
- Women, who think they are qualified and want to serve in combat, would be free to volunteer.
- With 73 million military age males, there is no compelling reason to draft women
- None of our potential enemies are foolish enough to saddle themselves with this politically correct, expensive and dangerous experiment.
And yes, this would be an experiment. It’s true that countries such as Canada and Denmark have integrated units for the purpose of equal opportunity, not military necessity. However, these countries have militaries that are largely peacekeeping forces and depend on other countries for their survival.
Despite what you may have been led to believe, Israel, which consistently has had to fight for its survival, drafts women but they are not used in combat. Instead, they train and support the troops and guard its borders with two friendly countries, Egypt and Jordan. In fact, their role in the IDF is more limited than in our military.
For a brief period, before and immediately after World War II, Israeli women fought alongside their fathers, husbands and brothers to defend their homeland as part of the Haganah. It was viewed as a necessity, but was not all that successful. These mixed gender units suffered high casualty rates. The women not only put themselves, but the men who tried to defend them, in more danger. Therefore, the idea of using women in combat was abandoned by the Haganah and not even considered by the IDF. We could learn a lot from Israel.
Let’s be clear. Throughout our history, women have volunteered for military service and served with distinction. However, the recent action by the Obama Administration to begin assigning women (not a choice) to direct combat positions will cause many thoughtful women, who would be inclined toward military service, to reconsider.
It may not be fair that the average man is six inches taller, 30 pounds heaver and, more importantly, has 42 percent more upper body strength than the average woman, but it is reality. In combat, a woman will not have an equal opportunity to survive, nor will her fellow soldiers who must depend on her in battle and who must make up for her lack of strength and stamina in the field.
The larger question for members of the House and Senate is why have you neglected your duty to regulate the military? Why have you left the important decisions regarding women in the armed services to this and previous administrations more concerned about political correctness than military necessity?
On February 2, the Senate Armed Services Committee held its first hearing on women in combat since 1991, 25 years ago. http://cmrlink.org/content/home/37748/cmr_files_comprehensive_statement_for_the_record_of_senate_armed_services_committee_hearing_on_women_in_direct_ground_combat During that time, the executive branch has put more and more women in harm’s way by steadily blurring the lines between combat and combat support and now this!
They have betrayed our military and are worthless representatives of we the people.