Military lowering standards to qualify women for combat

1 Comment

This is from BizPac Review.

Lowering the physical requirements for women in combat is wrong.

Lives will be lost in combat because of the lack of physical strength

by women.

I would hope if I was wounded in combat the person in the foxhole

next to me  could drag me to safety.

Political Correctness running wild.

This is real life not some Bravo Serria movie with Demi Moore.



Photo Credit

Don’t look now but affirmative action is coming to the U.S. military as it considers different training for men and women.

Instead of “Army Strong,” perhaps the new motto should be “Army Fair.”

When former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced the lifting of the ban on women serving in combat earlier this year, he said not everyone can meet the qualifications to be a combat soldier but everyone is entitled the opportunity, as reported by Fox News.

Since the decision to lift the ban, there has been a lot of debate about the physical requirements of serving in front-line positions, with concerns about lower standards being part of that discussion.

Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who supported the decision, spoke of this when he said the military, and particularly elite special forces units, should maintain their “rigorous physical standards.”

Six months later, we learn that the U.S. military is looking at ways to modify its training for women to help them qualify for direct ground combat roles in the infantry, tanks and special operations, according to the Washington Times.

The idea was proposed by Rep. Niki Tsongas, D-Mass., at a House Armed Services Committee hearing this week.

“To put in place a training regimen that is ill-suited to maximizing the success of women is not really the outcome any of us want to see,” she said.

Army Lt. Gen. Howard Bromberg, deputy chief of staff for personnel, appears to agree with Tsongas.

“We are looking at that, and we’re not looking at it just for the integration of women,” he testified. “We’re looking at it for the total soldier, because just as you have a 110-pound male who may lack some type of physiological capability or physical capability, he or she may both need to be trained differently.”

Lt. Gen. Robert Milstead Jr., deputy Marine Corps commandant for manpower, is also on board. While pitching for gender-segregated boot camp, he spoke of how men and women “need to be nurtured different.”

As it stands, all four women who’ve attempted to pass the Marine Corps Infantry Officer Course have failed. The demanding 13-week course is considered to be among the toughest in the U.S. military.

And while much of today’s combat takes place at a distance, al-Qaida must be looking forward to meeting this new “nurtured” soldier up close and personal on the battlefield.

Apparently, “maximizing the success of women” is a greater priority for some than living and dying.

Of course, if you understand the progressive left, you could see this coming. Just as Obamacare is but a foot in the door that will lead to single payer, the announcement in January was just the beginning of the emasculation of the U.S. military.

Which leaves one to wonder if the final earthly thoughts of these new American soldiers, as they lay dying on the battlefield, will be to wish that there had been a little less gender equality within their unit.



Obama threatens to veto religious freedom protection for military

Leave a comment

This is from BizPac Review.

This shows that beyond any doubt the Obama Regime has

declared war on Christians.

This is an outrage that must be stopped.

In spite of what Obama and the Liberals say America is a

Christian nation founded on Christian teachings.

If we ever forget that we are One Nation Under God, then we will be a nation gone under.

Ronald Reagan



The Obama administration has threatened to veto the National Defense Authorization Act of 2014 if it contains amendments introduced and approved by the House Armed Services Committee designed to protect the religious freedoms of American military service members.

The White House published its Statement of Administrative Policy on the bill in its current form, which includes the following objection, according to Breitbart News:

Expansion and Implementation of Protection of Rights of Conscience of Members of the Armed Forces and Chaplains of Such Members: The Administration strongly objects to section 530, which would require the Armed Forces to accommodate, except in cases of military necessity, “actions and speech” reflecting the “conscience, moral principles, or religious beliefs of the member.” By limiting the discretion of commanders to address potentially problematic speech and actions within their units, this provision would have a significant adverse effect on good order, discipline, morale, and mission accomplishment.

Although the White House offers nothing to support its bald statement that the “provision would have a significant adverse effect on good order,” etc., they affirm that “…if the bill is presented to the President for approval in its current form, the President’s senior advisers would recommend that the President veto the bill.”

This is disturbing given the extent to which the military has attacked statements of religious faith lately.

A U.S. Army reserve unit recently labeled Catholics and evangelical Christians as religious extremists during an equal opportunity training brief.

Pentagon threatened soldiers who share faith with punishment up to and including court martial.

The Pentagon removed an Air Force video honoring first sergeants bewcause ir cxontained the name “God.”

A 25-year Army veteran master sergeant was excoriated by his superiors for sharing his religious belief in favor of traditional marriage.

An inspirational Air Force painting was removed from a base dining hall because it contained in small words, “Matthew 5:9” a reference to a biblical verse.

The examples continue to pour in, which prompted the amendment into the latest version of the NDAA.

Former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations Human Rights Commission Ken Blackwel told Breitbart News:

President Obama is waging a war on religion. He and Chuck Hagel are denying the most basic rights to those who put their lives on the line to protect all of our rights. It is shameful and appalling. I am confident that congressional leadership will show courage to stand up for our troops against this radical assault on religious liberty in the military.

Those we rely on to lay down their lives to protect our liberties and freedoms — including religious expression — should be allowed those same freedoms in the proper setting. To deny them less would be the pinnacle of hypocrisy.


%d bloggers like this: