Nearly half of all women who attempted to make it through the One Station Unit Training (OSUT) program in Fort Benning, Georgia reportedly did not make the cut, despite requirements being altered in their favor.

According to PopularMilitary.com, only 18 of the 32 women who participated in the training advanced – not a good figure for the history books considering this is the first time women have participated in this training.

The outlet goes on to declare that “leadership attributed the high female attrition rates in the class – nearly fifty percent – to a private’s size and stamina when carrying the standard 35-pound rucksack and combat loads, with most of the women only around or under 5’4 and weighing less than 125 pounds.”

PopularMilitary.com further cites trainees who claim there was “a clear double-standards between males and females in their training cycle, including lighter rucksacks and lower expectations.”

According to ArmyTimes.com, the women who did pass were the minority among their 137 peers.

“There were subtle differences about this cycle,” the outlet states. “Pink and purple running shoes, long hair, more security in the barracks, and more visits from the brass.”

ArmyTimes.com states that “soldiers unanimously supported the integration down to the team level.”

“It’s odd and funny and somewhat baffling to me that we’re sitting here having this conversation,” said one male private when asked by the outlet if he had a problem with serving alongside women.

“Can women really keep up with men? Have you not been looking around for the last however many decades?”

The outlet further declares that “hundreds more” women are expected to report for OSUT training later this year.

This is not the first time women have struggled to pass military training.

According to The National Review, in 2015 all 45 “hand-picked, highly fit women” who participated in Ranger and Marine-officer combat training flopped.

“The 45 women were part of an effort to meet a 2016 deadline mandating that all combat roles, including special forces, be opened up to women,” the outlet states before citing a study from Britain’s Tri-Science Review which concluded that co-ed military units have “lower survivability” and a “reduced lethality rate.”

“This study, along with countless others done over the last 40 years, demonstrate that combat capabilities are so heavily weighted toward men that the gap cannot be closed,” continues The National Review.

Needless to say, news of the stunning failure rate of women during the OSUT program has prompted much criticism.

Sources:
Steven Crowder, Facebook
The National Review
Britain’s Tri-Science Review
ArmyTimes.com
PopularMilitary.com

  • Ryan S

    The military brass will just lower the standards even more after pressure from politicians, all in the name of political correctness. They don’t care about the safety or ability to complete missions, just the feel-good diversity in the platoon photos.

  • Med1

    If your surprised by this news, it’s only because you’re one of the idiots who wanted women in there in the 1st place! As for the rest of us, we knew this would be a total disaster! Thanks Obummer.

  • Ryan S

    I also want to know why they had pink running shoes and long hair… I thought the Leftists wanted “gender neutral”? Shave their damn heads and give them boots!

    • Plebeian

      They don’t want gender neutral, they want “male neutered”.

      They may soon require enlisted men to have their dicks cut off (fully paid for by the taxpayer).
      Just look at Manning.

      • Mr B J Mann

        They don’t want gender neutral, they want “male neutered”.

        Classic!

        • Carrie

          Basically. It’s okay though, I’m brainwashed because I like to cook, apparently.

    • Michael Allen

      I have been bringing up the issue of unequal grooming standards in law enforcement and the military for YEARS! I defy anyone to give me one good reason not rooted in sexism that justifies why women get the option to have long hair and simply wear it up, whereas men only have the option to wear theirs absurdly short.

      • smackdab

        Because women won’t enlist voluntarily with that requirement while men are forced to enlist against their will, and head shaving is a mind control tactic to bring men to heel. I wouldn’t have enlisted with that rewuirement. My husband was drafted. He had no choice.

      • Ann Tipton Clemment

        I chopped my hair for basic and cut it all off again for ABN School. I’d have been fine with the same standards as males. But the Army required me to appear feminine, and I wanted to contribute to the nation. I was QM and not something combat, because I am not built for that and I know it. But I can contribute.

  • Jesus Christ

    5’4!!! I can probably throw these women

    • smackdab

      Not if I’m better trained with a gun.

  • #OffThePlantation

    While, I’m aware that there has been women snipers in the past, the truth is men are just generally better suited for line of work.

    • fugly

      Equal rights, equal responsibilities.

    • smackdab

      So they stay home fucking guys in bars while their men go off to defend them? Sounds like a good deal.

      • Mr B J Mann

        SO IT’S BETTER THAT THEY BE DRAFTED AND FUCKING GUYS IN BAR RACKS?!?!

        • smackdab

          What’s the fucking difference? Having personally witnessed men deploying to combat zones, and returning from them, I find I have far more respect and appreciation for the men in my life than the vast majority of my peers. Very few men are actually noble, decent human beings – it’s the small minority of men who enforce it upon others. It’s high time women begin enforcing common decency upon other women – like they once did in the not so distant past.

    • urbanvrwcmom

      I, as a woman accept that fact.

  • wagonwheeldc

    And after the hand picked ones reach 26 yrs then even the hand picked ones lose abilities. This is old news but women in most combat roles bad ideal

    • smackdab

      Men given combat roles expecting physical requirements they don’t possess would fail also. Isn’t it more sensible to develop female combat roles the same way? Believe me, I’m perfectly happy to sit home eating bon bons with my hair in rollers while you face machine gun fire. This is why those idiot women holding up WELCOME REFUGEES signs are now decrying their men aren’t saving them from being attacked and raped by those same refugees. Let’s you and him fight while I enjoy the show really needs to be put in the past.

      • MLMII

        Look, I understand that you seem to enjoy repeating this talking point over and over again, but would you KINDLY explain what a “combat role tailored for women” would actually look like and how it would be at least as effective as our current combat roles?

        And I’m sorry, but lighter gear isn’t an answer unless you can demonstrate that said gear wouldn’t decrease combat effectiveness of our current gear, and yes, that also includes the increased costs and supply line headaches that having men/women gear would bring.

        ….

        Now with that said, I can see where you are coming from with the entire “women need equal buy in” in our society as men, but it can not come at the cost of decreased effectiveness, especially in our combat troops.

        • smackdab

          Let’s put it this way, and I hope I don’t bore you by repeating myself. The enemy is here, among us, on our soil. You can bet your ass those poir pitiful women you enjoy clucking over are fully supportive of their men, and fully intend to fight alongside them. The women you seem to enjoy scoffing and scorning and rejecting their attempts to support you are returning the favor in kind. However much you may think muslim women have it bad, their support is accepted and used by their men. So keep it up, wise guys. It’s obviously a winning strategy…

          • MLMII

            Or in other words because you can’t answer my question so you are simply going to try to distract and spin.

            My question is a simple one … kindly describe what a “combat role tailored for women” would actually look like and explain how it would be AT LEAST as effective as our current combat roles that are tailored for men.

            I won’t be holding my breath.

          • smackdab

            Oh, I dunno, sweetcheeks. It would probably look like the female snipers in Vietnam, or the Rusdian female snipers. It might look like the women who dressed like men during the Civil War, or the Pioneer women who participated in defending their wagon teains or homes from injuns, or the tattooed Pics who ran into battle naked alongside their male counterparts. Or maybe…they’ll be given rifles, training and a helmet and thrown out there with everyone else, to sink or swim. Is that a direct enough answer, aashole?

          • MLMII

            Its probably as close as you are capable of being honest so yeah, I’m satisfied by the fact that you have backed away from the “new and revised combat roles and equipment designed for women instead of men” and have been reduced to spewing rants full of ancient myths, soviet propaganda, and civilian self defense.

            The fact that you have also exposed yourself as simply not caring about lowered lethality and increased casualties that would result from your desire to use the American military for your social experiment is rather telling as well.

          • smackdab

            Actually, asshole, it’s exactly the same process MEN have been forced to sacrifice themselves for since the beginning of time, is it not? You effing dumbass. If a woman has the right to vote YOUR ass into a war, she has the obligation to put her own ass on the line right alongside YOURS. YOU do not HAVE to help her, work as a team with her, or be anything other than you’re own sweet self. I have served in the military BEFORE feminism swept all the animosity and hatred under the carpet. I KNOW how men respond to service women, and it’s a rare few who actually step up to play hero. Yes, shitforbrains. It’s not been done before, it’s sooo different, but there’s no time like the present to start playing catch up. They considered drafting women during WWII, but decided to draft older, married fathers instead. Well, sorry, buddy, but we’re over populated enough, and eggs just aren’t that preschus anymore. Women need to face the fact they’re just as disposable as their brothers, and we’re all in this together – no more “let’s you and him fight”. No more selfish, female centric voting for free birf’ control when MEN are dying. F.U.

          • MLMII

            And that ladies and gents is the sound that a man trying (and failing) to present himself as a woman squealing when a nerve is hit.

          • smackdab

            Are you too stupid to realize how much you insulted yourself by that bird brained comment? This is the REAL reason men don’t want women sticking their chickenheaded beaks in. 99% of them as stupid as you proved to be, and fuck up everything they touch. Gawd you’re embarrassing. No wonder men call U S women “nigger bait”.

          • MLMII

            Yep, “little sweet ol’ me” …. clearly far too stupid to realize, much less point out that you’ve devolved into a rabid dog foaming at the mouth to the point where you’ve abandoned even the pretense of your original point to do what again exactly? Attempt to insult my intelligence while making a statement about white women who date black men?

            Bless your heart anyways “dear”.

          • smackdab

            What statement did I make about interracial dating, Tinkerbell, other than my first hand knowledge of being a woman in the service? Obviously it’s something you know nothing about, which renders your stupid opinions utterly worthless.

          • MLMII

            Three problems with your post; firstly no one actually believes you are a vet and your sputtering about discharge forms is just as empty and unverifiable.

            Secondly, the “if you aren’t ‘X’ you can’t have an opinion” line is just stupid on every level possible, even if you ignore the fact that after I got over my kneejerk reaction and listened to combat vets whose opinions and judgements I respect, I changed my mind.

            And lastly, what exactly do you think “nigger bait” is in reference of? … Come on, I’ll wait for you to google it.

          • smackdab

            Nobody owes you any vetification, dumbass. You’ve made a flaming raw horse’s ass of yourself enough already. Did you really think you wouldn’t encounter a female veteran on a news story thread about female veterans, shit for brains? Because YOU never botheted your ass to serveanything other than yourself you presume ALL women are as worthless as yourself? GTFO

          • MLMII

            Well, it is rather telling that I’ve yet to encounter one in these comments.

          • smackdab

            Well, you have now.

          • MLMII

            You seem to be confused, I said that I haven’t encountered a female vet in these comments, not a rabid pretender.

          • smackdab

            What would anyone gain by such pretense? As opposed to being an asshole sticking your fingers in your ears and singing lalala because you’ve made a fool of yourself? Give it up, shorty.

          • MLMII

            Have you looked at your posts? When you aren’t merely throwing out foam speckled insults or making lewd innuendo laced comments as close as you are able to come to a complete thought is “I served in Vietnam and you didn’t!”

          • smackdab

            So? I did. And you didn’t. Not just Vietnam, but never. I love how it’s always other women who accuse me of really being a man because a. They lost the argument and need to deflect and b. They can’t conceive a women going off the reservation by speaking truthfully. You’re a pathetic joke.

          • MLMII

            Even if I were to assume for a moment that you really did serve, that isn’t an argument for any position and the fact that you apparently believe otherwise just shows how empty your position really is.

            As for the latter; quite frankly you’re wrong, I believe you are a bitter man trolling the internet because that is how your posts read, your word choices, your tone, and even the macho posturing that if somebody doesn’t agree 100% with you they are subject to a barrage of childish vitriol all scream “male”.

          • smackdab

            Oh, and a daddy hater to boot. Isn’t that lovely, little miss bitters. How’s that Lean Cuisine for one, Fancy Feast for 12 working out for ya?

          • MLMII

            Ok, now that I’ve finished laughing and wiped my eyes I have to ask, what in the blue blazes are you smoking? The only person here that hates men is you, heck, you hate men enough that you are arguing for their deaths.

            And for the record bitch, my Dad is a wonderful man so take your projected issues elsewhere.

          • smackdab

            Sorry , cat lady, but your final comment screams man hater. You’ve apparently missed the fact I advocate that YOU share responsibility by YOU registering for Selective Service, not for MY sons to sacrifice their lives for your happy was. Protest and deflect all you want. I never make generalized nasty comments about men because I actually do love and respect my father, my husband, my brothers, my sons. You might wanna edit that final comment. It just screams …Daddy Hater. What a nasty piece of work to say such a thing.

          • MLMII

            So which is it; you just too stupid to understand that putting women in combat will result in the deaths of good soldiers or are you just too hateful to care?

          • smackdab

            Putting women on Selective Service registries will save more men’s lives than any thing else I can think of, women being the majority voters. When it’s YOUR butt on the line, you tend to pay attention to things outside your own selfish interests. Instead of voting for Free Birf’ control, you might look to see what the asshole is REALLY about. As far as women in combat are concerned, I suggest doing what has always been done with new, untested troops – separate but equal troops until they prove they won’t get everyone else killed. Black troops, and Japanese American troops proved themselves before being integrated into regular troops. Can you imagine an entire platoon of just women fighters? Until women themselves figure out their best strengths and weaknesses( we’re so much smarter than men, after all, and it takes 5 men to do the work of one woman they claim) men shouldn’t be subjected to their trial and error. Men paid that price already. It’s now your turn, sister.

          • MLMII

            Just too stupid to understand with a dash of being so mired in the past that you can’t see the modern world as it is wins I see.

            Your starting premise that the “free birth control” candidates (and no, I believe that if you can’t pay for your own birth control you should simply “remember what your knees are for” as my Grandmother used to say so don’t you dare go down that road) are also most likely to get America into pointless, never ending wars is simply wrong and can easily be proven by pointing to the guys who started the wars that our soldiers are fighting today. And that is even ignoring how men tend to skew their votes so even pretending that putting women in combat would somehow change the face of politics is silly at best since neither sex seriously considers whether or not the draft will be called when casting their votes because, lets face it, the odds of a draft being called is almost zero and that makes your stated motivations for trying to force the military to allow women into combat a joke at best.

          • smackdab

            I’ma gonna type this very slowly, schweetie, cuz ‘ol granny here thanks yer a little slow witted…and you aren’t exactly breaking any speed records with your “feelz over reelz” logic. You apparently aren’t aware of it, but your government spends millions of dollars every year maintaining and enforcing Selective Service registries. Gee willikers, ya think that’s just an Affirmative Action/Welfare program for single moms, or could it be they seriously keep it active because they DO plan to use it. 1.) WOMEN have been the MAJORITY VOTERS since 1986, when they put RONALD REAGAN in the white house. 2.) WOMEN win elections 90% of the time IF AND WHEN they actually run for office. If women are still a minority, its because they CHOOSE to let men do the dirty work while THEY pull the strings behind the scenes. Now…pay attention pookiekins – it’s not MEN starting wars. It’s MEN AND WOMEN pandering to the FEMALE VOTERS who are starting – and maintaining endless wars. A 16 year war has not been going on without the CONSENT of EVERY FEMALE VOTER. Remember I pointed out that women are the MAJORITY VOTERS??? OK, cupcake – you still with me, hunny buns? This isn’t hurting you head, now, is it? Men who do not sign up for Selective Service can be denied driver’s licences, school loans, business or professional licences, they face prison, are denied or fired from government jobs and face a $250,000.00 fine. They KNOW when they get that nasty little letter from Uncle Sugar that they are subject to being drafted. Unlike YOU, who doesn’t have to give two shits other than what your selfish little ass wants as a freebie hand out…’cuz oppression. You’ll have to back up that comment about men “skewing” votes (other than voting for whoever the little woman insists he votes for). Women insist on equality, they whine incessantly about the ERA not being passed, they claim they still aren’t “equal”, but when it comes to that last equality frontier…oh, heaven forbid the Entitlement Princess should be “forced” into combat!!! Oh, heaven’s to Betsy!!! Not all those “strong, independant women” who have men cowering in their skivvies in fear of! 3.) There ARE women who fight for their country without whining about being “forced”. During the Vietnam war, female snipers were one of the biggest fears our guys faced. Unlike American women, they didn’t sit around in bars banging strange men while their husbands were off fighting. They weren’t dumping their men for his best friend who weaseled out of serving, they didn’t serve divorce papers on their paraplegic husbands. That’s probably why they WON and WE lost. Shit’s heating up, snowflake. You might want to start doing a few sit up, just in case they surprise your lard ass with a DRAFT NOTICE…or are you brushing up on Arabic instead? Yeah. That’s kinda the gal I’ve pegged you for…

          • MLMII

            If you clean the flecks of spittle off your screen you might have been able to read that I said no one, man or woman casts their vote based off their views of selective service and that the odds of a draft being called is almost zero. … Heck, the fact that your silly notions can not even get traction on Milo’s site (a shining citadel of free wheeling debate and refreshingly brutal honestly if one ever existed) pretty much says it all.

            Most of your rant about “vietnam female snipers”; and “cheating American women divorcing their wounded husbands” pretty much speaks for itself and is probably as close as we’ve gotten to your own personal truth in this entire debate. (Although I do await with baited breath for yet more stories about “Apache” and her demise by the heroic Sergent Hathcock although the rather graphic photos of her victims were something I really could have lived without seeing but given who you are I suppose it isn’t surprising that you idealize the psycho.)

            Oh, and just a little hint, before you start ranting about how women are majority voters you might want to do just a little research about how they actually voted in elections since Regan, lets start with the most recent shall we and curse how badly President Clinton is doing in her job. What is that again? Sanity prevailed and President Trump is sitting in the oval office? Could it be that a majority of women were too smart to fall for the insulting “vote for your gender” silliness? … Um, no, sadly I’m in the minority of women who voted for Trump and the entire country can thank the men (and the Electoral College) for keeping that evil witch out of the White House.

            Ok, ok, I admit it, I added just a dash of drama into that last bit, the actual numbers seem to suggest that Clinton’s “vote for your gender” messaging didn’t make much of a difference in the normal “gender gap” between democrats and republicans but I am curious about your theory that when men enter the voting booth they push the screen for the candidate that their girlfriends/wives support because you really need to stop projecting your own personal issues on women at large.

          • smackdab

            This discussion thread is long past it’s expiration date, shit for brains. How long does any discussion thread last here? My “own personal truth” here is that my son married a first generation Vietnamese immigrant. Her parents were boat people. I was shocked to say the least when he first brought her home to meet us, knowing his father and I are both Vietnam veterans – my husband a Volunteered-To-Beat-The-Draft combat vet. He has a bit of a struggle finding himself in a large crowd of Vietnamese people, but speaking for myself, I couldn’t be more thrilled. She’s unshakably loyal, hard working and a wonderful human being – and stood strong in the face of her community’s anger at her for marrying “a white guy”. All of her close friends have married evil white menz, as well. I never used to understand that attraction men have for Asian women, but now I do.
            You see, I happen to admire loyalty. I respect women who stand up for their homes and families alongside their men. A house divided cannot stand. It has nothing to do with admiring snipers, but admiring women who take a stand for their home and family, instead of sitting on their lard asses, sell outs whining about their “inequality” while fucking over the men who bear the brunt.
            There was a time, before feminist improvements, when adults ran the country. Adults that knew their votes could mean life or death for themselves or their sons – you know, before the days of “Prom King” votes. Need I remind you the claim that HILLARY WON THE POPULAR VOTE?
            Need I remind you the same assholes losing their shit about Trannies not serving in the military are the same assholes who never said a peep when requiring women to register for Selective Service was dropped without so much as a whimper?

          • MLMII

            “My side won the popular vote so you have no mandate!” is hardly new to this election and is just silly no matter which side is screaming it and modern feminists being hypocrites more concerned with their own personal influence than any supposed principles is also sadly, nothing new.

            What you fail to see is that there are different ways of standing by your home and family, and not all military wives are just itching for the chance to bed some hunk they met at the club when their husbands are deployed just as not all soldiers cheat on their wives with the local flavor while half a world away.

          • smackdab

            My daughter is a military wife. I have not made any absolute statements that ALLLLLLLL military wives cheat. My daughter IS a second wife, however, to a man whose first wife decided to get pregnant while he was deployed.
            It IS extremely common. I know – I’ve seen many a guy taken off in handcuffs after a Dear John letter melt down.
            That being said, a woman sleeping around while mooching off a man’s military service and benefits is a bit different from a man deployed to a war zone, don’t you think?
            So now, the ball’s in YOUR court, toots. Please explain WHY WOMEN SHOULDN’T BE SUBJECT TO SELECTIVE SERVICE AND COMBAT REQUIREMENTS.
            I’m sure you must have some clearly intelligent rationale for this disparity, so…have at it, sister. I truly can’t imagine what you could possibly offer that’s outside the “99.9% of women are incompetent idiots” sphere, but I have faith you’ll come up with something.
            Show us what ya got.

          • MLMII

            First off, no, being deployed is not a “free pass”, cheating is cheating and its wrong period, the fact that you are trying to draw a distinction is rather enlightening though.

            As for your question; well physics and biology don’t care about your feelings and no matter how much you rant and scream, acknowledging simple reality has nothing to do with competence or in your case, the lack thereof. You want to prove me wrong? Ok, why don’t we start by adopting a single set of requirements and agree that both men and women have to be able to meet them in order to serve?

  • mak

    It’s sad really that they try and try to do this when it will always fail. There are many places in the military that women can do well but not in the field. Lowering the tasks they must perform is only signing their death certificate or someone close to them.

    • Mr B J Mann

      “There are many places in the military that women can do well but not in the field.”

      But what happens when the place not in the field is over-run by the enemy, or when they need more boots on the ground out in the field and the only “men” they have left are wo-men?!

      • smackdab

        What happens is they all just give up and die? I don’t think so. This happened to wagon trains during the western expansion – pregnant women took up arms to defend themselves against Indian attacks did they not? Isn’t THAT how the West was won? Men and women united in common cause, instead of men getting slaughtered while women stay home partying it up and cheating on them? This is why we have feminism – obese entitlement princesses wearing pink pussy hats expecting YOU to keep life comfortable for them while they throw contempt at you?

        • Katherine Leicester

          What happens is they try to fight back. They are knocked down. Raped in front of their children, and then they are disemboweled.

          Then the men exact revenge, and find new wives.

          Don’t be stupid about women’s courage. We fight even when we know we’re lost.

        • Baka [D]

          Prego Women with cover behind wagons v Men on Horses with bows and arrows.

          TAKIN’ ALL BETS, TAKIN’ ALL BETS!

          Seriously, guns win in olden times, duh…we’re taking Woman with gun v Man with gun + balls + ability to carry more ammo and/or portable artillery because he can carry more. Odds are in the side with more balls.

          • smackdab

            Then keep aniliating yourselves while they sit on their fat asses and complain about their oppression. Be my guest.

        • Mr B J Mann

          But we aren’t talking about a couple of wagons in a life or death situation, all hands on deck, every man, AND WOman to man the pumps!

          Maybe you yanks have too many troops and can pretend to play at soldiers.

          In the UK our “army” long since fell below the minimum size for an “Army”, is now down to about 80,000 men and women (that’s including cooks, clerks and cornet players!), and they’re STILL cutting the experienced troops!

          Maybe you think 35,000 elite men and 35,000 wannabe wimmin is enough to defend any country (Turkey has 400,000!)?

          I’m no military expery, or even military man, but it seems a teensy weensy bit on the low side to me.

          And then there’s the air force.

          You could argue you don’t need to be that big and strong and tough to fly a plane (but it might come in handy if you get shot down, or your air base is over-run before you can take off).

          But we seem to struggle to get half a dozen planes operational at the same time.

          And yet we keep on spending millions on training female pilots.

          Dead keen, committed, determined to serve their country and follow a military career at the sharp end.

          Who all end up getting pregnant and when they eventually come back it’s to fly a desk family friendly hours.

          And as for the shenanigans they get up to on board ship!!!

          • smackdab

            And why is that you think? Could it be your feminist leaning government ? You’re already screwed. Might as well open the channel locks and let the flood go. Why give them a comfortable ride until you’re eliminated and they’re in bed with the enemy

          • Mr B J Mann

            What are you on?!

            Yes, we’ve got a feminist leaning government.

            And one that is more than decimating the military.

            And the reason we’ve got a joke of an armed services is because people like you are arguing for the feminists and “liberals” getting what they want!

            Why should I approve of the feminist government replacing half of what’s left of the military with women that would be laughed out of the selection procedures if they were men?!?!

            Why should I support the floodgates being opened even wider like that?!?!

            And that is AN ENTIRELY SEPARATE ISSUE from giving women an easy ride.

            Letting feminists achieve their goal of “equality” in professions and careers they want to target (it’s never cleaning sewers or mining or lumberjacking or demolition or deep sea fishing, is it?!) to give them a greater foothold in the establishment is the opening of the channel locks and letting the flood go!

            That IS giving them a comfortable ride until we’re eliminated and they’re in bed with the enemy.

            And that seems to be your aim!

            Or are you really too dumb to see what you’re arguing for?!?!

            According to CNN in 2013 a SIXTH of your officer corps was female, including 69 generals and admirals, 7.1%, 28 in the Air Force, 19 in the Army, one in the Marine Corps and 21 admirals!

            Presumably there are a lot more now!!

            And it’s all thanks to you, you’re actually a feminarsty fifth columnist, aren’t you!!!

          • smackdab

            What percentage of your military is female? USAs is only 14%. That’s up only 4% from when I served 43 years ago, before feminism wanted anything to do with the military. That doesn’t say to me that “feminists” want to go into combat. It tells me women in general don’t even want to serve in the military, much less go into combat. Sure, a handful of weirdos will try for it…out of how many millions of able bodied women living in your country these days? When I was a kid, I once begged and pestered my father to allow me to swim in our pond. Finally he agreed – and quite seriously offered to sit nearby and shoot any snakes that came near me. Needless to say – I no longer found the idea of swimming in that pond attractive. I’m just saying here – let them go for it. It’s “equality”, and they’re taking you for a ride anyway, so sit back and enjoy.

          • Mr B J Mann

            OBVIOUSLY feminists don’t want to go into combat.

            What they want is the 69 generals and admirals taking over control while the men are dying!

  • It is what it is – science. And before some whiner brings up that they do it in Israel, that’s because the country has like six million people to face down a hundred million neighbors – they literally need every single person because they lack the luxury of being able to pick and choose. The United States has that luxury and it’s idiotic to social engineer a fighting force whose only role is to win as quickly as possible.

    • Remo Meier

      Actually, the Israelis had women in combat units for about a year and then hastily got them all out again into auxiliary roles when they saw what disaster it was.

      • Katherine Leicester

        Finally, someone who brings up “the rest of the story.”

      • Gene C Clark

        a lot of them are pilots, I got no issue with female pilots..thats ok with me.

        • Mr B J Mann

          And if they are shot dwn behind enemy lines and become a foot soldier?

          Or if their air base is over-run before they can take off (or can’t take off because they can’t fight their way, or even run fast enough, to their planes)?!

          Great, hundreds of millions on a jet, and tens of millions on training, and all wasted because the pilot isn’t man enough to even get to their jet!!!!

        • Stanislav Kogan

          Not that many, actually and very few combat pilots.

    • Stanislav Kogan

      They don’t do it in Israel. Women in IDF are strictly in non-combat roles except for a few specific very small units. IDF uses women a lot for various trainer roles, with various degrees of success. For example, the Armored Corps training school is mostly staffed by women with very good results, but the women-run sniper school is a complete disgrace.

    • smackdab

      Yeah, well looks who’s winning in spite of their small numbers, and look who’s losing in spite of their superior strength. Maybe winners welcome all who want to serve. The Vietnamese held off not only the US, but the French before them. Russia lost to Afghanistan, and so will we. Native Americans remained divided among themselves until it was too late. Look at history instead of the gym mirror for answers.

      • Actually, the North Vietnamese were not militarily superior; they had a willing liberal media on their side and won a propaganda war against a milquetoast US government that refused to commit the resources and tactics necessary to win – and holding off the French is no noteworthy feat.

        Meanwhile, the US has won every war it decided to actually fight and has done this without being politically correct. The entire mental virus of political correctness is what destroys our ability to win.

        • smackdab

          Then…explain why the French also failed before us. . .

          • Um…French? Think it kind of answers itself to most people.

          • smackdab

            Ummm…no. Pretty chicken shit answer. WE were there HOW many years? Spebnt HOW much money? Lost HOW many lives? I’m asking as a Vietnam era veteran myself, not as some random asshole. I think the 20/20 hindsight revisionist claims make a real swell story, but no. It wasn’t gonna happen anymore than the Redcoats were going to bring the Patriots to heel.

          • Funny that you would use “chicken sh*t” in a response to a question about the French. It’s as if you’re dancing around the thing and we’re all sitting here laughing at you looking so silly.

            Unfortunately, I have too many Vietnam (and other) vets in my own family who disagree with you and they come off sounding considerable more intelligent (and also they’re real vets – not just some gray head on the internet claiming to be). But if it makes you happy to dance on the graves of those who *actually* were there and didn’t make it back, I’m sure Jane Fonda’s looking for someone just like you. So not only is your appeal to authority logical fallacy just that, you lost before you even tried it.

            In the real world, the war was very poorly executed from Washington, troops hands were tied, there was no desire in Washington to be victors over the enemy and if you’re not on the field to win, you might as well stay home.

            And the fact you even deny that the French are complete surrender monkeys really turns your retorts into nothing but a comedy routine. Even Mexico demolished them, which is why they have Cinco de Mayo. But if you want to make a fool out of yourself, please, don’t let me stop you. It’s free entertainment and I’m sure everyone here enjoys being called around the computer to have a chuckle.

          • smackdab

            No, asshole. We had ten (10) years to win that war against a bunch of farmers, and it never happened. You can lay blame and excuses where ever you choose, but the fact remains – they had the determination and solidarity on their side, and we simply did not. I don’t have grey hair, thanks to genetics, and I don’t need to rewrite history to justify having served VOLUNTARILY during that skullfuckery. The rules haven’t changed since WE beat the red coats AND enormous native populations to forge this country. It’s why Confederate bodies are being exhumed and flags and statues torn down generatipns past any collective memories – it was a dirty “win” that’s still not a settled reality to either side.

          • Oh, namecalling. Yep, you’re a lib. And you’re also in addition to being so ill-informed that you must resort to acting like a 7-year-old, aa bad person for being a leftist.

          • smackdab

            Telling the raw truth is something most ALL Vietnam veterans are prone to do, and having served during that mess VOLUNTARILY pretty much eliminates the “lefty” bullshit, dontcha think, douchebag? We “coulda” won Korea, too, if not for blah, blah, blah,I suppose? 58,000 of MY peers died for nothing, and they deserve for the truth to be known.

          • More like just butt hurt because someone called you out for your gray avatar. Maybe you’re a fish too. Or a camel.

            You’re a fraud.

          • smackdab

            I’m a Vietnam era veteran. Why would I be “butthurt” about my age, if I made it clear I served my country during the Vietnam war. Are you really THAT stupid? Are you really that dumb?

          • You’re a gray avatar pretending to be something on the internet.

          • smackdab

            You’re a rotted grey asshole using ad hominem attacks because you can’t allow the truth to be spoken. Suck it up, buttercup. We haven’t won a war since 1945. Maybe YOU should have enlisted, Rambo.

          • You made this about you – and now it’s about you. Next time stick to arguments and don’t make claims about yourself that you can’t back up, but that are logical fallacies of appealing to authority.

            You really need to learn how to troll on the internet better.

          • smackdab

            Wtf are you banging on about, numbnuts? How is this about me? Because I served in that war, and I reserve the right to speak honestly about it? What does my hair color have to do with anything, shit for brains? We lost and were no where near winning, any more than we were Korea, or the current clusterfuck were just about to ein, any minute now. Obviously you never served your country outside of paying lip service to lies. Shame on you.

          • “Blah, blah, blah, blah, I’m a gray avatar, me me me me, blah, blah, blah.”

          • smackdab

            Maddy, hun. You, too, could have, and should have served your country, but you chose to let someone else do the dirty work. Now you want to disparage someone who actually DID do the right thing. That makes you a real piece of crap. Don’t be too hard on your worthless self . No one expects an entitlement princess to actually do anything else besides flap her pie hole.

          • “Maddy, hun. You, too, could have, and should have served your country.” As could you. The difference between you and me is that you’re stealing valor.

          • smackdab

            Wanna put some money where your big fat mouth is, Maddy? I got the DD214 saying I’m an honorably discharged veteran as of July 3, 1974. The first woman from Creek County, OK to have ever enlisted, I’m pretty damn proud of that fact. You wanna pursue a “stolen valor” claim, I invite you to contact your local VFW and have them contact me. https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/28797e3b19e38d5b77389deaf48d851006d3acdd9b1108f623fe879037ed5df6.jpg

  • Dante Alighieri

    … a study from Britain’s Tri-Science Review which concluded that co-ed military units have “lower survivability” and a “reduced lethality” rate….

    • Mr B J Mann

      F F S it’s lower lethality, NOT mortality!

      Smarties have lower lethality than cyanide pills:

      They kill fewer people!!!

      Is it any wonder you come out with the crap you do when you are illiterate!!!!

      Co-ed units are less likely to survive and are less lethal.

      It’s not rocket science.

      Except for womens libbers.

      Of both s-xes!

      • smackdab

        Simple solution – NO coed units.

  • Luca Barbato

    Women make amazing snipers and in some scenarios you hit the morale of the enemy if they know they are being killed by women.

    • Mr B J Mann

      You mean one woman?

      • smackdab

        There were many female snipers in Vietnam. One, “Apache”, was considered more deadly than any man. Many Russian women were snipers as well. Get over yourself.

        • fugly

          …and Carlos Hathcock plugged her when she was squatting to piss.

          • smackdab

            Then she figured out how to piss standing up.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Thanks for confirming you are a troll who was never in Vietnam!

            Carlos Hathcock KILLED her when she squatted to piss!!

            So she never then figured out how to piss standing up, did she!!!

          • smackdab

            I am a Vietnam era veteran, shit for brains. I did mot say I personally hung out in Vietnam with Apache, herself. Are you fucking retarded?

          • Mr B J Mann

            Am I fucking retarded?

            Nah, I’d never put my d!ck anywhere near you!

          • smackdab

            And to think I presumed you were dickless. ..sigggghhhhh

        • Baka [D]

          So which is it? : Develop weapons for losers who can’t carry steel/composite gear or stick them with getting ripped apart sneaking into enemy lines to pick off replaceable officers in an age where thermal goggles will light your girls panties brighter than the sun…?

          • smackdab

            Are you a loser because I can breastfeed an infant and you can’t? Does it mean you can’t be a parent because feeding an infant woukd require compensations on your part? Women out number you and they out vote you. Do you REALLY want some obese entitlement Princess voting for Pajama boys to send you into combat, or do you want their fat ass on the firing line along with yours?

        • Mr B J Mann

          Get over myself?!

          So how many female yanks are we talking about?!

          Oh, you mean Vietcong?!

          So how many is many, vs the male ones.

          And was Apache captured and tested on the range?

          Or a myth to scare the enemy?!

          But this takes us back to sqare one:

          However good a sniper she was, could she fight her way into, and back out of, her position?

          Or even carry her gear into it?!?!

          When the British Paras were stranded on the wrong side of the Falklands when their helicopters were destroyed they carried so much gear across the island that if they tripped and fell they LITERALLY couldn’t get back up again by themselves and had to be helped back up by a couple of colleagues.

          And then they fought and won a battle when they got there.

          Then again we know all about SE Asian lady-boys and Soviet lady shot-putters, so maybe the Vietcong and Soviets are the exception that proves the rule?!

          • smackdab

            Are you saying Vietnamese women are different animals than us Yanks? You’re saying women are useless, and I’m saying women can get their shit together if the alternative is beimg slaughteted, as it was for Vietnamese women, and yes, American pioneer women. The days of men being slaughtered in war while women march around protesting their oppression are coming to an end. Your ungrateful British women are among the worst. A little military disipline would do them a world of good. (I’ve served, I can say that from experience).

          • Mr B J Mann

            Give em all the “discipline” you want.

            But you’d be cutting off your nose to spite your face if you crippled your military just to make them take responsibility for their politics.

            I didn’t say women were useless, or couldn’t fight.

            I’m just saying the best of them would lose in a fight against the worst male soldier.

            Maybe enlist em and use em for the men to warm up on in basic training?!

          • smackdab

            Because WE are the enemy? Do you even hear yourself?

          • Mr B J Mann

            F F S what were you in the military?

            A cook?!?!

            If you fill your military with women, your enemy won’t be doing the same to make things fair and give you equality.

            Therefore you will lose any wars.

            Yes, the wimmin will be dead, and if they are (one of the) enemy you can count that as a plus.

            BUT YOU’VE STILL LOST THE WAR AGAINST THE OTHER ENEMY/IES!

            Do you even hear YOURself?

          • smackdab

            I was in Personnel, In and Out processing. I sat in an office with 20 men typing orders sending frightened young men to Vietnam, processing those bitterly angry young men for their return. It was a most profound experience I’ll always be grateful to have experienced, although it came at a horrible price and much personal abuse. My uncle was a US Congressman at the time. My parents begged me to ask him to get me out, but I hung in, refusing to be bullied. I was proud to serve my country, whether men liked it or not. It’s not something anyone can ever take from me. I love this country, whether it loves me back or not.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Try and be nicer!

          • smackdab

            Try being smarter.

          • smackdab

            They already hate you and betray you. What, exactly do you think you’ll be losing?

          • Mr B J Mann

            I’d already told you:

            “YOU’VE STILL LOST THE WAR AGAINST THE OTHER ENEMY/IES!”

            But that was before I’d realised you are a feminsaty fifth columnist who was never in Nam!

          • smackdab

            I’m an anti feminist, dumbass, and they did not send first enlistment women to Vietnam, double dumbass. I wasn’t a doughnut dolly or a nurse, but I was the first woman to have enlisted from Creek County, OK at a time most men were fighting to AVOID enlisting. That makes me a Vietnam era veteran whether you like it or not, Mr. Neverserved

          • Mr B J Mann

            Well, ya fooled me!

          • smackdab

            You aren’t very bright, so it wasn’t a stretch.

    • #OffThePlantation

      While I have no doubt about that. Those women are still exceptionally rare.

      • smackdab

        Lack of demand, don’t you think?

  • Mr B J Mann

    I wonder if the US has signed some kind of treaty whereby its enemies agree to attack mixed s-x units only with mixed s-x units?!

    After all: all has to be fair in love and war.

    Or is that not how it goes?!

    • smackdab

      Or better yet, develop weapons and combat techniques for women, and keep them separate until it’s as well honed as it’s been done for men. There’s no sanity in giving women the right to decide the fate of their country if they don’t share the responsibility of the outcome of their decisions.

      • Baka [D]

        Fucking idiot…I suppose you could arm the womix with MP7’s since they’re lighter than a rifle, but I better not hear you cry foul when they still can’t hit shit out of range.

        • smackdab

          How do you think this country even happened, dumbass? Women acompanied men into Indian Territory, often pregnant, and had to pull their weight or fucking die trying. Now they’re obese, over bred and fucking bar pick ups the minute you deploy, as the MAJORITY VOTERS, while your dumbass provides for them.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Ignore her, she’s a feminasty fifth columnist who was never in Nam!

          It’s now clear why she wants more women, and more tailored weapons and training for women, in the military.

          She’s not joking when she says she’s the enemy!

      • Mr B J Mann

        But why?

        They are never going to be a match for men, so will never be safe to use in a defensive war until we’ve run out of most men.

        Maybe we could use them as cannon fodder in “just” “liberal” wars fought to introduce women’s rights to the uncivilised/barbarous regions of the world?!

        Perhaps it would be simpler just to take back the vote from them?!

        • smackdab

          Yeah. You’re already fighting a liberal woman’s war.Welcome Refugees!Oops! Now we have blown up children, but…welcome refugees even more. Don’t you think if women’s butts were in the sling they MIGHT consider thr consequences BEFORE they vote?

          • Mr B J Mann

            How would letting women join up make things better?!

            They would just think that they had even more right to vote than they’ve already been given?!?!?!!!

            And there would be even more of them safe in the middle of an army camp surrounded by protective men!!!!

            Safe from refugees!!!!!!

          • smackdab

            Hun. I’ve been in the military. Men lose that protectiveness real quick when there’s nothing in it for them. Put equal numbers of head shaven, male clothing wearing females out there and it’s every man for himself.

        • smackdab

          That’s an option I’ve already suggested. They’ve opened the gates, the enemy is within at their invitation.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Yes, you’re the enemy, you’re inside the gates, and you want training and weapons tailored to feminasties!

          • Ian Cowley

            What they going to give them? Selfie sticks to hit the enemy and make-up to put in their eyes for chemical warfare. Fighting techniques like what, that jump in the air legs around neck takedown we see in action films where dudes just stand there and let it happen.

            They will be more concerned with taking selfies and updating their social media self brand. Give them a sniper job and they will give their position away with the smart phone lighting up every few seconds checking for views and likes

          • smackdab

            …..and meanwhile, we have invaders, and our next war will be fought on our own soil by men and women united in one common cause-let that sink in a moment.

    • djmc993150

      Whats more amusing is that during Vietnam, VC and NVA units with women were specifically directed to not get into hand to hand combat with US units because of the physical strength and gender differences.

      • Mr B J Mann

        Exactly.

        Height for height men are heavier.

        Weight for weight men have much, much more muscle mass.

        Pound for pound men’s muscle is far, far stronger.

        It’s in a far more efficient musculo-sceletal framework (women’s joints are displaced from men’s more optimal positions to enable their child bearing and rearing – and perhaps male attracting – functions).

        And men’s bones are much thicker, stronger and tougher.

        Aparently one of the reasons women can’t be allowed to compete with men on level terms, especially on the tougher special forces tests, is that their bones, literally, start to crack up under the pressure!

        Then there’s the the agression aspect, hormonal differences (and I don’t – just – mean the monthly ones)!!!

  • Rekt

    “(..) co-ed military units have “lower survivability” and a “reduced lethality rate.”
    These women must be so proud, signing both their own and their fellow soldiers’ death warrants.

    • smackdab

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but yes – I’m proud to have served, and served during the Vietnam war no less. It isn’t women’s fault the same government that trains you men, and develops weaponry and techniques for men has not extended the same courtesy for women, endangering both men and women’s lives in the process. Women are the majority voters – that makes them the ones putting men in harms way because they have NO skin in the game. Either find a way to hold women equally responsible for the outcome of their enormous voting power or no longer allow them the right to vote. I’m fine either way.

      • djmc993150

        Please explain what you mean by “develops weaponry and techniques for men”.
        I am in the military right now, and have been for 18 years. WTF are you even talking about? What part of my pack is “developed for men”? A pack is a pack. What part of my body armor is able to be lighter because its for women? What part of my rifle is made for men, what part of a grenade is made for men, what part of a rocket launcher is made for men, what part of an artillery piece is made for men.
        Qualify this claim of yours with an actual fact and piece of equipment / technique.

        “Find a way to hold women equally responsible for the outcome of their enormous voting power”?

        So because politicians cater to stupid feminists and women don’t vote the way you think we want them to, you want to play the slippery slope game?

        • Baka [D]

          He’s not going to be able to, since he’s an idiot. He’s the type of person that pushes for lighter rounds against armored enemies because they can be carried en masse by the ladies. He’d also suggest not climbing mountains with heavy gear because the chopper can pick them up, forgetting what rockets are.

        • smackdab

          My Marine son bought me a rifle for Christmas. It’s far too heavy, the trigger is too far down for my arm length, does that make me an asshole to want something smaller and lighter that I can actually use? Why have power steering in cars? Men don’t really need it, so women shouldn’t either? I’m unusually strong for a woman and I’m not shy about doing “manly” chores to help my husband out(double hernias from his hard labors) instead of playing the helpless little woman bit, but do I need to be punished for having shorter arm spans, less upper body strength? It’s everything! The damn weed wacker is designed for a male, too long, too heavy, the trigger too far down, the power washer(I wash cars for my son’s new start up car lot for free to help them. Hold the trigger with one hand while pulling a stiff cord with the other is hard for me, I’m 64 years old! ). Do I just stand by twirling my golden locks and play helpless, or do I seek out ways to be a more effective participant in this world? As a woman who served during the Vietnam war I’ve often said women could use a good dose of reality, and sharing responsibilities instead of just enjoying privilege is a good thing.

          • djmc993150

            “Its far too heavy” – Then you shouldn’t be carrying a rifle. Weapons we have right now (the M4) is small and as light as we can make it. If you are too weak to carry an M4 than you don’t belong in the military period. That’s not a male/female issue, that’s you not being able to support a rifle that is less than 10 lbs in weight. Any normal manual labor job would expect you to be able to do more.
            And yes, that you want the military to find an even smaller and lighter (meaning LESS effective weapon) just because you are completely incapable of a very miniscule physical exertion, that does make you an asshole.
            Men don’t need power steering? According to whom? You? Have you driven a car without power steering? You do realize its not there JUST to make it easier to turn the wheel but to increase accuracy of turning, ratio increase and a ton of other safety reasons. Anyone, even a child, can steer a car once its moving. No one “needs” power steering to be able to steer. Its in cars (and military vehicles) to improve performance.
            If you cant lift a 10 lbs rifle, I don’t believe you did anything but miniscule effort in helping your husband in “manly” chores.
            If your arms are too short to properly shoulder and fire an M4, than you are too short to even be in the military, any male that short would also be rejected (and in fact the lowest height for men is greater than the lowest height for women in the military).
            The “weed wacker” is designed for the AVERAGE height of the population. Its not “designed for men” its designed to be useable by the AVERAGE person, they are not and never going to make a lawn tool for men or women. It wasn’t designed for men, it wasn’t even designed for the average man, it was designed for the AVERAGE person to use it comfortably. The fact its “too heavy and too long” means you are so far physically beneath the average you wouldn’t even be able to properly use something “designed for women”. The weight of it is specifically determined by the LEAST amount of material the manufacture has to put into it for safety and reliability. They didn’t make it “heavy” for men, they made it as light as possible to save MONEY on materials.
            There is a difference between giving women a “dose of reality” and destroying the military to do it. Putting women in the infantry / combat is not an answer. Taking their voting rights away is not an answer. Having politicians cater to small percentage of women who demand women (though not the ones who will actually have to do it) be sent into combat is the problem.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Ignore her, she’s a feminsaty fifth columnist who was never in Nam!

            As she demonstrated when she didn’t realise the Apache had been killed squatting to pee!

          • smackdab

            I don’t carry a rifle, dumbass – he bought it for my protection. It’s under my bed. As a Marine, he’s familiar with weapons stats, and says the SOUND of a rifle being cocked is the most effective deterrent and a shotgun does not require great accuracy in the dark or while in a state of panic. My brother has a smaller, lighter weight one, and I am deadly accurate with it. My mother was a great shot, too. My husband buys and sells vintage Porsches from the 50s, and none of them have power steering. He likes that it keeps me from driving his Speedster. I can with great effort, but it’s not fun, and I just don’t. Weed wackers come in all sizes, lengths and quality. My husband chose a professional heavy duty one with a gas tank. I switched to a smaller, light weight cheaper one, and I defy anyone to guess which weeds were whacked by the heavy beast and which were by the girly electric whacker. He appreciates my help even when neighbors criticize or razz him because I laid 12 tons of river rock in our yard with a shovel and wheel barrow while he drank a beer and watched. He has hernias, assholes! Mind your own business! I got it done in half the time the neighbor guy did with his Dad helping. I’m not a weak woman by any means. I work in a furniture store as a visual merchandiser, which means I move heavy furniture all day. I get twice as much work done as men do, and I’m in my 60’s, because I use EZ sliders instead of lifting and humping everything. I use fulcrum, balance and my legs/butt to move massive armoires by myself, while it takes two young muscled up guys to lift and strain it from one spot to another. There’s always more than one way to skin a cat.

      • Rekt

        Some may be good enough, but I doubt it. Women in general doesn’t come close to men’s physical performance. Just take a look at sports. Or take a look at sports where trans men are competing, it’s not really a competition…

        • Mr B J Mann

          Indeed.

          I read a long time back that female Olympic athletes are only on a par with SCHOOL BOY athletes!

          I’d never checked it before, but I had a look at UK performance tables today and it looks like top UK female athletes are on a par with top UNDER 15 year old UK boys!

          • smackdab

            Annnnnnd..so what? War isn’t a tennis match. Women participate in making war, they need to participate in ending them.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Siggghhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!

        • smackdab

          I notice my trash gets picked up regularly by women these days. They’ve invented trucks with arms that do the heavy lifting instead of men breaking their backs and dying broken and before their time. The trash is just as gone whether by modern, female friendly means, or by brute male force. Got it?

          • Rekt

            Yes. Technology is a wonderful thing. The washing machine, invented by men, have liberated more women than any feminist ever has.

            Doesn’t change the fact that men are biologically more suited for combat than women.

          • smackdab

            It also doesn’t mean women are exempt from responsibility.

          • Rekt

            That was never my claim. I’m just saying our biology restricts us to more suitable purposes, so to speak.

          • smackdab

            United we stand, divided we fall. THEY aren’t divided – THEY aren’t scorning their women for attempting to pull their fair share. THEY aren’t scoffing at their willingness to aid in the cause. THEY aren’t discouraging their women from doing whatever it takes to win. Just saying – you guys are utterly stupid if you think rejecting women because they can’t hoist the same size backpack is a winning strategy. Stu. Pid.

          • Rekt

            By all means, but we don’t have to do the same tasks in order to do “our fair share” (Marxist BS, btw).
            We can do the tasks we are more suited for. So by your standard for morality (fair share) it will be fulfilled and it will be fulfilled more effectively.
            I’m not saying I’m against ALL women in male dominated whatever. I’m just saying there is a reason why it’s male dominated, and vice versa with female dominated whatevers.

          • smackdab

            Marxist my ass! What an incredibly idiotic comment! Look, dumbass. It isn’t MARXIST that women vote for their own selfish interests instead of for the greater good. It’s their biology. Having one’s ass on the line for the outcome of said vote is vital for the survival of this nation. It’s how small groups have survived against larger forces, the pioneer push West, for example, the Vietnam war, and now our muslim caliphate. Undermining half your life partnership is going to lead to disaster. YOU will deserve the bad outcome, but I don’t.

          • Rekt

            To do one’s “fair share” is duty-ethics, which is what Marxism rests upon. (“Do your duty for the people!”)
            And yes, I agree that people – not just women, should vote their selfish interest. And I agree, yet again, having skin in the game makes one take it more seriously, and that is also why I’m against all government social programs.
            You seem, however, to basically want the same things as I. We just have a different way of thinking.

            This is, in any case, straying way off topic.
            Women, in general, do not belong in the battlefield.

          • smackdab

            Your biology restricts you to voting for your own selfish interests instead of the greater good. If women face the dire consequences of their votes, they’ll take more responsibility to concern themselves with voting for the greater good, instead of idiotic shit like free birf’ control or phantom pay disparities.

          • Rekt

            Your going off topic.

      • Mr B J Mann

        Sorry to burst your bubble, but you’re a feminsaty fifth columnist who was never in Nam!

        As you demonstrated when you didn’t realise the Apache had been killed squatting to pee!

  • smackdab

    Here’s the reality, guys. Women are the MAJORITY VOTERS. Yes, those same obese assholes running around in pink pussy hats that consider YOU their disposable property are the ones in the driver’s seat putting MEN in harms way because they have NO CLUE what defending ones self or loved ones is all about. Full disclosure, I AM a female Vietnam era veteran and I NEVER cast a vote that I don’t consider what impact my vote will have upon my brothers, sons and nephews that will pay the price for my decisions. Military service would do a lot of entitlement princesses a lot of good. No, I do not advocate putting male and female troops in combat together, I do advocate training and equipment designed for women’s aptitudes, strengths and body proportions, JUST LIKE IT’S BEEN DONE FOR MEN. As I said – no man is expected to lift twice his upper body strength, or be given weapons too heavy and too large for them to manage, then laughed at because they fail. Get a fucking grip!

    • Mr B J Mann

      “no man is expected to lift twice his upper body strength, or be given weapons too heavy and too large for them to manage, then laughed at because they fail.”

      BECAUSE THE WIMPY BLOKES WOULDN’T GET IN DESPITE BEING BIGGER N STRONGER N TOUGHER THAN WIMMIN!!!

      • smackdab

        I’m speaking about YOU, wimpy bloke. YOU are no more capable of performing at twice your upper body strength than I am, yet you mock me but not yourself? It’s like me laughing at you for not being able to lactate, or suggesting you can never be a parent until you do.

        • Mr B J Mann

          Are you on drugs on something?

          I never mocked anybody, simply stated scientific facts.

          And what if I’m no more capable of performing at HALF my upper body strength than you are, whatever that means?

          I’m not saying I should be in the military, am I?!?!

          I hope you didn’t have any of those chemicals in your system when you breast fed your boys!

          • smackdab

            Are you saying you haven’t served in the military? Are you shitting me? I served three years, from my 18th birthday to my 21st, on an isolated Air base with 7,000 men and less than 100 women, in an era when convicted rapists were allowed to enlist instead of going to prison, and men could say or do just about anything they wanted, and you were laughed at if you thought you had a right to complain. We were called whores, lesbian nymphomaniacs out to trap a husband, and [email protected]@er bait. I was told by my commanding officer that’s why I was sent there – “the boys are lonely”. Needless to say, the Air Force didn’t get it’s money’s worth from this stubborn okie, but that’s beside the point. My father didn’t want me to serve. He saw women treated the same way during WWII – FUCKING WWII for fuck’s sake!!! Those were patriotic women, not feminists trying to prove their manhood. They got shit on. Their patriotism got shit on. No wonder feminism rose up after that.

          • Mr B J Mann

            Have a Nice Day y’all!

          • smackdab

            Brilliant rebuttal.

    • Mr B J Mann

      And you want them armed and trained, tells us all we need to know about you!

      Especially when you demonstrated that you’re a feminsaty fifth columnist who was never in Nam!!

      As you demonstrated when you didn’t realise the Apache had been killed squatting to pee!!!

  • AverageJoe1987

    Well obviously the training is sexist. – liberal logic

  • mfh

    I think this is much to do about nothing. When I joined the Corp we had 113 boots at the start and graduated with only 48. That’s 42%.

    • Katherine Leicester

      Women forced into the infantry ranks and failing is the same as Marine Corps boot camp attrition rates?

      No.

      • mfh

        Seems like it to me. We had higher attrition rates then this article says he woman had. I was there.

  • Baka [D]

    Read the asshole “smackdab”‘s comments down below…delusional to a fault.

    • Mr B J Mann

      She appears to be a feminsaty fifth columnist who was never in Nam!

      As she demonstrated when she didn’t realise the Apache had been killed squatting to pee!

    • smackdab

      Name calling with no rebuttal. You are an ahmazzzing warrior.

  • Kyle S.

    invite both sexes to try out, that’ll naturally weed out the women because obviously lowering standards is stupid and only gives you a weaker military, there’s no need to have a “are women strong enough” debate, women have their specialty but having co-ed anything is just a bad idea, it just weakens the whole team and causes disruptions and distractions, if we were in a real world war then things would change pretty quickly back to the way they once were I’d imagine, women are designed to give live and men are designed to take life, nurturer and protector, no few decades of equality and “independent career woman” is going to change hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, and why waste more money when pound for pound men are the better value?

  • Heywood Jablowme

    All im hearing is stuff about infanty and on the ground stuff. What about subs? Subs are tight quarters and in that case a smaller woman might be able to do a good job. Or driving vehicles? There is a middle way here that is not unrealistic. Pilots ect?

    • Mr B J Mann

      Oh, purleeeze.

      Yes, have women drivers.

      And a team of men to load and unload the vehicles, jackup up the vehicle when it needs a tyre changed, changing tires, unbolting broken bits…….

      And as for subs, yes, much smaller, but you’d need levers ten times as long on the spanners to do anything, ten times as many women to do the heavy lifting, just how many women can you fit in a sub?!?!

      As for pilots, what happens when they get shot down behind enemy lines and become boots on the ground?

      Or when their airbase is over-run and they can’t get to their aircraft fast enough because they can’t run as fast (especially kitted up) as a man, or they aren’t man enough to fight their way to their plane?!

      And how many women, after they go though their training, especially pilots, then take maternity leave?!?!?!

      Oh, and they aren’t man enough for the military three weeks out of four:

      What about the other week?!?!

      • smackdab

        I work with young women who havnt had a period in three years. They get birth control shots of some sort. I personally would never risk it, but many do. What else ya got?

        • Mr B J Mann

          Over-trained and under-fed.

          Bit like your brain!

          • smackdab

            Stupud comment.

  • Adnil Yelkam

    men meet the training needs or they flunk out. a lot of men don’t make the cut but those that do are ready and able to go to war and war is not a joke. they are risking their lives and to have them not receive adequate training because someone can’t keep up or to force them to the battleground with little to no physical support is ridiculous. why not have separate units for men and women? train women to their full potential and do the same for men. like it or not ladies most women do not and can not match the physical strength of a man.

    • Mr B J Mann

      But why waste half your resources on training women?

      And why train twice as many as you need and can afford to get enough men to do the job?!?!?

      • Adnil Yelkam

        because you’ll hurt their feelings if you don’t

  • TMGirl

    They want equality, except when it’s not in their favor, then they want exceptions.

  • Gene C Clark

    If you cannot drag your buddy out of a foxhole to a medic…you got no business being on the front lines.

  • Dina Rybicki Eubanks

    I have to question the “hand-picked, highly fit women” chosen. It’s a new field and there’s a learning/fitness regimen women will need to prepare for. Since the average height of these women is really short, seriously 5’4″, what qualified as highly fit. I have to wonder if that means looks good in a swimsuit. A short, thin man would likely fail the tests as well. Giving them special gear just makes them targets of ridicule which was probably also the point. Nice try….not buying it.

    • Mr B J Mann

      So who do you want picked?

      Athletes perhaps?!

      Female world record holders are on the same level as top schoolboy athletes!

  • Tobias Keith

    All this nonsense because Obamama is a pussy douchebag. President Trump cannot overturn Barrys’ edicts fast enough.

  • Greggore

    We still need Women to try. It won’t happen over night, but yes they have to be able to do the job or go to the auxiliary to help out.

  • PoliticallyIncorrectDeplorable

    Sad they are playing with national security