I say try because maybe one woman in a thousand is fit to serve.
Just lower standards.
Also, I always find it ridiculous how I, as a very antiwar person, still want us to be better at war. We could be winning these wars I don't think we should be fighting...easily. And it would probably have a lower deathcount, even. It's just insane. We do war in the worst possible way, for all involved. Except the defense contractors, rebuilding companies, lobbyists, and the like, of course.
Please, if we're going to do war, can we at least do it competently? We're capable of it, the powers that be just choose not to do it that way. It's a fucking joke.
I remember stories from early in the Ukraine war where ex-US military guys who volunteered with the Ukrainian army were really not happy about fighting guys who could also call in artillery and air support.
Nah, that isn't why. Killing shit kickers has been a staple of human warfare for thousands of years.
Our rot comes from a different source. In part, altering our doctrine to counter insurgency contributed to the decay, but the true cause of that is the foolishness behind trying to rehabilitate mohammandan subhumans.
But the truth is that the decay is purposeful. Both of society and of our military.
I mean, one of the reasons why our Elites felt comfortable purposefully decaying such a thing is because they saw the power gap between us and those dirt farmers and thought our technology put us so far ahead we didn't need some mega awesome force.
J6 showed that they really don't consider themselves "mortal" or in an danger whatsoever physically, because they've been seeing war as something way over there that can never reach them. A game they don't need to take seriously and can play with.
If you haven't already, go read General Butler's War Is a Racket and Marine!, the General Puller biography. Our incompetence in warfighting is a direct result of corporate influence, and has been for a century. If we had super capable and competent militaries, we could get away with smaller militaries. Look at what the Marines were from 1940-1990 compared to the Army, and imagine if that concept were carried over to every service branch.
The fact that military men are often prohibited from maintaining their own damn equipment because of obscenely cronyist contracts genuinely shocked me the first time I heard about it. How the fuck are you supposed to fight a war if you have to wait for a licensed contractor technician to be sent over every time you need something fixed?
That's obviously a decision to prevent armies going rogue. If a division is self sufficient than that general can easily coup the government. No doubt that's how it was sold at first anyway.
Also, I just have to say, I despise modern leftists. They managed to take any of the positive points out, while keeping all the negatives. Antiwar? Slava Ukraini! Anti authoritarian? Nope...STATISTS.
Nothing more pathetic than a statist leftist, man.
I'd argue that all leftism is statism. They're only anarchists until they can take power. Their ostensible goals require overwhelming state power to enact upon the unwilling.
The reason why that contradiction doesn't bother them is because they're comfortable with their hypocrisy.
Didn’t the marines do a study during Obama years that showed poor results for women in combat but they just ignored it because it wasn’t what the Obama administration wanted
Woulda been the funniest thing ever to see him try. Watching a bunch of grown men trying to trudge through mud up to their waists (because they are too overloaded with equipment) while a toothless man in overalls flies by them on an airboat throwing jugs of piss with 5 different infectious diseases everyone from the Swamp is immune to into all their faces.
Oh it wasn’t just that. They offered massive advancement opportunities for any women willing to be infantry officers. The problem was the physical requirements and risks required women to actually do something. They cancelled the program after no women signed up.
Women need special accomodation for mentruation, which reduces combat effectivness. Women can get pregnant in tbe field, second verse, same as the first. Women are also more likely to be mistreated as POWs, and every single female soldier death weighs more heavily on the public conscience than a man's, undermining the war effort.
Even taking a shit in the field is different between men and women. With men, you tell them to suck it up and go shit behind a bush or a rock. With women, you have two other men dig a hole and put up a makeshift tent around it so wahman can feeeeel safe shitting around the men.
Women can get pregnant in tbe field, second verse, same as the first. Women are also more likely to be mistreated as POWs
I'll be more blunt: Female soldiers are free stress relief for the other side.
A robust civilization that is winning wars, doesn't have to try and conscript females.
I say try because maybe one woman in a thousand is fit to serve.
Just lower standards.
Also, I always find it ridiculous how I, as a very antiwar person, still want us to be better at war. We could be winning these wars I don't think we should be fighting...easily. And it would probably have a lower deathcount, even. It's just insane. We do war in the worst possible way, for all involved. Except the defense contractors, rebuilding companies, lobbyists, and the like, of course.
Please, if we're going to do war, can we at least do it competently? We're capable of it, the powers that be just choose not to do it that way. It's a fucking joke.
Decades of bullying poor farmers with rusty AKs and RPGs has made the US complacent and retarded.
I remember stories from early in the Ukraine war where ex-US military guys who volunteered with the Ukrainian army were really not happy about fighting guys who could also call in artillery and air support.
Nah, that isn't why. Killing shit kickers has been a staple of human warfare for thousands of years.
Our rot comes from a different source. In part, altering our doctrine to counter insurgency contributed to the decay, but the true cause of that is the foolishness behind trying to rehabilitate mohammandan subhumans.
But the truth is that the decay is purposeful. Both of society and of our military.
I mean, one of the reasons why our Elites felt comfortable purposefully decaying such a thing is because they saw the power gap between us and those dirt farmers and thought our technology put us so far ahead we didn't need some mega awesome force.
J6 showed that they really don't consider themselves "mortal" or in an danger whatsoever physically, because they've been seeing war as something way over there that can never reach them. A game they don't need to take seriously and can play with.
If you haven't already, go read General Butler's War Is a Racket and Marine!, the General Puller biography. Our incompetence in warfighting is a direct result of corporate influence, and has been for a century. If we had super capable and competent militaries, we could get away with smaller militaries. Look at what the Marines were from 1940-1990 compared to the Army, and imagine if that concept were carried over to every service branch.
The fact that military men are often prohibited from maintaining their own damn equipment because of obscenely cronyist contracts genuinely shocked me the first time I heard about it. How the fuck are you supposed to fight a war if you have to wait for a licensed contractor technician to be sent over every time you need something fixed?
"Your puny AR-15 can't do anything against a tank!"
"I'm sorry, sir, but all of our tanks are stuck in the garage. The civilian technicians keep...disappearing."
That's obviously a decision to prevent armies going rogue. If a division is self sufficient than that general can easily coup the government. No doubt that's how it was sold at first anyway.
Also, I just have to say, I despise modern leftists. They managed to take any of the positive points out, while keeping all the negatives. Antiwar? Slava Ukraini! Anti authoritarian? Nope...STATISTS.
Nothing more pathetic than a statist leftist, man.
I'd argue that all leftism is statism. They're only anarchists until they can take power. Their ostensible goals require overwhelming state power to enact upon the unwilling.
The reason why that contradiction doesn't bother them is because they're comfortable with their hypocrisy.
I know the general gist, but I'll check them out. I've heard good things, but haven't read them myself.
Didn’t the marines do a study during Obama years that showed poor results for women in combat but they just ignored it because it wasn’t what the Obama administration wanted
That and worse yes. Obama ordered several wargames about declaring war on the South for example.
Woulda been the funniest thing ever to see him try. Watching a bunch of grown men trying to trudge through mud up to their waists (because they are too overloaded with equipment) while a toothless man in overalls flies by them on an airboat throwing jugs of piss with 5 different infectious diseases everyone from the Swamp is immune to into all their faces.
Shit would make Vietnam look like a joke.
Oh I very much agree.
Because I was part of that scenario planning and I've seen the results before they buried them.
Spoiler: the feds lose. Bad.
Oh it wasn’t just that. They offered massive advancement opportunities for any women willing to be infantry officers. The problem was the physical requirements and risks required women to actually do something. They cancelled the program after no women signed up.
Sounds like most things under Obizzle.
'uhhh, what do you mean, unconstitutional? duhhhh that ain't right!'
No Women are fit to serve, her fitness is only one side of the coin.
The true problem is that any who are, don't make up for the resources necessary to train, equip, and house them differently from the male soldiers.
Were it up to me I'd ban females from serving active duty, and reconstitute the women's service corps.
You won't get many takers if they have to wear heels and dresses.
Still just the tip of the iceberg.
Women need special accomodation for mentruation, which reduces combat effectivness. Women can get pregnant in tbe field, second verse, same as the first. Women are also more likely to be mistreated as POWs, and every single female soldier death weighs more heavily on the public conscience than a man's, undermining the war effort.
Even taking a shit in the field is different between men and women. With men, you tell them to suck it up and go shit behind a bush or a rock. With women, you have two other men dig a hole and put up a makeshift tent around it so wahman can feeeeel safe shitting around the men.
I'll be more blunt: Female soldiers are free stress relief for the other side.
Yes to all. Hence service corps. They should be doing paperwork far from the battlefield, to free up real soldiers.
Imagine being on the front with your lives in the hands of some draftee female support fobbit.
Didn't they drop standards lower than an OF ho's panty's?