Defense Secretary Leon Panetta told reporters today that the repeal of restrictions on women serving in combat meets his priority “to remove as many barriers as possible for talented and qualified people to be able to serve this country in uniform.”
“Our nation was built on the premise of the citizen soldier. In our democracy, I believe it is the responsibility of every citizen to protect the nation. And every citizen who can meet the qualifications of service should have that opportunity,” Panetta said at a Pentagon press conference with Gen. Martin Dempsey, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
“It’s clear to all of us that women are contributing in unprecedented ways to the military’s mission of defending the nation. Women represent 15 percent of the force, over 200,000. They’re serving in a growing number of critical roles on and off the battlefield. The fact is that they have become an integral part of our ability to perform our mission,” Panetta continued, adding 152 women in uniform have given their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan.
“Every time I visited the war zone, every time I’ve met with troops, reviewed military operations, and talked to wounded warriors, I’ve been impressed with the fact that everyone — everyone, men and women alike — everyone is committed to doing the job. They’re fighting and they’re dying together. And the time has come for our policies to recognize that reality.”
Panetta said the change will take place “in a responsible, measured, and a coherent way.”
Dempsey said integration will happen “in a way that enhances opportunity for everyone.”
“This means setting clear standards of performance for all occupations based on what it actually takes to do the job. It also means ensuring that these standards are gender neutral in occupations that will open to women,” the chairman said. “As we introduce to women to previously closed occupations, we must make sure that there are a sufficient number of females entering the career field and already assigned to the related commands and leadership positions in order to sustain success over time.”
Dempsey said units will begin opening to women this year. “They will continue to assess, develop and validate general neutral standards so that we can start assigning personnel to previously closed occupations. And they will take the time needed to do the work without compromising the principles I just mentioned,” he said. “In fact, adherence to the principles may lead to an assessment that some specialties and ratings should remain exceptions.”
President Obama in a statement today called the move “another historic step toward harnessing the talents and skills of all our citizens.”
“This milestone reflects the courageous and patriotic service of women through more than two centuries of American history and the indispensable role of women in today’s military,” he said. “…Earlier today I called Secretary of Defense Panetta to express my strong support for this decision, which will strengthen our military, enhance our readiness, and be another step toward fulfilling our nation’s founding ideals of fairness and equality.”
“Today, every American can be proud that our military will grow even stronger with our mothers, wives, sisters and daughters playing a greater role in protecting this country we love.”
With 30% budget cut expect a lot of firings. Some of those not initial fired are going to be let go anyways to make room for more women since there is not enough gender diversity.
When women are designing and building fighters and aircraft carriers and doling out roles for men to play, then call me and let’s talk about fantasy.
War is not a fantasy, and there will be a price to pay down the line. Cultural fads and evolutions that have said no to the bustle are ignored by gravity and rain. Fire remains hot and sand dry. We are building a dream world, one that doesn’t really exist.
The problem is they’ll degrade the physical requirements to make sure women can make the grade. Already happened in the Firefighter course in most states.
Ask any 200 lb. soldier w a Combat Infantry Badge if he wants to fight beside a 140 lb. female, no matter how good her physical condition. Uh-uh. He wants somebody able to pick him up, sling his ass over the shoulder, and beat cheeks outta there if he is wounded in a fire zone.
Helo pilots, truck drivers, fighter pilots, drone pilots, etc. are all slots that can be filled by competent females w/o endangering other soldiers. The activists don’t give a damn about combat effectiveness or safety of the warriors.
That same combat infantryman would welcome a female warrior IF, and that’s a damn big if, she can compete physically. Unfortuantely we all know PC bullcrap will rule the day, and if the infantry isn’t 50% female soon the brass will lower the standards.
Exactly.
They will simply lower the standards, which will result in a proportional drop in combat effectiveness.
I served in the Airborne Infantry in the 1980′s. While there were no women serving in my battalion in the 82nd–and the idea that there could have been is laughable–there were, however, two or three women in my jump school class. While jump school was considerably less demanding than the infantry training that preceded it, and even less demanding than the routine airborne infantry duty that followed, there were two sets of standards applied: One for us, and one for the few women. They literally fell out of every run, and performed miserably on all of the airborne training apparatusses. But they were given an automatic pass while we were subject to being “recycled” or forced to quit at the slightest failing, or indiscretion. I had to talk a good buddy of mine, who would later become a model paratrooper, out of quitting after being recycled for improper PLF’s on the swing landing trainer. To add insult to injury, they were ridiculously blatant about the double standard. It’s not like we couldn’t see how pathetically the females performed.
I won’t get into how the presence of women within our combat arms units will destroy the whole ‘warrior ethic’ thing, and the espirit-de-corps. That’s for a different comment. But it worries me deeply that the vast majority of the people who believe that women in combat is a good idea, McCain and a few others being the exception, have no f-ing clue how badly they will damage our military’s ability to fight.
“They will simply lower the standards, which will result in a proportional drop in combat effectiveness.”
Correction: They will simply lower the standards, which will result in a proportional rise in combat casualties.
While I agree, what about Audie Murphy?
‘Responsible, Measured, Coherent’ — but of course! That’s right, Leon, just say the usual meaningless words. The Obama press corps really appreciates it.
The Marxist egalitarians have hammered in the final nail of the coffin. It is sealed shut. Inside lays the once noble, moral, God-fearing U.S.A. that understood the differences between men and women. Maybe somewhere, generations from now, the Good that Western civilization was founded on will return, but for now, we are doomed.
Ahh…how many of us wanted our sons to register for selective service when they turned 18? Not to mention our daughters too. I mean fair is fair here, right? I mean those Jihadis will love this…seeing that our men in congress have no balls so they send the women in to fight for them. I am just being argumentatitve here because I happen to know plenty of women that could handle that type of combat especially some from the hood, but believe you me, not all of them fine women want to be escorted into duty by selective service. They aint haven that.
Carter wanted to register girls too. The Congress stood up and said, “you will not register our daughters”. I was in Israel at the time, where unfortunately we draft women (a large percentage of whom claim a religious exemption) and I found it highly ironic.
But Israel, in spite of crazy feminism taking over, does not allow women into a position where they will engage the enemy on the ground. You know why? Because in 1948 they had no choice but to fight, and we know what happened to the women who fell into Arab hands (not that what happened to the men was very pretty).
What this country needs is a good old-fashioned ground war. One where people are storming beaches, delving deep into foreign territory to take plots of dirt that may or may not mean anything in the grand scheme of the war. Long, hard slogs where wars fought days without sleep or rest. Lying in wait for an enemy to come into territory they hold and springing a surprise firefight.
Perhaps then we’ll get a better understanding as to why women are not indicated in any of that. The Left likes to a sleight of hand by talking about women in “support roles” as justification for combat roles. A combat role is not a place to try to advance your career or about getting “opportunities”.
We all liked seeing Chun Li kick Zangief’s ass, or Ripley carrying a machine-fire-grenade gun and killing aliens, Alice kicking zombie and mercenary ass, Samus taking out alien hordes and got a kick out of a bald Demi Moore in GI Jane. Newsflash: IT’S ALL FAKE. When this particular equality hits the real world everyone is going to be surprised by the outcome.
Except those who explicitly warned against it.
+9001 for all your excellent references
Bravo
Absolutely right. But I also think that the Leftists want this because it will further weaken America’s will to fight when the necessity arises.
@Sly: Did you notice this: “I believe it is the responsibility of every citizen to protect the nation. And every citizen who can meet the qualifications of service should have that opportunity,” Panetta said.
Sounds like preparation for a draft of men and women. Interesting times we live in. I know it’s a sin to question God, but I ask him often why I wasn’t born in 1800?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323539804578260132111473150.html?mod=opinion_newsreel
What women can expect in combat in todays WSJ.
In the article Mr. Smith cites the lack of hygiene. I can amen that. The tropical conditions in Viet Nam no doubt exasperated the disease vectors, but pictures I’ve seen of the Middle East battlefields have Third World sh*thole written all over them with flies, open sewers and filth,etc. All that and sucking chest wounds and traumatic amputations too. God help us the day we got troops on the ground in sub-Saharan Africa.
Ah dysentery! I remember that one well sitting over slit trenches for long periods of time, trying to get clean with the little sheets of toilet paper they gave you. I also remember wearing fatigues until they rotted off you.
The Dem Rep they quoted cited how professional all the troops are as a guard against sexual tension. It’s worked pretty well on Navy ships hasn’t it…not.
“In fact, adherence to the principles may lead to an assessment that some specialties and ratings should remain exceptions.”
THAT is one BIG loophole the combat arms of the military and any brass with balls should exploit to limit the number of women in actual frontline combat.
Hey MEN!
If the founding fathers were to come back and see this…They would tie us to a pole in the town square and horse whip us ALL!! for cowardice! Starting with the joint Chiefs – and working there way down.
Awesome, I not only live in a republic that condoned the killing of over 50 million unborn children, we now have our women fighting our wars for us/with us.
We are done, our society has reached the apex of infantilism, and immasculation worthy of being snuffed out by Islam!!
Great work Leon. Your leftist brethren would be proud!!
Read more: http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2013/01/women_in_combat_and_then_what_comments.html#disqus_thread#ixzz2IvmWJvMb
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
The military will have to change the PFT test again so women can make it into Victor units.
This Jarhead will sleep better at night now that women will be in combat units, and Homosexuality is Honorable in my beloved Marine Corp. Thank you globalist agenda flag holding POS.
Now that we’ve decided that women are equivalent to men in every respect, why don’t we carry this step to its logical conclusion and really even the field. Save a little money too – everything can be gender neutral.
We can start by eliminating the need for all domestic violence units – G.I. Jane, baby! Call out the troops.
Personally, if we can gather the right female fighting unit, start by drafting a bunch of these feminist leftist blogging types, I believe its long over due for them to take the wheel for a drive down Achmed Boulevard.
This could be a wonderful teaching experience – just make sure you leave my wife and two daughters out of your need to ‘prove yourselves.’
Obama is also NOT thinking about how our enemies (especially Islamists) would love nothing better than to capture an American female soldier on the battlefield. Could you imagine what the Taliban would do to a person like that? She would undoubtedly be forced to endure rape, torture, and unspeakable degradation and would certainly be used for propaganda purposes before being executed in a very disgusting manner (such as beheading). The Taliban and creatures of their ilk would probably even put a bounty on the heads of these female soldiers simply for their use as hostages. This will not end well and nobody seems to be thinking of the unintended consequences of this decision.
This what Obama said during the 2008 campaign about the Selective Service and drafting women: “And I think that if women are registered for service — not necessarily in combat roles, and I don’t agree with the draft — I think it will help to send a message to my two daughters that they’ve got obligations to this great country as well as boys do.”
Well, now that he has indeed agreed to combat roles for women, it follows that registering women for Selective Service is merely a a lawsuit or an executive order away.
My guess is that this a camel’s nose in the tent in order to create a mandatory national service program with a military/non-miitary option for everyone. Not only can Socialist goals be executed and enforced through coercion, but it removes 18 to 24 year olds from the unemployment rolls, thus lowering unemployment rates (which is what made the 50s look so prosperous; delaying entry into the workforce for a huge swath of people); and it will give incentives such as a completely bankrolled college tuition afterward.
I have no problem with some sort of mandatory national service for every able-bodied kid. God knows I could have used it when I was 18… Whether it be the military, the Peace Corps or just wiping bums in an old folks home it would get them out of their parent’s basements and into the real world. EVERY 18 year-old needs a reality check.
I was in the Infantry. NO WAY do you want women in it, they are just not physically strong enough. Why don’t we take the failure of other armies who have tried it as evidence that it’s a stupid idea.
Just wait till there are women hostages…
We have now truly – and officially – gone insane. You just gotta love that “Fundamental Transformation”.
I’m almost ashamed to admit that I ever wore the uniform. And Dempsey should be ashamed. He’s not a soldier. he’s a political whore.
– Small Loaf, but can they fight?
it’s probable and now, possible… maybe snipers or pilots, but grunts? no no no and hell no. when they wear out faster they will ask for their feminine pass. all of a sudden you’re gonna have to be a gentleman and help carry her load too. if they are pretty it gets worse, then the competition between guys for her attention, there goes unit cohesiveness. oh i forgot they only date sergeants. i thought the military had a rape problem? what about PTSD. we are the only nation that wants to play fair on the battlefield. NUTS!
This literally turns my stomach. We are all now living a Progressive nightmare.
Like I said on another thread a couple of gang rapes will pu a stop to this shit.
Next up, CNN reports wondering why the sudden gut wrenching epidemic of reprisals coincidentally after somebodys fiance is shot to death.
re rapes, many of our current enemies in the middle east regularly practice that against male soldiers, as well, so that isn’t anything new.
Emotionally, I see this as a horrible idea. You have to factor that in; emotions are a real thing, especially when you are under intense pressure for days or months on end and are armed and in the fog of war.
On the other hand, if you think women are not in front-line positions now you are living in a dream world. Just because they are driving trucks or nurse/medics or MPs or whatever, when the fit hits the Shan *all* soldiers are infantry.
On TV the other day I saw beautiful 110 lb. women beating up ugly 210lb men with guns, therefore women are going to great in combat.
If DoD and the JCS support women in ground force line combat units, don’t half-ass it – go all in.
All women aged 18-25 should immediately be required to register for the draft. All PCS orders to infantry units should be involuntary based simply on the numbers required and nonnegotiable, just like the men. It’s sink or swim for the men and should be no less for women.
And immediately stop all gender based physical fitness training (PFT); one PFT scale, one set of PFT standards, nothing but one standard for all PFT scoring and physical training. Either drag the camel into the tent or don’t screw up what’s not broken. For combat infantry Marines and soldiers, there is only one scale – fight for your team member’s lives or everyone dies.
A number of men fail every year trying to measure up to the standards required to meet combat capability, but they don’t get a choice whether to try or not and have to live with the final result. Women should be held to the exact same standards.
Yeah, just what America needs and wants: our “mothers, wives, sisters and daughters” toting a rifle on the firing line.
That Panetta is a little suck-up weasel rat bastard. He gave the shrieking harridans on the left what they want (men’s role in society), and then the putrid little Benedict Arnold clone said “What a good boy am I.”
I just can’t wait to see the pictures of the captives. With their blouses torn, lips split, and their torsos black and blue….then there all those rapes. Let’s see GI Jane please with Panetta to come and rescue her. How’d that work out for the ambassador. A disaster waiting to happen.
This is all fine and dandy but we will not have achieved true equality until they start accepting the handicapped.
Possible even the mentally deranged.
Remember what happened to Jessica Lynch? She was repeatably raped in her anus.
Well I guess the 18 year old women should sighn up for the seective service.
So what?
Being a soldier is not worth it — men should not even contemplate this kind of ‘job’. It’s dangerous hard work, badly paid and crippled workers get discarded like rubbish.
So, I’m all in favor of feminists taking over the army — it’s a win-win situation…
It’s funny how the same “feminists” who celebrate this move proving that women can handle the exact same physical, biological, and emotional rigors of direct combat are the same “feminists” who tell us women need their own special and different health care needs covered under Obameecare at the expense of all taxpayers.
There is another element to this story that has yet to be picked up by the bloggers. The military is robotizing at a rate that would shock most civilians. Combat drones are being developed and deployed for land, sea, and air combat. The predator drone is only the beginning of this. Warbots (warbeiters) are being developed for land and sea battles as well. Most of these are controlled by operators siting in control rooms in places like Las Vegas. However, the next step is fully automated (e.g. autonomous) warbeiters that will operate on their own. The military of 2030 will be largely automated.
This may be one of the reason why the high command is more open to the role of women in the military than one would expect.
Ever notice, on the Cops shows, how the petite policewomen stand back and watch the male cops take the bad guys down. Once the bad guys are handcuffed then the policewoman walks up to them and asks him why he stole the car, robbed the store etc. Is there any reason to think it would be different in the military?
So if they ever re-institute the draft, in case they want to get the strongest of our young people out of the country for some reason, does that mean that we women will be drafted too?
juspasinthru–I certainly hope so’ along with equal rights come equal opportunities. However, women will have an out, all they’ll have to do is get pregnant.
juspasinthru–having a period, PMS etc are not excuses for not getting out there and killing the enemy. Do you think you, or any woman, could survive SERE or Navy Seal training?
I raised many of the concerns cited on this comment thread yesterday on a Slate forum and was roundly hissed and booed. I merely stated that if a woman can pass the stringent tests than have at-er but don’t discount the FACT that men are hard-wired to protect women and this may lead to a loss of unit cohesion. We all know that declining standards of physicality to make women fit in lead to inadvertant death and injury. The R.C.M.P. in my country are far more likely to use tazers and hand guns now that everyone is expected to not break a fingernail. In my home town last year the cops tazed an 11 year-old boy and set the dog on a 12 year-old girl. Years ago a Mountie had to be at least 5’10″ and 175lbs. I got stopped in a traffic check a few months ago and I wanted to pat the officer’s cute little head (playing dress-up is so adorable and all) but my saner half prevailed. There’s your idea of “Gender Neutrality” run amok.
War is a man’s game, women need not apply.