It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
I think I've established my libertarian bona fides rather comprehensively here at Ricochet. Anyone who's been around our little community for awhile has probably received some of my Peace, Love, and Happiness (hands off, that's trademarked -- I bought it from a boomer after the dot-com bubble burst) at some point, and hopefully left the conversation a little more mellow. And maybe with the munchies.
Though not strident, I default on equality of opportunity and human freedom, and that extends to gay rights, gender roles, soft drugs, weird religions, immigration, and a whole slew of other positions typically viewed by my more conservative brothers and sisters as positively Leftist. They're not, at least not in justification, and I'm certainly no commie, but we'll leave off that discussion for another time.
I say all that to say this: I am absolutely opposed to having women in ground combat roles. I'm no misogynist, I'm just a Soldier with 13 1/2 years in the Army, multiple combat tours, and a wealth of experience from having served under, with, and over both male and female Soldiers. War, as fought today by U.S. Army and USMC ground fighters -- infantry, for the most part, but also tankers, cavalry scouts, combat engineers, and artillery -- is exclusively male for very good reason, mainly having to do with physical limitations. I've never bought the argument that females are trouble and young males can't be trusted (true for teenagers, less so for young troops with a scowling Casey Taylor ready to discipline them), or that women must be protected from the horrors of war, but those are moot points; a person has to be physically strong to meet the demands of ground combat. Though there are separate fitness standards for females in the rest of the branches, those considered 'combat arms' have one -- male. We all have to meet basic strength and endurance standards, and all of them, for every age group, are far greater than those required of females. For very good reason, as ground combat is no place for weakness. We have high, uniform standards in place -- higher than any other country's military force -- to ensure that when we fight, we win. At least we used to.
Which brings us to this week. Our senior military leadership has made a grave mistake which, I fear, will greatly harm our lethality and esprit de corps. From the Army Times:
WASHINGTON — Army leaders have begun to study the prospect of sending female soldiers to the service’s prestigious Ranger school — another step in the effort to broaden opportunities for women in the military.
Gen. Raymond Odierno, Army chief of staff, said Wednesday that he’s asked senior commanders to provide him with recommendations and a plan this summer. And while he stressed that no decisions have been made, he suggested that Ranger school may be a logical next step for women as they move into more jobs closer to the combat lines.
Don't be fooled by the verbiage; it's already a done deal. My instructor buddies already have their orders.
I'm not a Ranger, but I cut my teeth in the Infantry. I learned everything I need for a successful career by going to other schools, but I respect the discipline and strength of those men like no one else, and I'm still surrounded by them; friends, neighbors, co-workers, leaders. My best friends are Rangers, the Mountain School is my backyard, and the best warrior-leaders I've ever had were all Rangers. They, to a man, are devastated by this. The whole community is devastated, and it's already filtering down to the regular Infantry; my inbox is testament to this. Whether or not our senior leadership chooses to recognize it, this will very likely bloom into a crisis very quickly if not handled correctly. Given that no opinion was sought from the Ranger community before making this move, I have my doubts that it will be. I'm out of words, so I'll leave you with this sobering read:
Female officers have complained that the lack of the school credential disadvantages them for promotions and commands, and in an election year their complaints have found champions among the political appointees in the Office of the Secretary of Defense. In a Department whose highest priority is the Secretary's million-dollar Gulfstream commute, and that has lost interest in two ongoing wars and a dozen other flashpoints where soldiers risk their lives daily, a stroke of a pen can upend a 60-year-old course that embodies a tradition with roots in the 18th Century.
As with everything else I write, these are my opinions and mine alone, and do not represent the position of the United States Army, Department of Defense, or other Federal agency. That should cover it.
- Comment (171)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (12)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
We felt the same way about females on submarines though for different reasons.
When the guard force where I work was integrated there were problems. One young female was reassigned after the Marines nick-named her "the clearing barrel." It was less than six months before a safety stand down had to be held to deal with the herpes outbreak among the guard force. And these people are only removed from society for short periods of time.
Edited on May 18, 2012 at 5:33pmFeb '11
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
No, but my job didn't require me too. It required me to tolerate very high temperatures and very long hours.
If I couldn't- then I would have faced disciplinary action culminating in a discharge under other than honorable conditions.
It happened often, but not to me.
Women? That was a different story. There was a different standard, thanks to political pressure- and that's the problem.
If there was uniform standard of discipline- complete with a uniform physical standard- then I think I would have no honorable objection to women in the military.
I hasten to add, parenthetically, that were a good number of women who were quite capable and did their duties without issue.
But- thanks to political correctness- that didn't even matter.
That's a problem, I think.
Feb '11
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
The King Prawn: We felt the same way about females on submarines though for different reasons.
When the guard force where I work was integrated there were problems. One young female was reassigned after the Marines nick-named her "the clearing barrel." It was less than six months before a safety stand down had to be held to deal with the herpes outbreak among the guard force. And these people are only removed from society for short periods of time. ·
I've got plenty of the same sort of anecdotes- and I've heard plenty more from other veterans since I got out.
That's not good, obviously.
Mar '11
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Karen: Girls aren't strong enough, eh? I'd talk to Darby Nelson. Can you dead lift 350lbs?
"She wants to be able to physically and mentally ready for anything life throws at her, from carrying a buddy in combat to moving a couch. She chose the military because she considers soldiers heroes and wants to give back by doing the same." But the Rangers can't have her. She's going to the Naval Academy.
And by all means, let's continue to meet our high *readiness* standards by sending reservists and guardsmen on multiple deployments. · 2 hours ago
Or we could quit looking for dragons to slay abroad and reduce the size of the military in manpower terms. But that makes too much sense, so by all means, lets keep pulling mothers from their kids and sending them into combat.
Mar '11
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Casey, what it comes down to is this: as long as we continue with the growing fantasy that gender is just an oppressive social construct, and that men and women don't have natural roles that are different, it's inevitable that women will be infantry, even if they can't match the physical standards set for men. You and I both know what's going to happen there: the physical standards will be lowered to accommodate them. It's inevitable.
May '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
My nephew is in the army. He wanted to be a Ranger really, really bad. He's very strong, very agile. Unfortunately, he's not tall enough. That's it. He's made it all the way through Ranger School to be rejected simply because he's not tall enough.
I do not think the standards should be lowered. But I do think it is rather odd that a recruit can't be allowed to pass because he's not big enough.
Nov '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Palaeologus
Karen: Girls aren't strong enough, eh? I'd talk to Darby Nelson. Can you dead lift 350lbs?
"She wants to be able to physically and mentally ready for anything life throws at her, from carrying a buddy in combat to moving a couch. She chose the military because she considers soldiers heroes and wants to give back by doing the same." But the Rangers can't have her. She's going to the Naval Academy.
And by all means, let's continue to meet our high *readiness* standards by sending reservists and guardsmen on multiple deployments. · 16 minutes ago
She sounds like a great lady. But I don't understand your argument.
Are you suggesting that because Darby could presumably meet current physical standards that Ranger standards will be the same for men and women?
Are there tens of thousands of women waiting to join up and make the deployment rotations smoother? · 3 hours ago
Precisely. Hard cases make bad law.
Mar '11
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Is anyone familiar with integration of women into the IDF?
All I know is that women can serve in combat positions there, and I would be interested to hear if this includes infantry, and what the experience there has been.
Jun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Leporello: Not having women in combat also has to do with what could happen to them if they are captured by the enemy.
Great post. · 15 hours ago
Thank you. To be fair, though, the exact same thing that happens to women POWs often happens to male POWs. Which I think is worse.
Apr '12
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Interesting question, but if you recall, some years ago fire departments got in trouble because not enough blacks were being promoted due to their lower test scores. If there was one standard so few women would qualify that the standard itself would be viewed as biased ... even if it was the same standard from the get go.
As to weight lifting, check any record - while the top women are stronger than the average male, they are puny compared to the top males.
Jun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Guruforhire: I think that the challenges of the asynchronous battlefield has muddied a lot of water on this issue.
...
What bothered me was being told 2 mutually exclusive things within the space of the same first sergeant rant.
...
Maybe you are just hitting the point where its time to evaluate whether or not the army is the place you need to be for the next 5 years.
You make several very good points. The modern battlefield has changed significantly due to technology and the application of Mao's insurgency doctrines by terror groups. On the one hand, this enables females to fight in certain roles along with their male counterparts, often heroically. Leigh Ann Hester springs to mind. On the other, it's shown rather starkly the difference between combat MOS training, standards, and abilities ,and those of combat support and combat service support. Just because females have been exposed to combat and performed under duress doesn't automatically mean that they are qualified to be combat arms. There's a lot more to being Infantry, Armor, Cav, Artillery, Engineer, SF than just finding cover and pulling a trigger.
Second point: Morale. It's important.
Third: I know.
Mar '11
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
As an aside, I don't think it's necessarily un-libertarian to be against women in combat roles.
Most strains of libertarianism are accepting of discrimination when it comes to jobs which require certain traits only possessed by certain groups of people. In other words, discrimination can be tolerated on meritocratic, but not superficial, grounds.
Edited on May 18, 2012 at 11:43pmJun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
BrentB67: Well written article.
I served in the Navy as an aviator and while not as grueling as infantry it presented its own physical challenges.
Regarding your statement that there is a crisis brewing. Turn the pot down, no crisis. There was going to be a crisis when women started flying. The crisis didn't materialize, but the result was predictable.
When the Navy expanded its 'opportunities' first the physical standards were lowered - why did we have to climb that wall on the obstacle course when we could just tap it and run around it?
Thank you, Sir. You, too, hit on some salient points. Primarily, we serve civilian masters who often don't listen to us. It wasn't DoD that forced lower physical fitness standards, it was Congress. It wasn't DoD that instituted quota promotions, it was Congress. It's not DoD who came up with this grand plan -- in the works for the last several years -- it was Congress. A lot of this, I think, springs from the fact that we have the lowest percentage of vets in office that we've ever had.
Sep '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
I agree, Mendel. Casey's not just a libertarian; he's honest. I feel the same way about firefighters. I do have one question, though, for Casey. Do you think it would be OK if there were women-only units in combat?
Jun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Not for Infantry, Engineer, or the higher-level schools for those branches, no. The combat roles for those two do not lend themselves to gender integration at all.
Jun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
Karen: Girls aren't strong enough, eh? I'd talk to Darby Nelson. Can you dead lift 350lbs?
"She wants to be able to physically and mentally ready for anything life throws at her, from carrying a buddy in combat to moving a couch. She chose the military because she considers soldiers heroes and wants to give back by doing the same." But the Rangers can't have her. She's going to the Naval Academy.
Yes, I can. What's more, I can do it after carrying 110 lbs on my back eight miles up a mountain, which is in addition to my protective gear, weapons, and ammo, and expect to physically overpower the enemy when I get to the top. Once that's done, I expect to live in a hole for three months without bathing.
Darby's a very impressive young lady who I'm sure will go far in the Navy. I wish her all the best. But her desire to serve in combat is irrelevant, as is her remarkable physical strength. The realities of the infantryman's job, and to a lesser extent the engineer's, require more than heart and a good PT test.
Edited on May 19, 2012 at 12:03amJan '12
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
I'll have to ask with Mendel how the IDF fares with women in combat roles (assuming that they actually are on the front lines). I surely do not support promoting women in the military just for the sake of bowing to some PC mandate; but if my country should really, really be in danger, I'd just as soon have a few Momma Grizzlies defending hearth and home as anybody else.
When America was young, women did participate in guarding the frontiers. True, they served informally, in situations that were too fluid for reliance on organized armies. How they would fare in the more formal structure, I suspect, is an empirical question. How their potential comrades, the men in arms, would react must be addressed--and not by forcing the men just to accept the fact: group morale cannot be coerced; it must be earned. White soldiers accepted blacks not because of Truman's orders but because the blacks proved they could fight.
Bottom line: if certain women (and it's always an individual matter) can prove they can undertake the rigors, fine. I bet their "borthers" would treat them as "sisters." But no mandates!
Edited on May 19, 2012 at 12:13amJun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
I certainly agree with you there. That's what worries me.
Jun '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
FeliciaB: My nephew is in the army. He wanted to be a Ranger really, really bad. He's very strong, very agile. Unfortunately, he's not tall enough. That's it. He's made it all the way through Ranger School to be rejected simply because he's not tall enough.
I do not think the standards should be lowered. But I do think it is rather odd that a recruit can't be allowed to pass because he's not big enough. · 5 hours ago
How tall is he? One of my best friends is 5'3", and he's retired Ranger Instructor.
May '10
Re: It's Getting Harder To Be in the Army
I'm really surprised you feel this way, knowing your view on gay marriage. Aren't your arguments against female Rangers the same as those against gay marriage? Gays/women don't have the right physical equipment. Marriage/Ranger has a very specific meaning that will be fundamentally altered or diminished through this kind of change. The future of our country's society/security will be threatened by such change. If these arguments aren't reasonable in your eyes against SSM, why do they work against female soldiers? I'm not trying to be a jerk, it just doesn't make sense to me. Maybe it just comes down to feelings or what is really important to you?