Thursday, January 24, 2013
Yea! Girl SEALS!!! Now That's Progress!
Is there anything that the US does well that our politicians won't foul up?
Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta announced today that he is lifting the ban on females serving in frontline combat roles.
Does anyone honestly believe that the physical standards won't be changed for women? Certainly, there will be some women who might be able to meet the real standards but without a doubt not enough to satisfy the politically correct fairness police.
In a world where we already aren't respected by our enemies for our stupid policy of buying their oil when we have plenty available to us in our own country, will we gain respect in their eyes by letting our women fight our battles for us?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
8 Herbert Crescent; Knightsbridge, London, United Kingdom. It's an unassuming address for an unpretentious group. "Quiet professionals" are rare in a society whose norms are defined by Lindsay Lohan. But here, in amongst the dusty books, and dingy drapes of the UK Special Forces Club you'll find them, the precious few who remain. Old warriors sharing a bottle of gin, a few laughs, and their memories as if time had stood still. Most in their nineties now, these are the operators of the UK SOE, the Special Operations Executive created alongside Col. Wild Bill Donovan's US Office of Strategic Services (OSS) in the early days of WWII when democracy was staring into the abyss. Ascend the staircase from the lobby to the bar and dining room and you walk in a hall of heroes. Their photos line the staircase, black frames for those who were tortured and killed by the Nazis, their citations inform us of their exploits, each one seemingly more impressive than the last. More than a third of them are women. Lucie Aubrac, and the woman the SS called "The White Mouse" Nancy Wake, Pearl Witherington, Eileen Nearne, and scores of others. And so with the decision in the US to open all combat roles to women, history comes full circle. Those who doubt the contribution of women to Special Operations don't know Special Operations. To those who believe that women have no place in Special Operations, I simply say read your history. Or if you dare, stop by 8 Herbert Crescent in Knightsbridge and tell one of the little old ladies quietly sipping gin at the bar on the first floor your point of view. But stop to read the stories on the way up. My bet is that by the time you're at the top of the stairs you'll have changed your mind.
ReplyDeleteBV: Thanks for sharing this interesting historical perspective. It compelled me to learn more about these brave women. There is more information available than one would imagine and anyone interested in the Second World War or the origins of our CIA or the British MI-6 should make it a point to learn more about the role of women in the dangerous and shadowy world of WWII espionage and resistance operations.
ReplyDeleteThat said, my objection to women in front line combat units is first moral and then practical. Putting aside the moral argument and focusing on the practical aspects, the stories of the women who served in the British SOE and the American OSS don't really make a strong case for women in the physically demanding combat roles such as infantry, artillery, or special operations forces. The vast majority of the SOE and OSS women were engaged in activities such as espionage, sabotage or logistical support for resistance operations. They were couriers, wireless operators, and intelligence gatherers. For the most part, they were not combatants; they were spies. Yes very perilous work requiring great bravery, coolness under pressure, daring and nerve but not necessarily physically strength or ruggedness.
BV, both you and I know that military bases around the country all have obstacle courses with a 6 foot wall for women and an 8 foot wall for the men. The push-up, sit-up, and run time requirements are different. This is fine for ensuring that men and women are in physically good shape. The standards are different as they should be. I might also note that, from the practical argument only, I don't object to women flying combat aircraft or serving in ships for example where the human-machine interface is a great equalizer and makes the physical strength aspect far less of an issue. If the physical standards are guaranteed to remain the same, that would be one thing and certainly there would be some women capable of meeting those standards. But we know that won't be the reality of the situation. The numbers of women making the grade won't be high enough so the standards will be lowered!
We are talking physics here not fairness. If the mission requires a 6 minute mile for 5 miles or an hour for a 3 mile open water swim, that's what it takes. It makes no difference who is doing it. A 60mm mortars weighs 57lbs and a 155mm artillery shell weighs 95lbs regardless of who is carrying or passing them. There is no female or male F=ma. Top female athletes can easily best the average man but can't touch the best male athletes and there won't be any 'Ladies Tees' in combat.