tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post6594401400609956116..comments2023-06-15T09:13:45.467-04:00Comments on Liberty's Torch: The Terminus Of LiesFrancis W. Porrettohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05862584203772592282noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-78341602361247493402016-03-22T06:26:45.169-04:002016-03-22T06:26:45.169-04:00Once again it seems as if a whole generation has b...Once again it seems as if a whole generation has been brought up to see what should or might be an egalitarian solution rather than a realitic view of human nature.<br /><br />Men are bigger and stronger than women. Thousands of years of conflict have shown that Boudiceas (sp?) and Joan of Arcs are the exception rather than the rule.<br /><br />We can argue whether or not women's outlook on conflict might be better than men's, but when it comes to staving in an enemy's skull, thrusting a spear into his groin, marching through the alps, grovelling in a foxhole in Bastogne or "seeing the elephant" at Antietam or Verdun, can there be any realistic argument that the members of the human species that bear children should not be doing that?<br /><br />Particularly if they are weaker BY ALL THE EVIDENCE BEFORE OUR VERY EYES than their male counterparts?<br /><br />The desire to involve women in close combat seems to be motivated by only two nefarious ideals:<br /><br />1) "We're all in this together." Truly leftist and egalitarian. But if that was truly the case, where have all the woman been for thousands of years? And, no, the VERY few cases of women in combat do not prove this point.<br /><br />2) "We're all in this together, therefore women MUST be in the front lines." This is best answered by saying, "F*** you, you misogynist son of a bitch.<br /><br />3) "We're all in this together, and maybe having women in combat will change the male, patriarchical world." Yeah, trying to force your social views on human nature has always worked - NOT.<br /><br />4) "If just one woman wants to be in a combat outfit, who are we to deny her?" We're the millions of combat veterans who relied on our comrades to be physicaly capable of pounding 30 miles of turf and 60 pounds of shi* to be there physically. And willing to look at guts, death, the perversity of war and what it will mean to us for the rest of our lives so that our loved ones - including WOMEN - won't have to.<br /><br />5) "We're really trying to equate everthing to everything else. Cultures have no meaning. Differences of morality have no meaning. Genders have no meaning. You are no better than me. They deserve everything you have because who you are and what you have is luck or privilege. Men and women are the same, really, and whatever a society does - including fighting - is just a mass of animals, male or female."<br /><br />Again, fuck you.Tim Turnernoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6557458849091969678.post-83718372140746527022016-03-21T17:12:19.195-04:002016-03-21T17:12:19.195-04:00There has been social engineering going on within ...There has been social engineering going on within the military for quite some time now. I was there for the infamous (?!) Z-grams, sent Navy-wide by then Chief of Naval Operations (CNO) Adm. Zumwalt. There was not much rejoicing at that time. And as things progressed, there has been even less.<br /><br />What is sad about all of this. It could have been "solved" very easily from the get-go. Let anyone, of any gender, race, or creed, try out for any position available. (Assuming there are quarters for same, in the case of gender). If you can meet and or exceed existing standards and or qualifying test scores, if there is an opening...then you have as good a chance as anyone else to get it. But they had to (and are currently continuing to do so) lower standards and tests scores (cutoff scores for advancement for example) in order to meet "non-existant" quota(s) (temporary or otherwise). And THAT is what has gotten Sailors (and I am quite sure other military branches) p'ed off to the point where there is a lot less quality (albeit, the total force numbers have shrunk considerably since I was in, but still.) personnel who are willing to stay in for anything longer than one or maybe two tours of duty. <br /><br />We still have a viable force compared to many others, but that is quickly changing. And I am quite sure the Russians, Chinese, and various other folks are taking serious notes as to our overall readiness. Navvet55https://www.blogger.com/profile/10673304558959945267noreply@blogger.com