• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

the feminization of our military.

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I really could not phrased it better then the General.


Where Have All Our Best Military People Gone? By Major General Paul Vallely, Ret.



Warrior leaders of General Patton’s or General LeMay’s stature are no longer wanted. The fundamental job of the military, "kill bad people and break their things," has become seriously hampered critically now by "rules of engagement" whose guiding logic is political, not successful, combat. If the US military is ever defeated, it will be because it is running the best Day Care centers in the world. We used to go to the Officers Club or NCO Club Stag Bar on Friday evenings to have a drink, smoke, and swap lies with our comrades.

Having a drink with friends is now frowned on. Smoking causes cancer and could "harm you." Bars are seen as ‘sexist.' Our personnel have quit patronizing their clubs because what happens in the club is now fodder for a performance report. In fact, now we don't have separate clubs for the ranks. Instead we have something called "All Ranks Clubs" or "Community Clubs." They're open to men and women of all ranks. But no one is there. I wonder why.

The latest brilliant thought out of Washington is that the operators ("pilots?") flying remote pilotless aircraft in combat areas from their plush desk at duty stations in Nevada or Arizona should draw the same combat pay as those real world pilots actually on board a plane in a hostile environment while being shot at. More politically correct logic? They say that remote vehicle operators are subject to the same stress levels as the combat pilot actually flying in combat. REALLY...you're bull-****ting me!!!???

Where are the people like the dynamic leaders of the past, such as Robin Olds, Doolittle, Patton, Ike, Boyington, Nimitz, etc.? They are identified, and forced out, that’s where they are going.


This administration doesn't want those kinds of leaders anymore. Division commanders don't run Divisions and Corps commanders don't run Corps. They are managed by selected high ranking admins with other esoteric goals in mind. Can you imagine someone today looking for a LEADER to execute that Doolittle Raid and suggesting that it be given to a daredevil boozer -- his only attributes: he had the respect of his men, an awesome ability to fly, and the organizational skills to put it all together? If someone told me there was a chance in hell of selecting that man today to run that mission today, I would tell them they were either a liar or dumber than hell.

We have lost the war on rugged individualism and that, unfortunately, is what fighting forces want to follow; not because they have to but because they respect leaders of that ilk. We've all run across that leader that made us proud to follow him because you wanted to be like him and make a difference.
 
Last edited:
There is a word for all this. Probably not permitted here.
 
Someone needs to remind the nice general that it's not 1945 anymore.
 
Anyone who actually thinks that the fundamental job of the military is to "kill bad people and break their things" definitely does not understand the military.
 
I really could not phrased it better then the General.


Where Have All Our Best Military People Gone? By Major General Paul Vallely, Ret.



Warrior leaders of General Patton’s or General LeMay’s stature are no longer wanted. The fundamental job of the military, "kill bad people and break their things," has become seriously hampered critically now by "rules of engagement" whose guiding logic is political, not successful, combat. If the US military is ever defeated, it will be because it is running the best Day Care centers in the world. We used to go to the Officers Club or NCO Club Stag Bar on Friday evenings to have a drink, smoke, and swap lies with our comrades.

Having a drink with friends is now frowned on. Smoking causes cancer and could "harm you." Bars are seen as ‘sexist.' Our personnel have quit patronizing their clubs because what happens in the club is now fodder for a performance report. In fact, now we don't have separate clubs for the ranks. Instead we have something called "All Ranks Clubs" or "Community Clubs." They're open to men and women of all ranks. But no one is there. I wonder why.

The latest brilliant thought out of Washington is that the operators ("pilots?") flying remote pilotless aircraft in combat areas from their plush desk at duty stations in Nevada or Arizona should draw the same combat pay as those real world pilots actually on board a plane in a hostile environment while being shot at. More politically correct logic? They say that remote vehicle operators are subject to the same stress levels as the combat pilot actually flying in combat. REALLY...you're bull-****ting me!!!???

Where are the people like the dynamic leaders of the past, such as Robin Olds, Doolittle, Patton, Ike, Boyington, Nimitz, etc.? They are identified, and forced out, that’s where they are going.


This administration doesn't want those kinds of leaders anymore. Division commanders don't run Divisions and Corps commanders don't run Corps. They are managed by selected high ranking admins with other esoteric goals in mind. Can you imagine someone today looking for a LEADER to execute that Doolittle Raid and suggesting that it be given to a daredevil boozer -- his only attributes: he had the respect of his men, an awesome ability to fly, and the organizational skills to put it all together? If someone told me there was a chance in hell of selecting that man today to run that mission today, I would tell them they were either a liar or dumber than hell.

We have lost the war on rugged individualism and that, unfortunately, is what fighting forces want to follow; not because they have to but because they respect leaders of that ilk. We've all run across that leader that made us proud to follow him because you wanted to be like him and make a difference.

Boy I have to agree 110% with you. Politics in this country, since the seventies I think has changed the face of the military and made it more trouble to be in than it;s worth to a lot of people: the very idea that some 19 year old girl is going to yell at you with some sort of perceived authority was enough to shy me away from the reserves. And putting women in combat is the worst idea they could have come with: women storming Omaha Beach, imagine... captured by nazis, and US troops would have to behave themselves in the murderous riot that is war so that they won't offend anybody.

We don't do war anymore as it is, so we've made it less dangerous and offensive for them.
 
Boy I have to agree 110% with you. Politics in this country, since the seventies I think has changed the face of the military and made it more trouble to be in than it;s worth to a lot of people: the very idea that some 19 year old girl is going to yell at you with some sort of perceived authority was enough to shy me away from the reserves. And putting women in combat is the worst idea they could have come with: women storming Omaha Beach, imagine... captured by nazis, and US troops would have to behave themselves in the murderous riot that is war so that they won't offend anybody.

We don't do war anymore as it is, so we've made it less dangerous and offensive for them.

Women were on the front lines in stalingrad, the battle that truly won the war. From Chuicov: "Remembering the defence of Stalingrad, I can't overlook the very important question ... about the role of women in war, in the rear, but also at the front. Equally with men they bore all the burdens of combat life and together with us men, they went all the way to Berlin." - Bellamy, 2007

The men in an american city defending itself to the last, now that is a fantasy to laugh about
 
Women were on the front lines in stalingrad, the battle that truly won the war. From Chuicov: "Remembering the defence of Stalingrad, I can't overlook the very important question ... about the role of women in war, in the rear, but also at the front. Equally with men they bore all the burdens of combat life and together with us men, they went all the way to Berlin." - Bellamy, 2007

The men in an american city defending itself to the last, now that is a fantasy to laugh about


Women were treated like beef by Stalin, so were the men. The US has always considered itself a higher civilization not suffering from desperation. The ONLY reason that Stalin won that battle is that he threw human beings like ants at the nazis. I am not opposed to women working on the front, as they have throughout our history, however, putting women in combat lines is a mistake in my view.
 
I really could not phrased it better then the General.


Where Have All Our Best Military People Gone? By Major General Paul Vallely, Ret.



Warrior leaders of General Patton’s or General LeMay’s stature are no longer wanted. The fundamental job of the military, "kill bad people and break their things," has become seriously hampered critically now by "rules of engagement" whose guiding logic is political, not successful, combat. If the US military is ever defeated, it will be because it is running the best Day Care centers in the world. We used to go to the Officers Club or NCO Club Stag Bar on Friday evenings to have a drink, smoke, and swap lies with our comrades.

Having a drink with friends is now frowned on. Smoking causes cancer and could "harm you." Bars are seen as ‘sexist.' Our personnel have quit patronizing their clubs because what happens in the club is now fodder for a performance report. In fact, now we don't have separate clubs for the ranks. Instead we have something called "All Ranks Clubs" or "Community Clubs." They're open to men and women of all ranks. But no one is there. I wonder why.

The latest brilliant thought out of Washington is that the operators ("pilots?") flying remote pilotless aircraft in combat areas from their plush desk at duty stations in Nevada or Arizona should draw the same combat pay as those real world pilots actually on board a plane in a hostile environment while being shot at. More politically correct logic? They say that remote vehicle operators are subject to the same stress levels as the combat pilot actually flying in combat. REALLY...you're bull-****ting me!!!???

Where are the people like the dynamic leaders of the past, such as Robin Olds, Doolittle, Patton, Ike, Boyington, Nimitz, etc.? They are identified, and forced out, that’s where they are going.


This administration doesn't want those kinds of leaders anymore. Division commanders don't run Divisions and Corps commanders don't run Corps. They are managed by selected high ranking admins with other esoteric goals in mind. Can you imagine someone today looking for a LEADER to execute that Doolittle Raid and suggesting that it be given to a daredevil boozer -- his only attributes: he had the respect of his men, an awesome ability to fly, and the organizational skills to put it all together? If someone told me there was a chance in hell of selecting that man today to run that mission today, I would tell them they were either a liar or dumber than hell.

We have lost the war on rugged individualism and that, unfortunately, is what fighting forces want to follow; not because they have to but because they respect leaders of that ilk. We've all run across that leader that made us proud to follow him because you wanted to be like him and make a difference.

So the general has his panties in a wad because drone operators are getting an extra 900 a month to help draw more people to fill the jobs. Source: Air Force Doubles Extra Pay for Drone Pilots to $1,500 per Month | Military.com

The U.S. Air Force is more than doubling special pay for some drone pilots to $1,500 a month -- a move designed to address a personnel shortage in the highly stressed workforce.
Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James announced the service will increase monthly incentive pay for senior operators of so-called remotely piloted aircraft, or RPAs, from about $600 a month to $1,500 a month.
"I just signed the memo earlier today," James said during a State of the Air Force briefing Thursday at the Pentagon, though she didn't specify how soon the additional money will be available for qualifying airmen. It would target those who have finished their initial six-year service commitment.

That's right, the general is all pissed because some one got a good deal in an effort to attract more people to the job. A job that, for example, does not qualify those pilots for Aviation Continuation Pay(up to 25,000 dollars a year). Yeah, **** mr. petty ass general and his bitch about people getting extra money for a job it is hard to attract people to. No one lost anything, no one is harmed by this. And how many of these drone operators are getting a raise? Fewer than 10...
 
These dinosaurs who see women as somehow lesser need to move on to retirement. ASAP.
 
Anyone who actually thinks that the fundamental job of the military is to "kill bad people and break their things" definitely does not understand the military.

No, that would be you.

Armies exist for the sole purpose of killing human beings in defense of the interests of the community responsible for raising them, and are meant to be so ruthlessly efficient, and therefore intimidating, in the pursuit of that goal that no one would dare challenge them in the first place, averting the need for their use.

"If you want peace, prepare for war."
 
Last edited:
Someone needs to remind the nice general that it's not 1945 anymore.

Some one needs to teach the pissy general about history, since even 1945 was not like he thinks. Patton? The guy who got **** canned from combat command for a year for slapping two soldiers(one was feverish from malaria, one was feverish from dehydration, causing confusion and stresses emotional state) and said combat fatigue was, and I quote "an invention of the Jews". Ike and Nimitz, who where more than anything politicians, and damn good at it? And did he really think there where no rules of engagement in WW2?
 
No, that would be you.

Armies are exist for the sole purpose of killing human beings in defense of the interests of the community responsible for raising them, and meant to be so ruthlessly efficient in that task that no one would dare challenge them in the first place, therefore averting the need for their use.

Ironically, you think you're defending the OP's claim about the fundamental purpose of armies, but what you're actually saying is something very different.
 
I would go with pussifying the military since we are well past feminizing the military.
 
Women were treated like beef by Stalin, so were the men. The US has always considered itself a higher civilization not suffering from desperation. The ONLY reason that Stalin won that battle is that he threw human beings like ants at the nazis. I am not opposed to women working on the front, as they have throughout our history, however, putting women in combat lines is a mistake in my view.

As if omaha beech wasn't sheer desperation and using young men as cattle. Where else would they retreat to, back to the sea? They were just bodies to throw at the artillery. The men wouldn't have any time to stand around gawking at the women who were shot there, or whatever your excuse for segregation is

btw your "higher civilization" bit sounds awfully weak, borderline pussification. Best to keep attitudes like that out of the military, to correct the problem huh
 
Anyone who actually thinks that the fundamental job of the military is to "kill bad people and break their things" definitely does not understand the military.

Well, that is their job.
 
Ironically, you think you're defending the OP's claim about the fundamental purpose of armies, but what you're actually saying is something very different.

No, I'm not. You simply fail to understand even the most basic aspects of military theory.

Militaries exist to kill, and dominate. Granted, in their proficiency with regard to those tasks, they instill fear in others which - under ideal circumstances - will hopefully lessen the need for their use in the first place.

Frankly, however, if it is your own side that is actually on the offensive, the latter part of the equation is irrelevant anyway.
 
Last edited:
No, I'm not. You simply fail to understand even the most basic aspects of military theory.

Militaries exist to kill, and dominate. In their proficiency with regard to those tasks, they instill fear in others which - under ideal circumstances - will hopefully lessen the need for their use in the first place.

Frankly, if it is your own side that is actually on the offensive, the latter part of the equation is irrelevant anyway.

The US for quite a long time had no standing army. Intelligence gathering is one thing, but deployment is ideally and justifiably used for self defense only
 
The US for quite a long time had no standing army. Intelligence gathering is one thing, but deployment is ideally and justifiably used for self defense only

That is ideology, not reality.

Whether on offense or defense, the primary purpose of a military is always to kill, destroy, and dominate. If it cannot efficiently accomplish that goal, it will be butchered by one that can.
 
Back
Top Bottom