Bonehead rule


Some time back, I complained here about the U.S. Marine Corps opening its infantry officer training course to the fairer sex.

Typically, America’s federal government paid me no mind.

And now it’s gotten even worse. The entire American military is erasing all bans on women in direct combat.

This is, of course, part of the silly and sadly expanding left-wing poppycock that all people are equal in all circumstances at all times.

While it is true that some societies have on rare occasion done something similar, it was always out of dire necessity. There is absolutely no necessity for the United States to do this. It is pure left-wing ideology at work.

Columnist Kathleen Parker focuses her clear eye on the nonsense.

19 thoughts on “Bonehead rule”

  1. I guess Canada is one of the countries you refer to in your last paragraph but we have had female soldiers for decades. Never a problem. From the CBC website:

    The Canadian Armed Forces opened all occupations, including combat roles, to women in 1989. Only submarines were excluded and they followed in 2000.
    About 15 per cent of Canadian Forces personnel are women.
    About two per cent of Canadian regular force combat troops are women.

    We currently have 230 female soldiers serving in Afghanistan and ” In May 2006, Canada experienced its first loss of an active combat female soldier. Capt. Nichola Goddard died on the front lines during a battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan.”

    We had 43 female military killed in WW1. Nobody made a big deal of it. Any dead soldier is a symbol of a failed effort, not just women.

    I believe the job of any military is to defend their own country, not go kick sand in some skinny foreigner’s face. When it comes to actually defending our own country, everyone should take part, women included. This is the only circumstance I would ever take part.


          1. Canada, like much of the free world since the end of World War II, gets a free ride under the protective umbrella of the United States. This has been of great benefit to them.


  2. Hey, the way I think about it, is they wanted it, so now I don’t want to hear any bitching about it or the results.

    And I have seen some pretty rough mamas I wouldn’t want to meet in a dark alley, they should go first. There was an old saying about that, which I will not repeat.


    1. Ms. Mommy: Support roles and women are an excellent fit in the military, and that’s where it should end. And yes, this topic often brings up Israel. Not comparable to the U.S. situation. Israel fits into the necessity category where indeed women have sometimes actually been in combat positions, but not nearly so much as the hype would have one believe. Israel is a relatively sparsely populated nation surrounded by hordes of religious crackpots who want to see all Israelis dead.

      What the United States is doing is 100 percent political correctness nonsense.


  3. Don’t forget that that US military is 100% volunteers. Any man that does want to serve with gays or women, don’t.


    1. David: Quite true. However, that’s not really the issue at hand.

      But the fact that there is no draft makes it even more obvious that what’s being done is pure PC. There is no crying call for additional manpower. Oops, I mean person-power.


  4. I have served in the Canadian Army. I wouldn’t want women on the front lines. There is still a sense of chivalry left in mankind (at least in our part of the world). This opens the door to multiple problems. Having said that, this summer, while doing some Harley riding, I ran into about 20 or so Dykes on Bikes. They were more scary than most guys I see. So, having said that, it’s an “after you Ladies.”


Comments are closed.