One of the tenets of socialist ideology is social egalitarianism: we are all equal. And the mindset of the progressive socialist is to remove any barriers that state differently. This is why the move towards a person being whatever gender they feel like, or worse, penalizing those who strive harder and demonizing them as part of a wealth redistribution scheme.But if there’s one place terribly dangerous for this principle of socialism to exist, it’s in our military. We’re all aware of the Obama administration decree that all ground combat duty positions in the U.S. military would be open to females. interestingly enough, we haven’t heard anything from the Trump administration about rolling back that executive order, decree.
Now, we have an example of what will certainly be coming our way, if this policy stands for our Defense Department.As reported by the Daily Mail, “The [British] Army is re-writing its fitness tests to make sure women can qualify for front line units once rules are changed this year, it was reported today.
Physical differences between men and women will be recognized in the tests as Defense Secretary Michael Fallon prepares to sign off on plans to allow women into the most dangerous roles for the first time. Female soldiers are expected to be allowed to join close combat units, including the infantry and armored regiments, for the first time from this summer.
The reforms will come alongside changes to the Army’s physical training which is currently ‘optimized for male physiology’, the Sunday Times reported. The new standards will be introduced from 2019 and are intended to better balance the demands of a specific military role with the training given to the individual recruit.Research which has driven Mr Fallon’s expected decision found women were twice as likely to suffer musculoskeletal injuries during initial training. And analysis of recent Army recruits suggests only 30 women a year would pass the current physical standards for joining the front line units.
The study found: ‘We know that women are built differently to men — higher fat mass, less muscle mass, less cardio output, which leads to greater/quicker energy deficit than men and they have to work harder to achieve the same output.’ Sources told the Sunday Times the modified tests will not be aimed to ‘satisfy a gender requirement’ but will be an attempt to ‘drive down’ the number of women injured.
One test being reviewed is a requirement for women under 30 to be able to do 21 press-ups, 50 sit-ups and run one and a half miles in 13 minutes or less. Also under review is the requirement for infantry to complete an eight-mile march carrying a 55 lb rucksack within two hours. Colonel Richard Kemp, who commanded British forces in Afghanistan, warned: ‘You will have infantry soldiers who are less capable than they are today. ‘I have spoken to people who are serving in the infantry who said that if women are allowed in, they will leave.’ General Sir Nick Carter, chief of the general staff, said: ‘I want to make it very clear that there will be no lowering of training or qualifying levels for soldiers in ground close combat roles.’A Ministry of Defense spokesman said: ‘The MOD is undertaking a review to establish the physical standards required for ground close combat, which is due to complete in 2019.’It will be based upon the principle that any standards will be related to the required role rather than individual characteristics.”
Not for nothing, but can someone explain to me the rationale of saying we’re going to open all ground combat duty positions in the British Army to females…and we’re going to change the fitness standards, not to accommodate, but to prevent females from getting hurt?
Dude, Whiskey-Tango-Foxtrot? Give me a break, you mean someone is admitting that a female under 30 having to do 21 pushups, 50 sit-ups, and run 1.5 miles in 13 minutes is too strenuous, but let’s admit them into the Infantry?This is yet another example of the socialist mentality of equality of outcomes. We want females to be Infantrymen as an outcome and we shall manipulate the standards in order for that outcome to be achieved…by any means necessary. I just have to ask, does this mean the venerable British Special Air Service (SAS) is now open to female Soldiers, but at a physical fitness level far inferior to what is currently required? How does that make sense, and what chucklehead thought this a great idea?
Here in the United States military there are two differing fitness test charts, one for males and another for females. Furthermore, it is broken down by age group. What the UK Minister of Defense is about to do, and make no qualms about it, is lower the standards in order to accommodate a change in policy. And what unnerves me, and certainly Colonel Richard Kemp, whom I know personally, is that politicians and social egalitarians are willing to put the lives of Warriors on the line for this insidious, and unnecessary policy change.
Yes, I know, the Obama administration celebrated the female Army officers who graduated Ranger School. However, why have their evaluation sheets never been viewed? And did they have to achieve physical standards in alignment with the male Ranger school candidates, or just the female standard? I have to tell you, when you see a US Army female Soldier donning the Air Assault badge, ya gotta tip your hat. The final requirement of Air Assault school is to complete a 12-mile ruck march in under 2:59:59, not 3 hours, with a 35-40 pound rucksack in full combat gear. There is no equivocating, and when I completed the Air Assault school final requirement, I did it in under 2 hours 30 minutes coming in second in the entire class, I watched troops struggle and fail. And regardless of what you’d done in those tough ten days, if you did not meet the final requirement — which isn’t possible without running — you failed.
Therefore I ask, what does the UK MoD spokesperson mean when they say, “The MOD is undertaking a review to establish the physical standards required for ground close combat, which is due to complete in 2019.’It will be based upon the principle that any standards will be related to the required role rather than individual characteristics.”
You have to ask if this spokesperson has ever been on an extended long range patrol and having to carry ammo and supplies on their back…and a wounded teammate if necessary? So what this person is stating that the standards will be based on an individual, and not the mission, the duty, the role, the situation. So, am I to deduce that if you are a 120-pound male, the physical fitness standards will drop, or be changed, in order to meet your “individual characteristics?”
Combat is an unforgiving atmosphere and the margin of success is determined in lives that must achieve an objective. And on this current battlefield, it is even more unforgiving when you’re engaging the Islamic jihadists who are maniacal fanatics. Sure, there are those who will mention the Kurdish female infantry units who have been fighting against the Islamic State. However, ask yourself, in western society are we raising our daughters in the same mode or mentality? The Kurds have historically been superb and vicious Warriors, that is their culture. Nevertheless, can that singular Kurdish female go hand to hand with an ISIS fighter?
I continue to be greatly concerned with this “fairness” mentality that has consumed western society. Their is no fairness when one is fighting against another for their life. And if we’re so willing to risk our national security on this social equality endeavor, then when will the Brits allow females on the Manchester United or Chelsea Football Clubs?
Here in the United States, why do we need male and female MMA or UFC? Why is there an NBA and a WNBA? Heck, I’m quite sure Serena Williams can take Roger Federer in a tennis match. Doggone, we don’t need a men’s and women’s hockey team. And is it still necessary to have men’s and women’s track teams? Just let them all compete and run against each other. Why not? Apparently, when it comes what should be the most important, training and deploying Warriors into the fight, it’s just one big happy family and there are no true separations. Like the old folks used to say down South, “it’s all fun until someone gets hurt.”
And based on what was reported and happening with the UK Army, we have to allow females into ground combat units, but change the standard so they don’t get hurt. The real question is will UK Defense Minister Fallon go to ask the enemy to change their tactics so as not to hurt anyone? Damn, FUBAR!
[Want to read more? Check out Col. West’s book Guardian of the Republic: An American Ronin’s Journey to Faith, Family and Freedom]