0915A1-640x336

So if you are still drinking this administrations Kool Aide, read the below back lash from the recent decision to allow females into combat roles. Letting females into combat roles is problematic to say the least but don't take my opinion, as others are echoing it. Some will say what do you infantry Marine types out there know anyway? Those in Washington sitting in offices who have never been in the infantry know better. Then let that thought sink in.Time for a C-Gar

Legendary Marine Sergeant Major Goes on Epic Rant Over Obama Admin Push for Women in Combat

A legendary Marine Sergeant Major is fed up with the Obama administration’s push for women in combat despite overwhelming evidence that it will put Marines lives in danger.

Sergeant Major Justin LeHew, known as “The Hero of Nasiriyah”, took to Facebook after Secretary of the Navy Ray Maybus said the Marines should have chosen better females for the failed mixed gender combat experiment.

In the epic rant, SgtMaj LeHew says:

“…This was as stacked as a unit could get with the best Marines to give it a 100 percent success rate as we possibly could. End result? The best women in the GCEITF as a group in regard to infantry operations were equal or below in most all cases to the lowest 5 percent of men as a group in this test study.

Also a good read:
 

The Problems of Women in Combat – From a Female Combat Vet

It’s not all about qualification. I’m speaking as a female Marine Iraq war vet who did serve in the combat zone doing entry checkpoint duty in Fallujah, and we worked with the grunts daily for that time. All the branches still have different standards for females and males. Why? Because most women wouldn’t even qualify to be in the military if they didn’t have separate standards. Men and women are different, but those pushing women into combat don’t want to admit that truth. They huff and puff about how women can do whatever men can do, but it just ain’t so. We’re built differently, and it doesn’t matter that one particular woman could best one particular man. The best woman is still no match for the best man, and most of the men she’d be fireman-carrying off the battlefield will be at least 100 lbs heavier than her with their gear on.

Read the rest of this story here

 

Comments

  1. WOMEN IN GROUND COMBAT UNITS – WHERE’S THE DATA?
    http://warontherocks.com/2015/04/women-in-ground-combat-units-wheres-the-data/#comment-848068
    Jon says:
    April 16, 2015 at 1:15 pm
    THE DATA:
    15 lbs. of 5.56/magazines (13x).
    8 lbs. of water. (1 gal)
    35 lbs. of armor and helmet
    6 lbs. grenades.
    2-4 lbs. medical pack.
    14 lbs. weapons.
    10 lbs. “other”.
    Total: 90 lbs
    That, is just what you’re carrying on your body on an ODA.
    To that, in the ruck on your back, you can add food, coms, batteries, GPS, NVGs, Claymore, 5-6 loaded pistol mags, your share of the extra 40mm rounds, an extra belt or two for the MGs, sleeping bag/personal items…and any mission or team gear.
    Call it 150 lbs. or more…and you have to be able to carry it in any climate, in any terrain. Not just for days or weeks, but for months and years. If you can’t, then why waste a million bucks and 1-2 years in training?
    What other “data” is needed?
    MM says:
    April 17, 2015 at 10:11 am
    Plenty of males don’t make the cut to serve in special operations, why do they think there are any women that can, when they don’t even have to pass the same standards as males in conventional units.
    1. Jon says:
    April 19, 2015 at 1:43 am
    “Making the cut” is only part of it. Once you’ve made it through selection, there’s 1-2 years of hard training. More wear and tear. That’s just to get you to an ODA…where your real training begins.
    Once on an ODA, it takes about 3-5 years to get an SF guy trained/sent to schools and enough experience to the point of being really useful…then on average, he’s got about another 3-5 years worth of wear and tear left in him. And will probably average 300 days a year deployed. Call it maybe 10 good years max. Then he’s either a team sergeant, on Group or battalion staff, permanent profile/instructor.
    If he’s a team sgt…now he’s an overage, wore out, broken down guy gritting his teeth, popping pills, to keep functioning and keep up with the young guys. By that point, every minor and most of his major joints have been dislocated at least once, he’s had multiple broken bones, he’s typically had at least one major spinal trauma, and his knees are wore down to bone on bone…but he’s afraid to have surgery, because they always end up worse.
    Where women fit into that…escapes me.
    • Editor of the Fabius Maximus website says:
    April 15, 2015 at 3:30 pm
    Speaking of data — there are relevant and objective data which the military has but does not release: accident & pregnancy rates, and physical and mental disability claims — for men and women by MOS and deployment history.
    It was widely said after Gulf War I that it was easier to get the Presidential nuclear war codes from the “football” than pregnancy data from DoD. We now have a far larger body of data about this aspect of women’s performance in a broad range of roles (including some forms of front-line duty). It should be released for outside analysis before taking further steps.
    To mention just one factor, there is some evidence that women’s health is adversely affected by some forms of military duty. Such as stress fractures in basic training and some kinds of heavy duty. This can have bad effects on both the women affected — and on the government if it results in disability claims (40+ years of payments).

Leave a Reply