Monday, June 10, 2019


Via Breitbart:

"LOS ALAMITOS, Calif. (AP) — The California National Guard has announced the appointment of the first woman to lead a U.S. Army infantry division.

Brig. Gen. Laura Yeager will take command of the 40th Infantry Division on June 29 at Joint Forces Training Base in Los Alamitos, California.

Yeager currently commands Joint Task Force North, U.S. Northern Command at Fort Bliss, Texas.

Yeager was commissioned in 1986 as a second lieutenant from the Reserve Officer Training Corps at California State University, Long Beach.

She served as UH-60 Black Hawk helicopter pilot, left active duty when her son was born and continued her military career in the California Army National Guard.

Yeager deployed to Iraq in 2011 as deputy commander of the Cal Guard’s 40th Combat Aviation Brigade, then served as a battalion and brigade commander."

I never served, so I think it is more apt to let experts speak. From the relevant comments section:

First one commenter who goes by the name Lycurgus_The_Law_Giver:

"She’s not allowed to fight (and rightly so), she would never win against an actual infantry man in actual combat, but she can command an infantry division? You are out of your mind. Women should never be allowed in the military. It costs just as much to train one woman as it does to train a man. Perhaps more. An army that is half women and half men will lose to an army of all men every time, all other factors being equal. If you don’t believe me, then let’s do a study. Let’s simulate the outcome. Let’s do a full dress rehearsal. Let’s have a full-scale combat exercise with a half woman / half man army versus an all man army, and let’s see what the outcome would be. You’d better be sure this is going to work, commanders, before you get into an actual war and lose, because this really is not going to work, and this is an enormous threat to our national security. All other things being equal, we are going to lose against a near peer adversary with an all man army, unless we are very, very lucky, or unless we are fighting a decisively inferior opponent, which is never guaranteed. A typical nation’s military is 1% or less of the size of its population. There is no reason whatsoever that we would need to draw on the female population to support the military. They can serve as un-armed nurses who do not need actual military training. It is vastly cheaper to train them just as nurses. They cannot be relied on as soldiers, so we cannot pretend that they are soldiers. They can assist with logistical supply lines as civilian contractors. They should never be trained with a weapon or given a weapon, because women are inherently unable to compete with men in combat, and they never will be able to compete with men in combat. I say this as a veteran who served in combat and saw the results of our failed experiment with female soldiers in combat. We lost 75% of our female “soldiers“ during our deployment to pregnancy, because none of them were the least bit interested In going to war, or using deadly force to defend their country. Those who did were usually promoted very quickly if they were pretty, Even if they were incompetent and had very poor judgment, and were probably the worst choice of all the people available for the job, but they had to promote a woman, or else they would be labeled sexist. They were all totally incapable of actually fighting in combat or commanding in combat, and they had a serious negative impact on the unit overall. They should have been wives of soldiers or serving in a purely civilian capacity. No one has a right to serve in the military. The nation decides who will best serve in the military, because the primary consideration is whether or not those who serve will win or not, and how we can best ensure they will win by selecting only the best candidates to serve, as the Spartans did through the Agoge. There is a reason why women have never before served in any military. If you ignore those lessons of history, you will be conquered."

Then, somewhat less nice/less elaborate, some guy named wrench2tc:

"I did convoy security in Iraq. The transportation units had females and every time we would get hit they would freak out and lose their composure. Absolutely worthless."

There are several prisms to look at this development and conclude it won't end well. I recall less than stellar combat records of female units in Israels wars, or the fact that Brig General Yeager as a helicopter pilot has no experience with ground troops (except, so it seems, as a medevac pilot).

But what I also have on my mind is the total bruhaha lately of letting transgender men-to-women athletes compete against genuine females and them clearly having the upper hand. Uh-huh. Thought so. ESPECIALLY in the armed forces, ESPECIALLY in ground combat units, a strong physique is a key issue.

To give just one example, one of the determining factors in the Brits winning the Falklands War, was the fact that post their landing in San Carlos, Royal Marines and Paras covered the 56 miles (90 kloms) to Port Stanley with a full kit in often atrocious weather... in three days. And 'full kit' typically amounts to an 80-pound (40 kilograms) load. They called it 'yomping'.

Your run of the mill ATHLETIC woman couldn't do that. Upper body strength, muscle mass, a pair of very stout legs and su-perb knees are paramount. Women-simply-don't-have-what-it-takes. That's not their fault or responsibility. It's biology. Males can't give birth. Same issue.

Sure, here and there and once in awhile you might come across a yompster. One in thousand perhaps. A statistical refugee. You can't build units with statistical refugees. Also, as a man you prolly wouldn't want to date these examples, although for the moment we won't go down that road.

You may argue that in her position, Brig General Yeager will never be required to do the physical part required of the grunts in the units she commands. And you are correct about that. Some of the most effective generals in world history weren't suited for anything like 'yomping' either. Famous Panzer General Hasso Von Manteuffel had a diminutive physique, yet he gave the Russians hell on the Eastern front and his 5. Panzer Armee advanced the furthest during the Battle of the Bulge, almost reaching the Meuse river.

But that is not the point. This promotion of Brig General Yeager is another dubious 'milestone' in the Diversity Nazis' transformation of the US military, another self-provided argument to usher women of all ranks into combat units, and it won't do the combat effectiveness of these units any good.

Bottom line is, this appointment is another denial of obvious truths, and one that in some near or distant future will inevitably lead to losses that could have been avoided. To unneccessary deaths.

But those insisting on this madness will never be the ones to pay the ultimate price.


No comments: