The good news: The military is hiring more women, meaning women will get the educational advantages that the military offers to lower middle class Americans.
The bad news: The
"Draft women" meme is about equality, not about military preparedness.
Women will eventually have to register for the draft if "true and pure equality" is to be realized in the U.S. military, Army Secretary John McHugh said Monday.
"If your objective is true and pure equality then you have to look at all aspects" of the roles of women in the military, McHugh said, and registration for the draft "will be one of those things. That will have to be considered."
silly me. The objective of the military is not "true and pure equality": the real objective of the military was about war.
But you wouldn't know it from
articles like this analysis, that assumes women are male carbon copies, and leaves out minor problems like would you think it's equality for women to be killed or injured in combat? And it ignores biologically related items like inter unit romance, menstruation, pregnancy, rape (especially if captured), and of course upper body strength.
There is a real problem in the US, in that the elites no longer join the military, and tend to look down on the type of Americans who do. It is also a problem because it means that
few veterans are in Congress, and many "elites" don't even know anyone who has served, meaning they miss the little details that are obvious to those serving but left out in "expert" analysis.
It says a lot that
Combat Barbie was British:
The dirty little secret is that war is about killing bad guys, and in modern warfare, to do it more efficiently and quietly so that the MSM doesn't call you a murderer.
as
Jim Webb discovered
“In fact, seeing the reaction to my father’s story in recent days has highlighted for me the almost stunning level of ignorance that the general public has about war. CNN introduced him as a ‘war hero,’ and yet people were surprised and even uncomfortable when they were given a glimpse of what that might have entailed. . . . This country has been at war for almost 15 years, and as I think about the ridicule leveled at my father in the past 24 hours, I can’t help but imagine what these same people must think about the service of my own generation. In their eyes, did we simply spend some kind of twisted ‘semester abroad’ in a place with plenty of sand, but no ocean? Or conversely, do they ignorantly dismiss our experiences, as they have my father, as those of cold callous killers?”
StrategyPage notes that women are in the military, but that there are practical reasons they are not in certain combat roles: (think biology related problems, especially the high injury rate) and they sarcastically note that those in charge of pushing the meme are not combat veterans.
StrategyPage's essay here will fill in the blanks...and
read this one. and
this one.
But when civilians with little hands on military experience push quotas etc. reality will push back.
StrategyPage:
reality:
A lot of the combat operations experienced by women in Iraq involved base security or guard duty. Female troops performed well in that. These were jobs that required alertness, attention to detail, and ability to quickly use your weapons when needed. Carrying a heavy load was not required. In convoy operations women have also done well, especially when it comes to spotting, and dealing with, IEDs (roadside bombs and ambushes). Going into the 21st century, warfare is becoming more automated and less dependent on muscle and testosterone. That gives women an edge, and they exploit it, just as they have done in so many other fields.
But the draft? No that is silly, not just for women but for men: because modern war requires brains and expertise, not bodies to be sent home in body bags. What are they thinking of? Pickett's charge?
Going into the 21st century, warfare is becoming more automated and less dependent on muscle and testosterone.
Another item not being discussed:
Most of the military support services (cooking, cleaning, laundry, nursing), was outsourced to military draftees during the days of the draft because it was cheaper than hiring civilians and many women in the military joined these support units.
Nowadays, you can just farm it out to civilians, by subcontracting Americans, hiring locals or just import Filipinos etc to do the cooking and driving.
In the "good old days" people who did this were called "Camp followers", and their use is often not noticed in official histories except as footnotes about the "supplies" being captured and destroyed by the enemies.
----------------------
news you can use:
Gizmodo: How many laser pointers would you need to kill a human? No, it's not a very efficient home made weapon: you would need 20,000 laser pointers to do it.
laser weapons are being worked on to kill satellites etc. but the way to go is actually
to use an EMP type weapon.
and yes,
you can make one of them at home. link2
----------------------
some compare the civil war in Syria to the Civil war in Spain in the 1930's. Back then, the elites cheered on the communists, but usually ignored or covered up the atrocities done by their pet commies: Orwell pointed some of these out, but even he hated Franco, whose atrocities were well known.
So what would have happened if the communist side won?
EdDriscoll points out that such a victory would have had larger implications in the following decades, linking to two articles that discuss the "what if's"....
For example the Hitler Stalin pact would have allowed Hitler to get Gibraltar...which would have cut off supplies to the British army in North Africa defending the Suez canal....
------------------------------
