Monday, January 21, 2019

White/Pink Flag Militaries

No, not the French this time, who have been sharpened up a bit in the past 60 years, but the US military, again, who have been under the gun and proven wanting. Few Institutions have escaped the deleterious effects of Feminism and Leftism and assorted cultural engineering, as Oz knows all too well, and the American military is right there in the firing line too. One would have hoped that the Top Brass would put a hard and heavy foot down, but just as Oz has weenie Generals, so does America. The White Flag has been hoisted in the Marines, of all people.

It is the 'Wimmin Ishoo' again, which everyone hoped would go away when Trump grabbed the reins.

It hasn't. And that is because, I guess, the Generals appointed during the Obama regime may take a while to dislodge. Bureaucrats still hold sway too.

I have said before that I have no problem with women in the military, so long as they are not sent to do a man's job. The same holds for certain civilian roles too. Like fire and police work. Women, mostly,  - I have to be plain - are just not up to the job. Not when YOUR life depends upon them. 

Soldiering is HARD. 

Far harder than firefighting, which, let us face it, is damnably hard work.

Young people join with romanticised ideas of what it is about and for at least a year they are civilians pretending, trying on, becoming soldiers. They are expected to eventually do five times or more what they could do, possibly, a month before they got off the bus. Many fail.

Men fail training. Women fail training.

21C 'youth' educated, if it can be called that, by a feminised school system, will remain soft, weak and undisciplined shirkers well into their first year or two. Entitled and physically on a par with the disabled, they will need all the 'Instruction' they can get. Not lax rules.

But the boys fail at nowhere near the rate at which woman fail training. Men who pass toughen in a while and become productive and reliable. 

Their colleagues insist. 

Women however fail more and those that do get through suffer far more thereafter.  Their colleages give them hugs. 

IF women are to be soldiers, then they should be in dedicated, all-female formations. They can organise themselves to an appropriate standard. And carry the responsibility along with their lighter packs.

But that does not stop the Social Justice Warriors in the Bureaucracies.  

Richard Viguerie brought us up to date.
Marines Hoist White Flag To Social Justice Warriors
The United States Marine Corps may have battled America’s enemies from the halls of Montezuma to the shores of Tripoli, but today’s Marine Corps leadership has hoisted the white flag to social justice warriors demanding the Corps continue the destructive social engineering experiments of the Obama administration.
The latest Marine Corps capitulation courtesy of Marine Corps Commandant General Robert B. Neller was on the long-contentious issue of co-ed basic training.
Our friend Elaine Donnelly, founder and president of the Center for Military Readiness, gave us the heads-up that Neller quietly announced on a Friday afternoon that for the first time in history, a platoon of fifty enlisted female recruits would be housed and trained alongside five male platoons in the 3rd Training Battalion at the Marines’ Parris Island boot camp.
If this were a good and certain to be well-received policy, it would have been trumpeted from the parapet of the Pentagon. 
However, since the announcement was buried on a Friday afternoon news cycle in the midst of the government shutdown controversy you can be sure that Neller and the Obama holdovers at the Pentagon knew it would not be well-received by Republicans on the Hill, the conservative national defense constituency and a White House that doesn’t need or want another Obama-era policy to defend.
According to a Marine spokesman speaking to ABC News, boot camp recruit classes typically are much smaller in the winter months.  Housing one female platoon with five male ones in the 3rd Training Battalion allows temporary de-activation of the all-female 4th Training Battalion.
The excuse was lame, best says Elaine Donnelly.  
The Marines’ Delayed Entry Program (DEP) sends new recruits to boot camp on timetables set by the needs of the service, not the weather.  
Someone should find out why there aren’t enough female recruits to populate the 4th Training Battalion.  Perhaps young women are shunning recruiters because they know that once they sign up, they might be ordered into ground combat units on the same involuntary basis as men.
Officials also made the disingenuous claim that the “temporary” change would support “training efficiency.”  But within a week, Marine Corps Times reported that the female platoon co-located in the men’s training battalion “may not be the last.”
Speaking at a forum in Washington, D.C., Marine Sergeant Major Ronald Green said the service doesn’t “do things as a one-time deal.”  Green added that the intent is to give everyone “the greatest opportunity for success.” 
Marine Sergeant Major Green’s “I’d like to buy the world a Coke” comment failed to recognize that boot camp is not about individual “success.”  Its mission is to transform ordinary civilians into disciplined male and female Marines.
Elaine Donnelly also noted that the Marine Corps Times article confirmed General Neller’s needless campaign to increase the percentage of female Marines from 8.9% to 10%.  That quota, unfortunately, signals that the Marines are assigning highest priority to political correctness over mission readiness and combat lethality.  
The Trump Administration should revoke this and all gender diversity mandates, including the 25% quotas that still apply in in the Navy, Army, and Air Force.
Sergeant Major Green also said that assessments of the gender-mixed battalion would determine “whether it is a model the Corps should continue.”  Based on previous Pentagon practices, however, assessments of the gender-mixed battalion likely will center on sociological goals, not the primary military goal: 
transformation of undisciplined civilians into Marines.
Officials and media will claim that standards are “gender-neutral” and women are doing the same things as men. 
Half-truths such as this in all the services, however, are misleading says Elaine Donnelly.  Under the Dempsey Rule, which Donnelly named for former Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey, 
high standards that women cannot meet are being re-evaluated, dropped, or scored differently to ensure female trainee “success.”

An example of how this works occurred last year at the Marines’ Infantry Officer Course (IOC) at Quantico, VA.  As CMR reported in 2018, only one female officer out of more than thirty had passed the IOC.  Most failed on the grueling Combat Endurance Test (CET) – the first and toughest challenge in the Infantry Officer Course conducted at Quantico, VA.
The incredibly tough CET event was designed to identify and prepare infantry officers who are capable of leading other men on the battlefield, from the front.  With uncompromising physical demands and high attrition rates, the first-day test was working to separate the best from the rest.
The system was not broken, but in November 2017, without prior notice, General Neller decided to “fix” it.  
Neller changed the must-pass CET into a success-optional Combat Evaluation Test.  The acronym remains the same, but now the CET is just another evaluation data point.  Seven months later, a second female officer passed the course.
All branches of the service are struggling to make changes in basic physical fitness and combat fitness tests (PFT/CFT).  They are finding it difficult to challenge stronger men without causing disproportionate injuries among women.  Gender-normed scores are justifiable in basic, entry-level, and pre-commissioning training, but not in advanced courses qualifying personnel for the combat arms.

Donnelly says, and we agree, that controversies surrounding co-ed boot camp are only part of the larger debate about the consequences of treating men and women as if they are interchangeable in all military positions, including combat arms units such as the infantry.  This debate must include an honest re-assessment of conditions leading to sexual misconduct in the military -- a problem that eviscerates morale and readiness in America’s military, and may have roots in co-ed basic training.
In the classic military and bureaucratic imperative, promotable officers and drill instructors will do everything possible to ensure that women are happy.  Over time standards or evaluations will change without notice, and the incremental experiment will be declared successful, justifying more “progress” in the wrong direction.
Lest anyone think I am singling out the US for failing to properly acknowledge the demands placed upon their military people, the Oz military 'attitude' at top level is also in a woeful state. The 'cream' of fighters - The British Army - has also come under fire for the appalling adverts they recently released literally calling on snowflakes, the emotionally incontinent and homosexuals to join up and be welcomed in, and those all-so-reliable Muslims, for whom new rules have been instituted for them to down rifles in the thick of battle five times a day to pray to Allah for the overthrow of Infidels.

Hello !!

Have a drink.

We need it.



  1. I am in fact delighted to read this web site posts which carries lots
    of useful facts, thanks for providing these information.

    1. I am pleased you find it useful. Have a beer. :)

  2. Best I don’t get started on this one.

  3. Anything that weakens the U.S. military is actually a good thing. in fact it's a good thing for the United States. Or at least it's a good thing for the American people. The U.S. military does not serve the American people. It does not defend the American people. It serves the American Empire. And the American Empire is a bad thing for the American people.

    America's defeat in Vietnam was a good thing for the American people. It demonstrated the cost of foolish imperial adventures. Just as Britain's defeat in Malaya in WW2 demonstrated the necessity for Britain to give up imperial possessions that it could not defend and that were going to be a drain on Britain's resources that she could no longer afford.

    Imperial overreach seems inevitably to lead to decadence and internal decay, Rome being a prime example. Spain was the greatest imperial power in Europe in the early 17th century. By the end of that century Spain was ruined.

    I like Americans. They're good people. They deserve to have a prosperous healthy country which is what they had before they embarked on the folly of world empire. They need to give up their empire so they can rebuild their society and make it a great place for all Americans. To make America great again America has to go back to being a normal nation. Empires are not healthy.

    1. What a country directs its military to do, is one thing: the militariy's competence and integrity is quite another and on several levels. I am sure others would take issue with you while I pull a few pints.

    2. I would have to vehemently disagree with your statement that a weakened U.S. military is a good thing. It is the exact opposite. The competency of the military and its ability to maintain the ability to carry out its mission with utmost precision and lethality is essential. I somewhat agree that the U.S. should stop getting involved in other countries affairs,there are enough issues at home. However staying on the leading edge of war fighting capability is an absolute necessity in order to defend the nation and maintain its sovereign freedoms. A country which is unable to defend itself (by way of a weakened military) will ultimately lose that freedom and way of life.

    3. I am glad someone, you especially, took issue. A strong military is essential for national survival in our era. Historically there have always been 'invaders', attackers and run of the mill bad nations who would do harm even to the most mild of people. Belgium in WW1 , a case in point - simply over-run. America currently continues the role that Britain took upon itself for several hundred years. That role is fundementally benign. Yes, it can inflict pain - devastation even - but not willy-nilly.

      It is not the military that Dfordoom needs to see 'weakened' but the political mobs that need Integrity, courage, tenacity and a benign presence that deters aggression. Current sheer nastiness and cultural suicide is the issue to worry about. The 'weakening' of our militaries is directly attributable to politicians who do NOT have the best interests of the people nor the military in mind. Our western world is beset by weakened politicians.


Ne meias in stragulo aut pueros circummittam.

Our Bouncer is a gentleman of muscle and guile. His patience has limits. He will check you at the door.

The Tavern gets rowdy visitors from time to time. Some are brain dead and some soul dead. They attack customers and the bar staff and piss on the carpets. Those people will not be allowed in anymore. So... Be Nice..