Page 8 of 10 FirstFirst ... 45678910 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 182

Thread: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

  1. #141
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    Political Correctness Has Destroyed The Army’s Readiness And Morale

    May 11, 2015

    The U.S. Army is facing its greatest danger as an institution since the 1970’s. Stricken with morale and readiness problems, it is also under attack from leftist social engineers who are determined to remake the Army, even if they have to destroy it.

    In the 1980’s, men who carried the burden of terrible lessons learned in Vietnam rebuilt the U.S. Army. They created a spectacularly professional force that annihilated Saddam’s legions in a defeat not seen since Agincourt.

    That Army is nearly extinct.

    During the Clinton administration, the Army was under pressure to open all military occupational specialties to women and to change the culture of the institution. Army policy soon included stress cards, coed basic training, ability group runs and sensitivity classes.

    These changes accelerated rapidly under both Obama administrations. Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell was repealed in 2011 and two years later, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta removed the ban on women in direct combat roles. Recently, the Army announced it would soon allow transgendered people to serve in its ranks.

    You would think that these seismic cultural shifts would cause the Army to finally put its foot down.

    Not a sound has been heard from the Pentagon.

    Where are leaders with intestinal fortitude like Colonel David Hackworth, who in 1971 went on ABC’s Issues and Answers, and told the world that the U.S. would never win in Vietnam?

    The brass is more worried about their retirement checks than an institution that has been around since the Massachusetts boys went live in 1775. The current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, sits calmly on the bridge of the U.S. Army Titanic, sipping Pentagon coffee as the Army collides head on with an iceberg.

    Under Dempsey, whom Senator John McCain called “An echo chamber of the Obama Administration,” the Army has become a repository for every crackpot feminist fantasy conceived in a Berkeley coffeehouse.

    Two weeks ago, male Army ROTC cadets were ordered to parade around several college campuses in red high heels, in order to show their concern for sexual abuse. Current Army training involves classes that portray the Bible, the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence as sexist documents.

    The Army has been ordered to allow women into the combat arms and special operations. Previously, women were denied these jobs because women do not possess the upper body strength that the combat arms requires. Women are also more prone to injuries and there are hygienic concerns as well.

    Logic means nothing to the Obama administration. President Obama doesn’t understand that the Army exists to defend the nation. It’s not Valerie Jarrett’s pet social engineering project.

    As reports filter in that women are 0-26 at Marine Infantry Officers’ School, Dempsey has already stated that the standards need to be “reviewed.” In Pentagon double-speak, this means that the standards will be dropped so much that Betty White could pass.

    Currently, there are a handful of women attending the hardest training the U.S. Army has to offer, Ranger School. This grueling 62 day course destroys men with the speed of a hotel power flush.

    Men who survive endless days of almost no sleep, limited food, parachute jumps with 100 pound packs and patrols through swamps, crawl out of Ranger School with 1,000 yard Guadalcanal stares.

    Have no doubt, there will be a female graduate of Ranger School this summer if she has to be carried around Fort Benning like a camouflage-clad character in “Weekend at Bernie’s.”

    The warrior culture is slowly being strangled to death by political correctness. A few real leaders still survive, but they’re relics of a bygone era, who will be swept aside like chimney soot in the vast cultural revolution that has engulfed the Army.

    Anyone suspected of not complying with sexism training or whispering comments that are thought to be politically incorrect is purged with the speed and finality of a Soviet commissar’s rubber stamp.

    Under the Obama administration hundreds of high-ranking officers from every service have retired or have been forced to retire because they didn’t fit in with the current climate.

    What kind of a military does political correctness produce? Look no farther than our half-hearted air campaign against ISIS and its kind and gentle spokesman, Rear Admiral Kirby.

    According to Kirby, the 25 daily sorties we’re flying against ISIS is really giving them hell. Shock and awe has metastasized into slap, scream and run.

    The wave of political correctness besieging the Army has had predictable results. Last week the American public was informed that despite a $278 million program to make everyone in the Army feel good, morale is down to post-Vietnam levels. The troops have spoken. They want to be in the Army, not a Gloria Steinem encounter group.

    Last month, General Odierno warned Congress that Army readiness is at “historically low levels.” Only a third of the Army’s brigades are fit for combat and sequestration can only do more damage to the Army’s fighting capability.

    The Army must once again rebuild itself. Women in the Army aren’t the problem. Political correctness is. Women can do 80 percent of the jobs in the Army and do them magnificently.

    Bring back the warrior culture by discharging the feather merchants and perfumed princes. In the 1970’s, the Army repaired itself from the bottom up. This time the problem is at the top.

    If nothing is done, the Army will continue to decline as a capable fighting force that can defend the nation and win wars. The national security will be in jeopardy. In his farewell speech to the cadets at West Point, General MacArthur remarked, “The Long Gray Line has never failed us. Were you to do so, a million ghosts in olive drab, in brown khaki, in blue and gray, would rise from their white crosses thundering those magic words: Duty, Honor, Country.”

    The ghosts know the gravity of the situation at hand. Does the Pentagon?

  2. #142
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    Navy Secretary Wants Marine Corps Infantry Open To Women

    September 1, 2015

    Marine infantry and special operations specialties will soon open to women, if the head of the Navy Department gets his way.

    As deadlines loom on decisions about whether to allow women into front-line combat jobs, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus called for opening all billets to female troops who can meet the rigorous standards.

    Marine officials will soon offer their recommendations, but Mabus, the civilian secretary who leads the Navy Department — including the Marine Corps — made clear that he must sign off on the decision to seek any exemptions to opening all jobs to women, and he hasn't had a change of heart.

    "That's still my call, and I've been very public," Mabus said in an exclusive Sept. 1 interview. "I do not see a reason for an exemption."

    Mabus said both sea services should keep physical standards unchanged.

    His call for opening all military occupational specialties to women follows Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jon Greenert's assertion in late August that the Navy would not seek an exemption for its legendary SEAL teams.

    All of the services have until Oct. 1 to submit their exemption requests to Defense Secretary Ash Carter, and the Marine Corps has not indicated whether it intends to do so. Mabus, however, signaled that his mind was largely made up.

    "My understanding of how the process works is that I'm the one that asks [the Defense Department] for the exemption," he said. "Now, other voices will be heard, the way [former Defense Secretary Leon] Panetta lined it up — I think, the way I read it — is that if the [Navy] Department doesn't ask for an exemption, they will open."

    While Mabus will have the last say for the Marine Corps' own billets, U.S. Special Operations Command must also sign off on the Marine Corps Forces Special Operations Command troops it oversees, as with the Navy SEALs. If SOCOM does not seek an exemption, MARSOC and SEAL teams will open to women on Jan. 1, 2016, along with any other jobs still closed to women.

    Marine brass have stayed tight lipped about whether they'll seek gender exclusions. In a July hearing for his confirmation as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Marine Corps Commandant Gen. Joseph Dunford did not let on whether a decision was in-hand.

    "We have looked at this issue pretty hard," he told the Senate committee. "I expect the data that we've collected over the past 18 months in a very deliberate, responsible way to be available to me in the August-September timeframe. And we'll meet the timeline established by Secretary [Leon] Panetta and General [Martin] Dempsey in the letter from 2012."

    Dunford is on track to send his recommendations to Mabus in the next few weeks, his spokesman Lt. Col. Eric Dent told Marine Corps Times in late August.

    Though Dunford is scheduled to assume the top Joint Chiefs role next month, officials said Dunford plans to make the recommendations regarding women in combat roles before Gen. (sel.) Robert Neller takes over as commandant.

  3. #143
    Literary Wanderer
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,590
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    What a liberal jackass. Another military fairy selected and placed in a position of power by our fearless pansy leader.

    Just call them womarines. And when they start getting their heads blown off because they can't keep up with the rest of the platoon, I guess someone might have to answer for this.

  4. #144
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Since vector beat me to the other story, here's this too.

    Air Force Ready to Open All Combat Jobs to Women, Secretary Says

    September 14, 2015

    The Air Force is ready to lift all restrictions on combat jobs and other military occupational specialties for women and also is taking a "lean forward" approach on allowing transgender airmen to serve openly, Air Force Secretary Deborah Lee James said Monday.

    "I don't see any barriers to opening up those remaining career fields" that are still closed to women so long as gender-neutral standards are kept in place, she said to applause from the audience at the Air and Space Conference, held in National Harbor, Maryland, and sponsored by the Air Force Association.

    James also said the service was "looking to see if there are ways that we can make reasonable accommodations" for transgender airmen.

    The controversial issue of lifting restrictions on women serving in combat MOSs -- mostly in the infantry, armor and artillery -- will come to a head at the end of the month. That's when the services must report to Defense Secretary Ashton Carter on whether they will seek "exceptions" to the 2013 order from then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta to gender integrate all billets.

    The Marine Corps last week said that its extensive testing of mixed-gender units in combat training showed that women were more prone to injury and also that such outfits failed to perform as well as all-male units.

    James said the Air Force has been the most aggressive of the services in lifting restrictions on women and that now only seven MOSs in Special Operations remain closed to them.

    "We have to make sure we have the proper standards for those who are applying for these career fields," James said. "We have to make sure these are going to be gender neutral and operationally relevant standards against each of the career fields. Put a different way, the standards have to be the same for men and women.

    The bottom line was that "You've got to have what it takes and it's got to be the same for men and women," she said.

    "My expectation is that once we have those gender-neutral and operationally relevant standards in place, I don't see any barriers to opening up those remaining career fields," James said, referring to the Special Operations MOSs.

    "I say let the best person -- whether that person is a man or woman -- let's compete for the job (and) just make sure under no circumstances do we lower the standards," she said.

    On the transgender issue, a six-month review ordered by Carter was underway, James said. There are "medical issues to look at," she said. "There are practical matters to be worked through," she added, without going into more detail.

    However, the secretary said, "I think the approach is one of a lean forward approach" in the Air Force to the transgender issue.

    The approach is one "that says no matter who you are, no matter what you look like, if you are capable at doing your job, if you're a good Airman, if you believe in integrity and service and excellence in all we do, then we're trying to lean forward and say you're the type of person we want in our Air Force," she said.


    Hmmm... "Lean Forward"... Where have I heard that before?

    Oh, that's right.




    Weeee!!! Isn't this destruction of the norms fun!





    Guess with all these women in combat roles not only will we get beheading videos, we'll get rape and beheading videos!

    I'll just leave this here...

    (As an aside how the hell is Turkey still a NATO member with something like this being allowed in its armed forces?!?!)

  5. #145
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    Changing The “Macho” Male Culture Of The US Military

    October 29, 2015

    Changing the “Macho” Male Culture of the US Military

    Anonymous

    I remember hearing in 2010 from a buddy at the Pentagon that the combat exclusion policy for women in combat arms would be overturned no matter what “about a year from the President’s last year.” At the time I thought he was crazy, but the next year I heard the same from another friend. His take was even more troubling: “There is a loosely connected group of advocates that have found huge traction with the current civilian leadership here and they have a pretty well-thought out campaign plan to get women into combat arms,” he told me. “Some of the groups simply want equality, others talk about more women generals, and there’s one group that is linking this to changing American male culture.” Looking back, many of the things I am seeing now make sense when remembering my friends’ comments.

    Today I am privy to most of the plans that are currently in place to put women into combat arms. I have been told, again by acquaintances working at the Pentagon and at various headquarters around the US military, that all of the “experiments” that the services have been undergoing for some time now have been a sideshow. The decision had been made from the get-go. As one Female Engagement Team Program manager told many in Afghanistan in 2011, “the decision has already been made; we just need to talk about “the how” instead of “if”.”

    This means that the Ranger School “experiment” was an experiment in name only. It was guaranteed from the beginning to graduate a woman and that graduation would be used as proof that the combat exclusion rule needed to go. This, of course, matches what every Army Command Sergeant Major (9) in 2011-2013 told me was said to them by high-level CSMs and General Officers while attending their pre-command courses: “women will be in combat arms and women will graduate Ranger School, if any of you has a problem with that, you need to get out of the military.” They reported that the Ranger Instructors at Ranger School were told the same thing.

    This same message was a similar one that was being told to people who had friends who were Ranger Instructors. The message: “women will graduate, we will guarantee it, and so if you can’t handle that fact, you need to move on out of Ranger School.” When I personally talked to R.I.s I got rolled eyes and lots of depressing comments. “It’s turned political, sir,” they told me one morning at Fort Benning during the Maneuver Center Conference a few years ago. “We are being told to get on-board, or get out.”

    Early this year I talked to another military buddy who had just left the Pentagon. His comments were even more troubling. “I used to think the Pentagon was divorced from the reality of the combat arms side of the military- that it was so out of touch with the average infantryman that it made me sick to work there,” he let on. “But that was when I first got there,” he continued. “Today it is times a hundred. The advocates of the women in combat arms are basically part of a larger effort to change the military culture- which they call a “rape culture”- and these folks are really linked close to the wider effort to change American culture.”

    I couldn’t believe what I was hearing. Since I’m quick to suspect things that sound conspiratorialist, my BS-ometer started to go off. But, then I heard the same from two other friends of mine. In essence, the idea of many of these advocates is that the American male is a, mostly unconscious, misogynist, and that it comes from our culture: movies that hype physicality, combat, aggressiveness, and the treatment of women as objects. It also comes from our military: males dominate the services, are the only ones allowed in combat arms, and thus make up most of the higher ranks. The cure for all of this is simple: change the culture.

    The “change the culture” movement has manifested itself in many ways and has taken on different efforts as well as groups that are loosely aligned towards fundamental change. On college campuses it has largely taken on the shape of the movement to end sexual harassment and sexual assault. As one professor from a prominent campus told me recently, “It isn’t really about ending sexual assault; it’s about controlling people and changing behavior. Men have the advantage in almost every way, so we have to find ways to cut into that advantage. Making traditional male behavior something that is socially unacceptable will cut their advantage. We have to make it unacceptable for men to talk the way they talk now, act the way they act now, and interact the way they do with women now, and have traditionally.” Hyping sexual assault statistics, making women fearful of men, and building a system that finds men guilty until proven innocent are simply means to the greater end of “cutting male advantage.”

    In the movie industry, change has been slower, but increasingly children’s movies depict a smart and physically strong heroine and a weak and unintelligent male. In some action films, one-hundred pound women amazingly punch two-hundred pound males so hard they kill them. The message is clear: women can do anything that men can do and it is acceptable for women to be physically aggressive and strong- men, not so much.

    For the military this means something similar. The military has also been accused of having a “rape culture” in the same manner as universities. Thus, combat arms positions are being cut while sexual harassment and assault counselors and advisers are being hired. Some see it as a cottage industry that requires a never-ending problem that has to be over-sold.

    Homosexuals serving openly in the military was another effort to change the traditional male culture of the military- that traditional culture being one of heterosexuality (some call it “hyper heterosexuality”). It appears that since many homosexuals are either not serving in combat arms or not serving openly, this cultural change has not been as successful as the advocates were expecting (which may explain the new US Army secretary’s appointment as well as Military Review journal’s coming look at homosexual acceptance within the military next year).

    The effort to change military culture also includes the effort to overturn the combat exclusion rule. This rule, as many advocates for overturning it have argued, is the strongest reason that men view women as less than men. According to some, it is the reason military men rape women, sexually harass them, and devalue them. It is the reason women get out of the service at higher rates, are injured more than men, have more PTSD issues, and score less on their PT tests.

    To change the overall culture, the thinking goes, the military must change. This is where the argument for overturning the combat exclusion rule using our allies’ experiences as proof that it will work is disingenuous. Our allies who have opened combat arms to women have simply opened their combat arms branches to women. That is all. No culture change. The Germans, French, Australians, Canadians, and Israelis still have a traditional male culture in their combat arms. The very few women who have entered these countries’ combat arms have had to grow thick skin or they’ve been shown the door.

    In the US, the plan is very different. The Department of Defense is micromanaging the transition. There is no trust that the services will get to the advocates goals of 20%- at least- of all combat arms service members to be females. Once the order has been given to make the change happen, which is expected sometime late this year or early next, it has been strongly implied to all general officers that if they are seen as “dragging their feet” they can expect an early retirement. The word has gone out to both silence anyone from even talking about the transition and that everyone needs to get on board and make this successful as fast as possible (possibly because of the potential loss of the White House the following year).

    To do that, commands are being told that they must have female mentors in place before the combat arms-branched females get to their units or show up to schools. For Ranger School this meant- and continues to mean- female observers who are unqualified. Some commanders have noted this is as much to protect males from spurious allegations as it is to assist women, but the implication is clear: a severe lack of trust among all parties from the top down.

    For operational units it means they will have to scramble to find women to either place them in combat arms units in non-combat arms specialties or to place them as “excess” personnel, serving in a unit as an overage simply in order to facilitate the transition from all male units to units having females in them. The focus does not seem to be on simply integrating females into units as much as it is to make females in combat arms specialties successful.

    The assumptions governing these requirements are: 1) the culture of combat arms units are hyper-macho and misogynist and thus women will most likely fail without women “protectors”, 2) if men in combat units are faced with charges of sexual harassment or assault- regardless of their validity, it could derail the transition, and thus female mentors and observers will assist in making the transition smooth, 3) leaders cannot be trusted to ensure fairness during the transition, and thus must be forced to facilitate a certain outcome, and, 4) women can meet the same physical requirements as men if their leadership is motivated, the women are given special training and they are held to the same standards as men.

    The guidance from the Pentagon is very clear to commanders, if not always explicit in the orders (even though much of it IS explicit). Women will be coming to your units. If they do not, it is because the services’ leadership and the leadership at Recruiting Command, ROTC units, and the Academies are not doing their job. Women will be successful at combat arms schools. If they are not, leadership will be held accountable. Women will be successful at combat arms units. If they are not, leadership will be held accountable. This includes looking very closely at different rates of failure between men and women, different rates of recruitment of women and men into combat arms branches, and different rates of high evaluations between men and women in combat arms units- and “fixing” discrepancies.

    I am personally not against women serving “in combat,” in support of combat arms, serving in all-female combat arms units, or attached to combat arms units when needed. I personally think if a commander assesses that a female- in whatever capacity- would be value-added on a certain mission, then that commander should be able to utilize females. I also think our personnel system should be changed so that those females that do add value in those kinds of ad-hoc situations are rewarded. Today they- as well as males- are punished if they step out of the bureaucracy-approved career paths (see, for two examples, the Afghan Hands program as well as the Female Engagement Team program).

    What I am not in favor of is forcing commanders to have to take females on every mission as if they were males. This inflexibility will hurt females if the assumptions about their physical capabilities are invalid or if they are seen as a hindrance to the mission. Paradoxically, many more women could potentially be promoted to general officer and serve “in combat arms units” (if needed) if our personnel system simply allowed more flexibility than it would under a “women are the same as men” overturning of the combat exclusion policy.

    My main concern is the potential degradation of combat arms units’ cohesion at the small unit level. I have played on coed sports teams. I have deployed with coed units. I have served in coed headquarters. The issues with respect to the relations between most men and most women wreak havoc with the way these teams operate with respect to all-male examples. The amount of attention that will potentially be shifted to handling male and female relationship issues should be a concern of everyone, if, for no other reason, than the current requirements that the military has had to take on with respect to sexual harassment and assault.

    The issue of the effect on the fighting effectiveness of integrating women into male combat arms teams is both more important and harder to quantify. This issue has been dismissed by the advocates in two ways: they deny it is an issue or they ask for proof, knowing full well it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to “prove” anything of this nature.

    The main problem, however, is that most of the advocates are not concerned with what this transition will do. Their objective was never about making the military “more effective.” In fact, some advocates I have talked to are actually anti-war and anti-military! What this change is really about for many is changing the “hyper macho” male culture of the military and the country as a whole. The advocates do not believe, or do not care, that this could potentially negatively affect combat effectiveness. They assert that cohesion will not be an issue or they insist that “men will change.” The possibility that greater combat effectiveness actually might come from a “hyper macho” male culture is something the advocates refuse to acknowledge.

    There is a reason that our allies have very, very few women actually serving in combat arms. There is a reason most, if not all, of our allies’ militaries still have a “hyper macho” male culture within their combat arms units, even after allowing women to serve in combat arms units. There is a reason the Israelis ceased to have co-ed units in combat arms, deciding instead to have the Caracal battalion of women, who serve mostly as border guards, be the main avenue for women wishing to serve “in combat” to get their wish.

    The reason is that these countries know or believe that combat takes aggression and aggression takes trust and homogeneity of purpose and culture. The best way to win at the tactical level is to take a bunch of above-average men, train them hard, equip them well, give them an above-average leader, point them at a target and get out of the way. Integrating those teams or trying to change their culture would mean they would, according to our allies, be less aggressive and less capable of winning against a similarly-structured enemy.

    Today we have the benefit of technology, and some advocates have pointed out that technology can make up for any loss in fighting spirit: that current and future warfare will be characterized more by technology, creative thinking, and diversity of background. I have no doubt that getting more non-combat arms general officers, diversifying the path to higher rank, and allowing flexibility to have- not only females- but anyone a commander needs for a mission- would make our armed forces better. I do not, however, share the assumption that technology no longer requires traditional male aggressiveness and male bonding at the small unit level in combat arms. We may get away with it for now, but in a pitched battle or a near-peer or peer war, it would be devastating to learn that the advocates were wrong.

    They say in the military that “assumptions kill.” The advocates for integration are either utterly obtuse about their spurious assumptions or they, aiming for larger cultural change through the integration of combat arms, just don’t care. I would hope that there would be more general officers who would stand up to the advocates, just as Shenseki and Powell did before them.

    Unfortunately I have seen little stomach in our current population of general officers to stand up to the advocates. They either do not want to jeopardize future promotion or they are tired and are just ready to ease on out. Very few, outside of the Marine Corps, if any, are willing to sacrifice themselves for the combat arms troops they proclaim to care so much about. That is a sad state of affairs our military finds itself in today, but not surprising, considering the War College report about us lying to ourselves. Maybe the advocates were counting on that…



    If you've got a little time to burn, the comments are interesting to read as well.

  6. #146
    Super Moderator Malsua's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    8,019
    Thanks
    2
    Thanked 19 Times in 18 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    In the movie industry, change has been slower, but increasingly children’s movies depict a smart and physically strong heroine and a weak and unintelligent male. In some action films, one-hundred pound women amazingly punch two-hundred pound males so hard they kill them. The message is clear: women can do anything that men can do and it is acceptable for women to be physically aggressive and strong- men, not so much.
    My wife starts cringing whenever this happens. The reason? She knows I'm about to start ranting .

    When a slight-framed, 5 foot tall 100lb actress takes out a 300lb brute, with some stupid kick or punch or whatever the fuck, it seriously irritates me.

    I'm just over 6 feet and 235lbs and I would have no more chance at a 500lb, 7'4" tall man(Andre the Giant) than that woman would have with me. Sure, I might get lucky and take out a knee or get a shot to the solar plexus but if he gets his hands on me, I'm done.

    It reminds me of the first episode of the Hawaii Five-O, episode where they introduce the skinny asian chick. She immediately takes out some guy with a kick to the head for "stealing her wave" or some bullshit. The guy could have broken her in half and choked her with her own entrails.
    "Far better it is to dare mighty things, to win glorious triumphs even though checkered by failure, than to rank with those poor spirits who neither enjoy nor suffer much because they live in the gray twilight that knows neither victory nor defeat."
    -- Theodore Roosevelt


  7. #147
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Quote Originally Posted by Malsua View Post
    My wife starts cringing whenever this happens. The reason? She knows I'm about to start ranting .

    When a slight-framed, 5 foot tall 100lb actress takes out a 300lb brute, with some stupid kick or punch or whatever the fuck, it seriously irritates me.

    I'm just over 6 feet and 235lbs and I would have no more chance at a 500lb, 7'4" tall man(Andre the Giant) than that woman would have with me. Sure, I might get lucky and take out a knee or get a shot to the solar plexus but if he gets his hands on me, I'm done.

    It reminds me of the first episode of the Hawaii Five-O, episode where they introduce the skinny asian chick. She immediately takes out some guy with a kick to the head for "stealing her wave" or some bullshit. The guy could have broken her in half and choked her with her own entrails.
    Grace Park, and she was able to pull that off only because she's a frackin' Toaster after all.

  8. #148
    Literary Wanderer
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    1,590
    Thanks
    5
    Thanked 6 Times in 6 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    We are on a train to fantasy land, where all cultural/societal norms are flipped upside down whether plausible/feasible, or not. Just think of the chaos deposited upon our general population (the ones that care, that is) as we make this transition to a female dominated society. Traditional roles having been abandoned, anything goes. The devastation is and will be all-encompassing. The question that needs to be asked repeatedly is - to what objective is this being perpetrated upon our people? You can bet the farm that the objective is very clear to the social elite. My two cents? A continual shift in power away from the populace toward the oligarchs until we retain absolutely no influence.

  9. #149
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,642
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 71 Times in 66 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    As Obama Weakens America, The Russians And Chinese Prepare

    Jeremiah Johnson
    November 16th, 2015

    SHTFplan.com
    Comments (109)
    Read by 7,216 people

    Jeremiah Johnson is a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces (Airborne) and a graduate of the U.S. Army’s SERE school (Survival Evasion Resistance Escape).



    We have seen some very heinous events over the past years of the Obama administration’s rule. We have seen the hollowing out of our military command structure (everyone is familiar with the list of field-grade and general staff-level commanders purged by Obama). We witnessed the “mothballing” of TARS (the balloon system complementing NORAD). We watch, as this administration shuts down production of the Tomahawk cruise missile, gets rid of the A-10 “Warthog” fleet that destroys tanks, and retires a dozen cruisers of the U.S. Navy, along with the aircraft carrier George Washington.

    We watched one of the greatest examples of complicit treason and traitorous behavior as Obama sat on a well-lit stage in the 2012 Seoul Nuclear Summit, leaned over toward Dmitri Medvedev, and said, “Tell Vladimir, I will have more flexibility after the next election.” This statement concerned the stationing of U.S. missile defenses in eastern Europe and the reduction of ICBM’s (the United States’ missiles).

    We watch as Obama has used his cabinet and the power-base he enjoyed when he had control of the U.S. Senate to lower the standards of the U.S. military, weakening it and turning it into an institution where his fundamental transformation agenda takes precedence over battle readiness and effectiveness. Unit cohesion is being undermined and destroyed, and the strength of our armed forces is on the wane.

    We watched on as Obama handed the Chinese and Russians our response matrices and battle plans under the auspices of “Partnership Readiness and Joint Training Exercises.”

    This refers specifically to operations with the participation and direction of FEMA with joint drills between U.S. and Chinese forces in Hawaii November 12-14, 2013. These drills were conducted for “disaster management,” specifically for “humanitarian purposes,” and on U.S. soil. One of the administration’s “Yes-men,” American Admiral Sam Locklear stated:

    “These types of exercises give us a good place to start and to get into the kind of rhythm of understanding and trusting each other.”

    This came from the mouth of a U.S. Admiral, the commander of US Pacific Command. It is a shame that he isn’t being quoted right now with the standoff that is currently taking place between China and the U.S. just outside of Chinese territorial waters. What would his opinion be of the new hypersonic missile that China has developed to take out an entire carrier group with just ¼ megaton warhead?

    Just this past weekend we witnessed more weakness and obfuscation regarding the missile launched off of the coast of California in the evening of 11/7/15, witnessed by thousands of people. Dave Hodges posted a comment from a gentleman who worked on Trident missiles who believed the launch (by the U.S. Navy) was to gauge response time and effectiveness in dealing with an SLBM (Submarine-Launched Ballistic Missile). Remember, the THAD system has proven itself several times under rigidly controlled conditions in Hawaii to be an abysmal failure regarding missile intercepts.

    Matching the level of the (purposeful, administration-designed) U.S. complacency, the Russian military has been matchless in terms of tactical acumen and performance.

    Vladimir Putin’s brilliance is visible in the Russian offer in the form of a request for the U.S. to join it in the fight against ISIL/ISIS… a war against the very entity created and sponsored by the Obama administration. By not accepting the Russian offer, the U.S. appears not to be helping its “fellow partner and actor” on the world-stage of affairs. If it does accept, then the U.S. fights against its own creation.

    The Russians are quietly and patiently on the move. We witnessed the annexation (the conquest) of Ukraine. Now a bitter semi-stalemate exists between ethnic Russian separatists with Ukrainian citizenship and the Ukrainian military, the former also “augmented” with Spetsnaz units. Those selfsame units have rotated into the Syrian theater of operations. We are watching the ongoing actions in Syria with the continuous Russian bombing of ISIS and the gradual movement of ground troops into the country.

    Russia has been on the move, now, incrementally and patiently. In December 2013, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said that Russia would respond with nuclear weapons. The Yars (SS-29) ICBM has been developed that can penetrate all current U.S. missile defenses. For those who may think this piece to be “slanted” towards current U.S. policy, please think again:

    The U.S. has been in the process (for decades) of destabilizing former Soviet-bloc, eastern European nations with the infusion of capital from the IMF and with the insertion of American bases, military personnel, and war materials.

    The Varshavyanka-class submarines (diesel, improved Kilo-class subs), also known as Project 636, with stealth technology and improved range in combat, are capable of striking targets on the land, under water, and on the surface. A 45-day range without refueling, and an arsenal of 18 torpedoes and 8 SAM’s (surface to air missiles) make these subs very formidable. They also can be fitted with cruise missiles capable of delivering a 250 kiloton warhead. They have been labeled the “black holes” of the ocean by the U.S. navy. One of these bad boys cruising up the Chesapeake Bay and into the Potomac…could pop out a cruise missile and fry DC in under three minutes.

    A federal police officer reported on Steve Quayle’s website that Russia has been moving her subs into the Pacific, prepositioning its assets to conduct an attack on the West Coast of the U.S. and/or an EMP-device attack. The U.S. has been pushing things in Syria. Remember on March 24, 2014, that Andrei Kozyrev, former Russian Foreign Minister said that the Ukraine crisis was “in the 11th hour” to avoid a nuclear war. The U.S. was pushing things then in Europe, and this was the reason for the declaration of willingness to use nukes. On March 22, just two days earlier, the U.S. had sent 12 F-16 fighter planes and 300 troops to Poland.

    The main point is that the U.S. and the NATO countries are now facing nations that are not backing down and if anything are taking a superior position regarding a potential attack posture. With the U.S. economy in a shambles and our military capabilities seriously compromised, the fall is visible on the horizon and steadily approaching. The situation changes on a daily basis, but one can see the two sides are on a collision course, one way or another.


    Jeremiah Johnson is the Nom de plume of a retired Green Beret of the United States Army Special Forces (Airborne). Mr. Johnson is also a Gunsmith, a Certified Master Herbalist, a Montana Master Food Preserver, and a graduate of the U.S. Army’s SERE school (Survival Evasion Resistance Escape). He lives in a cabin in the mountains of Western Montana with his wife and three cats. You can follow Jeremiah’s regular writings at SHTFplan.com or contact him here.
    This article may be republished or excerpted with proper attribution to the author and a link to www.SHTFplan.com.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  10. #150
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    The Marine Corps was the last holdout. Now they're falling...


    The Rape Of The US Marine Corps: A Lunatic Drive For ‘Fairness’

    January 16, 2016

    Gen. John Kelly, USMC, is retiring after more than four decades as an active-duty Marine. His “greatest fear,” he says, is that the vast “equal opportunity” pressure for women in combat roles will lead the Pentagon to water down standards.

    Kelly is finishing up as head of US Southern Command after an exemplary career that included three tours in Iraq. He’s also the highest-ranking US officer to have lost a child in the nation’s post-9/11 wars: His son, 1st Lt. Robert Kelly, USMC, was killed in action in Afghanistan in 2010.

    Why is he worried?

    Well, Defense Secretary Ash Carter last month announced that women will soon be eligible for all combat positions. (They had been blocked from about 10 percent of those posts.)

    Yes, Carter also warned that equal opportunity wouldn’t bring “equal participation by men and women in all specialties.”

    The reasons are obvious: On average, the two sexes simply have different physical virtues. Men will dominate when it comes to upper-body strength, which is generally vital in combat roles. And Carter has vowed not to alter the high standards for those roles.

    But Kelly doubts that will last: “Whether it’s 12 months from now, four years from now … the question will be asked whether we’ve [truly] let women into these other roles.” Ideologues who don’t see the results they want will ask, “Why aren’t [women] staying in those roles? Why aren’t they advancing as infantry people?”

    Navy Secretary Ray Mabus has already offered a taste of what’s ahead. He’s denied the Marine Corps’ request to continue sex-segregated boot camp and Officer Training School. Indeed, on *Jan. 1, he gave the Corps just two weeks to come up with an integration plan.

    On top of that, he’s ordered the Marines to adopt politically correct titles by changing every “man” label. That implies the Marines are about to lose every “rifleman” — when every Marine is a rifleman.

    It’s impossible to think of a worse insult — or a greater sign that the ideologues will win in the not-so-distant future.

    The Fire Department of New York has bitter experience with the same drill. The Post runs regular exposés of the efforts to bend (already lowered) FDNY standards with an eye to a “better” gender balance.

    Look, we admire the heck out of a woman who keeps trying even after she’s failed a key FDNY physical test six times. But it’s shocking to see her become a firefighter without ever passing.

    It’s beyond troubling to think about the potential impact on public safety and firefighter safety.

    And it’s impossible not to share Gen. Kelly’s fears for the future of our men and women in uniform.

  11. #151
    Expatriate American Patriot's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A Banana Republic, Central America
    Posts
    48,608
    Thanks
    82
    Thanked 28 Times in 28 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Semper fidelis nisi regione deficiat...
    Libertatem Prius!


    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.




  12. #152
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,642
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 71 Times in 66 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Army Approves First Female Officers For Ground Combat Roles


    Via Free Beacon:

    The U.S. Army has approved the first 22 women the service will commission as infantry and armor officers in the coming weeks.

    USA Today reported that the nearly two dozen women are close to completing their officer training either at West Point or in ROTC or Officer Candidate School. The service will commission them as second lieutenants upon their graduation.

    In order to completely qualify for the roles, the women need to successfully finish the specialty schools and meet all physical requirements. Thirteen of the women will become armor officers, while nine others will commissioned as infantry officers.

    The announcement is a telling development in the military’s effort to integrate women into the force’s combat roles. It comes in the wake of Defense Secretary Ash Carter’s order that the military open up all combat roles to women this year.

    In issuing the order, Carter rejected a request from the Marine commandant that some ground combat jobs remain closed to women. A Marine Corps study released last year found that female Marines were injured twice as often as their male counterparts, less accurate with infantry weapons, and less effective at removing injured troops from the battlefield.

    Carter has defended his decision as an effort to select from the “ largest pool of people” to fill combat roles.

    The military has anticipated small numbers of women to put themselves up for combat roles at first.

    In February, Carter encouraged women to “step forward” into the newly opened combat positions.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  13. #153
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,642
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 71 Times in 66 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    The US Military – A Fish Rotting from the Head
    Posted on May 4, 2016 by Ray Starmann



    The US military is a fish rotting from the head; a politically correct, feminized, decrepit, nearly bankrupt force that is one step away from complete obliteration on the land, on the seas and in the air.

    The military is decaying by the hour. Veterans know it, the troops know it, the military’s senior leaders know it, yet they do nothing as the floor gives way underneath them.

    From our commander in chief, to the Secretary of Defense, the secretaries of each service branch, the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the admirals and generals, the US military is being led by a combination of leftists, feminists, selfish careerists and all around lackeys and yes men.

    The current crop of senior leadership in the US Armed Forces has either green lighted, watched or turned away in embarrassment as every form of budgetary cut, equipment shortage, dimwitted national security directive and social engineering policy is hammered into the military like a thousand nails in a wooden coffin.

    We now have a military where Marine Corps planes don’t have spare parts, where Navy ships are decrepit and Naval air assets have less range than the planes Bush 41 flew in WWII; where Armor officers can’t run a tank range; where breastfeeding soldiers express milk in the field; where the slightest non-PC comment gets you a ticket to unemployed Obama Land; where male ROTC cadets parade around in red high heels to express empathy for rape victims; where women are allowed to serve in the Navy SEALs and the US Army’s Delta Force; where fantasy and delusion have become standard operating procedures.

    An example of the moral relativism wafting through the Pentagon like Sarin nerve gas are the comments made by General Mark Milley, the Army Chief of Staff, who sports Ranger and Special Forces tabs and who once served in the famous 5th Special Force Group. Milley told the nation and the world that women will serve in direct ground combat units and furthermore, he has no problem with young American girls being subject to a draft that could ultimately send them into direct ground combat units, aka the infantry.

    We’re all supposed to nod in a semi catatonic state as a man who wore the famed Green Beret spouts out this absolute nonsense with a poker face. Unless Milley has become some kind of bleeding heart liberal, I doubt he believes anything he has said. What Milley does believe in is the greater good of Milley, just like Dempsey believed in the greater good of Dempsey.

    And, look where that’s got us…

    What’s in it for you General Milley, the Chairman of the JCS once General Joe pops smoke? What’s the price today for selling out America’s women to mass slaughter on a distant battlefield?

    Tis the season of moral cowardice at the Pentagon and it’s quite reminiscent of the Vietnam era, when political perfumed princes skulked through the hallways of the Pentagon like mastodons; admirals and generals who cared more about their careers than about the troops and the nation they had sworn to serve.

    Some point out that the military is subordinate to civilian authority. They need to remain silent. I’ll say it again. Someone with a lot of stars on their shoulders is going to have to fall on their sword and resign. When they do, they need to hold a press conference and tell the nation how a combination of the Obama White House and willing minions are demolishing the military by the hour.
    But, this will never happen, mark my words.

    A more realistic option is this:

    The US military must be gutted from the top down by a President Trump. A President Trump must fire the Secretary of Defense, the secretaries of each service branch, the entire JCS and every admiral and general until he gets to a point where he’s cleaned out the perfumed princes, feather merchants and narcissistic careerists who have run roughshod over the military in order to pursue their own goals.

    The US Army was on the verge of self-destructing in the post- Vietnam years of the early and mid 1970’s. What saved it from imploding were the field grade officers and some tough and truthful general officers who maintained Army traditions and who rebuilt it from the bottom up; men like Dick Cavazos, Carl Vuono, Shy Meyer, Paul “Butch” Funk, Norman Schwarkopf and Fred Franks.

    In 1974, the Army’s problems were at the bottom, not the top. The Army had soldiers who were thugs, gang bangers, druggies and race baiters. Race riots were common and officers were afraid to walk into a barracks without being armed.

    The troublemakers were discharged, the new volunteer Army began to slowly attract motivated and better educated soldiers and with the election of Ronald Reagan money flooded into the lean green machine; resulting in new equipment like the M1 tank and funds for endless training at places like Hohenfels in Bavaria and on major NATO exercises like REFORGER.

    By 1990, the US Army was a magnificently trained and equipped fighting force. The men responsible for the military’s ascent were the senior leaders who had seen the military savaged by political generals and admirals.

    General Fred Franks, an amputee, who rose to lead the VII Corps to victory in the Gulf War is a symbol for everything the Army’s senior leadership once stood for and doesn’t today; devotion to duty, honesty, moral courage and most importantly, putting the troops always above personal ambition.

    During the Gulf War, a soldier in Third Armored Division noticed that General Franks looked very worried as he spoke to young soldiers. The soldier told General Franks, “Don’t worry General, we trust you.”
    How many soldiers can say the same thing about their senior leadership today?

    A young adult who enlists in the military must know that their leaders care more about them than their careers and retirement benefits and investment portfolios.

    Wanted: US military senior leadership with honesty and moral courage. Apply here.

    http://usdefensewatch.com/2016/05/th...from-the-head/

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  14. #154
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,642
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 71 Times in 66 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Louisiana woman makes military history



    By Chenelle Terry | cterry@ktalnews.tv

    Published 04/12 2016 06:38PM

    Updated 04/12 2016 06:46PM

    Natchitoches, La.

    A Robeline native goes down in history as the first female infantry recruit in the United States Army.

    Tammy "Grace" Barnett has until next June to mentally and physically train at the Natchitoches Recruiting Station to prepare for life as a soldier.

    "I'm small framed and I hope that since people see me doing this now, they'll be encouraged to step out of their comfort zones," said Barnett.

    She's the first female infantry recruit in the U.S. Army, since a recent policy change from the Defense Department gives women the opportunity to serve in combat.

    "Like our outstanding force of today, our force of the future must continue to benefit from the best talent America has to offer. In the 21st century that requires drawing strength from the broadest possible pool of talent. This includes women," said U.S. Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter.

    Barnett took the oath of enlistment at Shreveport's military entrance processing station. It was an exciting day for this Robeline native and New Llano police officer who comes from a military family.

    "It's reaching my goals. It's doing something that i know is right. It's serving the country that i love and that gets you right here. It's very much a part of my blood," said Barnett.

    "I think it's amazing that she made this decision," said Sgt. Reynaldo Pena who serves on the recruiting team.

    "Our United States Army Infantry, they're the best. They make sure that when it comes down to any situations that are going on, that they are trained to handle that mission," he said.

    Pena says Barnett has great leadership qualities, an important stepping stone in becoming a great soldier.

    Barnett is focused on taking on the challenge.

    "It's not about making history, it's about being part of a great team and that's what the military is," she said.

    Barnett says she doesn't expect to get treated any differently from any other soldier when she ships out to Ft. Benning in Georgia for basic training next June.

    She will continue working as a police officer until she leaves.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  15. #155
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    I applaud her wanting to serve our country and having the courage to enter uncharted territory but, if she is actually held to the same physical fitness standards the rest of the men are, I don't know that she'll be able to make it.

    And hell, I say that as someone who probably couldn't make it myself.

  16. #156
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,642
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 71 Times in 66 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    When a real war makes it to our doorstep these Leftist social policies weakening our readiness will be our undoing once they neutralize our high tech. When we find ourselves on a conventional battlefield the Axis multi-national forces will have a winning edge.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  17. #157
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    Millennial Cadet Asks Defense Secretary About 'Less Hierarchal,' More 'Casual' Work Environment

    March 23, 2016

    A millennial asked the secretary of Defense today if the Defense Department could go in the direction of corporations that are wooing the younger generation with a more "casual" work structure.

    Defense Secretary Ashton Carter spoke at West Point for a "fireside chat" speech followed by a short Q&A from the audience.

    A member of the class of 2017 asked Carter, "As a younger generation of millenials enters the work force, American corporations are shifting towards a less hierarchal and more flat and casual organizational structure. What is the Department of Defense doing to stay competitive in this new work environment?"

    Carter told the cadet it was "a good question," as "we've got to stay competitive."

    "And it gets to attracting and recruiting people. And it means we're going to have to keep thinking and keep changing about how we manage people. Let me give you a few examples of things that we're doing now that -- where we're taking lessons from the private sector that I think we can apply to us in order to better bring in their best practices," Carter said.

    "I'll give you a couple of examples. One, I have a major effort department-wide to reach out to the technology sector, so that we can increase the pace at which we innovate technologically. If you think about the vehicles that you'll be driving, the armored vehicles that you'll be driving, a lot of these things are decades old, right?" he continued.

    "And that doesn't mean they don't have any value, but we need to constantly upgrade your equipment. And if we're -- we operate programs on 10-year time scales and the technology world is changing every year, guess what? We're going to fall behind. So we've got to be defter. That's a big push."

    The secretary said they also want to "draw in some of what you're calling exactly right, flatter, more mobile institutions."

    "Now, I want to be careful because as I said, you are the profession of arms. And I can't put a newspaper ad in for a colonel in the, you know, air defense artillery, right?" Carter said. "You have to -- you get them through the Army. So there's a certain amount of our profession which is a profession and can only come about that way. But that doesn't mean we can't learn things."

    An example, he said, was "finding ways to send more of you out in the course of your career, out to the private sector so you can see how they do things and bring back the best of those practices."

    "Just recently, I changed our -- our policies in a number of ways on family programs -- things like maternity and paternity leave. Now, that may seem in the future to you all, but there will come a time if you decide to have a family where it's a pretty big deal," he said.

    "And I want to be competitive at that time, so you don't have to feel that you have to choose. Sometimes it's going to be tough for you, but I don't want to make it impossible for you to have a family that you'd like, and also continue to serve us. So where I can make that easier, consistent with readiness, I want to do that."

    Carter said the department is concentrating on making "a lot of changes of those kinds" in "the way we promote people and how we give you opportunities along the way, so we're not so rigid about, say, you have to punch this ticket and then punch that ticket, and then punch that ticket."

    "And you find that all you're doing is punching tickets. And that's not really giving you the opportunity to grow in the way that we need you to grow," he added.

    "We're thinking about how to change your career path. So I think we do need to keep thinking about the career path. You'll always be the profession of arms. We're not Wal-Mart. You know, we're not Google. We're the United States military. But that doesn't mean we can't change and adapt. And we have to because I need good people like you. And once I get you, I've got to keep you."

  18. #158
    Postman vector7's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Where it's quiet, peaceful and everyone owns guns
    Posts
    21,642
    Thanks
    30
    Thanked 71 Times in 66 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military

    Biden: More Women And Gays In Military Only Makes It Stronger

    Jonah Bennett
    12:18 PM 05/22/2016



    In a speech to West Point’s class of 2016, Vice President Joe Biden said Saturday that more women and openly gay soldiers will only serve to make the U.S. military stronger.

    “Having men and women together in the battlefield is an incredible asset, particularly when they’re asked to lead teams in parts of the world with fundamentally different expectations and norms,” Biden said in his graduation speech at West Point, according to The Associated Press.

    Biden heaped praise on Eugene Coleman, the class president, for coming out as gay.

    “E.J. would have been discharged from the Army, and we would have lost an incredible talent,” Biden said, referring to standard practice before the repeal of “don’t ask, don’t tell” in 2010. “Thanks for your courage, E.J., and I expect we’re going to hear big things from you, pal.”

    Pushing diversity has been a central objective of the Obama administration.

    Earlier this week, the Senate finally confirmed Eric Fanning, President Barack Obama’s pick for Secretary of the Army. He was initially nominated in September, but GOP Sen. Pat Roberts placed a hold on the nomination, saying he wanted assurances that the Pentagon would not move detainees from Guantanamo Bay to Kansas. Roberts insisted that his hold had nothing to do with Fanning’s sexual orientation. This hold infuriated White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest, who blasted Roberts for trying to grab public attention.

    In December, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter opened all combat roles up to women, a move which has kicked off additional efforts to facilitate integration. The Navy and Marine Corps are conducting a review to make sure job titles don’t unfairly exclude women by having the word “man” in them.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.


    Nikita Khrushchev: "We will bury you"
    "Your grandchildren will live under communism."
    “You Americans are so gullible.
    No, you won’t accept
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    outright, but we’ll keep feeding you small doses of
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll finally wake up and find you already have communism.

    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    ."
    We’ll so weaken your
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    until you’ll
    To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 15 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
    like overripe fruit into our hands."



  19. #159
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    Medal Of Honor Recipients Snubbed By Obama In Rush To Name Navy Warships After Liberal Politicians

    April 12, 2016

    As the Obama administration this week named another warship after a politician, a new report is circulating in Congress that shows that nearly 200 Navy and Marine Corps Medal of Honor recipients have never been awarded such an honor, contrary to naval guidelines and tradition.

    Navy Secretary Ray Mabus, who has named several ships after Democrats and liberal activists not connected to the military, was in Detroit on Monday to announce that an Arleigh Burke-class guided-missile destroyer will be named the USS Carl M. Levin. The Michigan Democrat served 31 years in the Senate and chaired the Senate Armed Services Committee from 2007 to 2015.

    The move has rankled some Republicans. They note privately the long list of war heroes yet to be so honored and the Navy’s own tradition of naming destroyers after deceased Medal of Honor recipients and other combat heroes, as well as admirals and generals who played significant roles in naval warfare.

    Mr. Levin did not serve in the military.


    In a new report privately delivered to lawmakers, the Congressional Research Service did an extensive examination this winter and found that, of 318 Medal of Honor recipients in the Navy and Marine Corps, 100 have had a ship named after them; the large majority of them — 186 — have not.

    One congressional staffer noted that Mr. Levin presided over the committee during the Obama administration’s major drawdown of troops and weapons systems. Joint Chiefs of Staff officers testified in recent months that they doubt they can fight one major war on the schedule outlined in the National Military Strategy.

    The Levin naming did not conform to Mr. Mabus‘ own guidelines set out in a report to Congress in 2012 called “Policies and Practices of the U.S. Navy for Naming the Vessels of the Navy.”

    Congress demanded the accounting after Mr. Mabus had strayed from tradition on several warship namesakes.

    The Navy report said its guideline calls for naming destroyers after deceased Navy and Marine Corps veterans and Navy secretaries.

    An examination by The Washington Times of the 71 Arleigh Burke monikers shows Mr. Levin is the only one — except Winston Churchill — who does not meet the Navy guideline for destroyers. Most Arleigh Burke honorees are naval war heroes; a significant number earned the Medal of Honor. There are several Navy secretaries.

    Capt. Patrick McNally, Mr. Mabus‘ spokesman, told The Times: “He names ships for American heroes and considers Senator Levin’s long commitment to the nation worthy of recognition …. The naming conventions are guidelines set by the secretary. He can deviate from them if he desires.”

    Capt. McNally said Mr. Mabus has named a number of destroyers after Medal of Honor recipients. They include the Ralph Johnson, the Thomas Hudner, the Harvey Barnum and the Daniel Inouye, the late Democratic senator from Hawaii.

    Mr. Mabus announced in January that an Expeditionary Sea Base will carry the name of Hershel “Woody” Williams, a World War II Medal of Honor recipient.

    Other Senate Armed Services chairmen have been so honored for other ship classes.

    The George W. Bush administration named a Virginia-class attack submarine after former Sen. John Warner, who also served as a Marine enlisted man in World War II and as a Navy secretary.

    Democrat John C. Stennis of Mississippi, a legendary defense hawk, has an aircraft carrier in his name.

    Democrat Richard B. Russell of Georgia championed defense spending as Armed Services chairman. Like Mr. Warner, his name is on an attack submarine.

    In the House, the late Democratic congressman Carl Vinson has his name on an aircraft carrier because he championed a large, “blue water” Navy able to operate in all oceans.

    “Carl Levin is no Carl Vinson, Richard Russell or John Stennis,” said a congressional defense staffer. “He has presided over the dismantlement of the U.S. military, which is an accomplishment for the Obama administration.”

    Mr. Mabus, a former Democratic governor of Mississippi, has irked some Republicans for veering from tradition by naming warships after social activists and politicians with no link to the military.

    Since the start of the Obama administration, Mr. Mabus has named combat logistics supply ships after civil rights leader Medgar Evers and leftist farmworker Cesar Chavez.

    All previous Lewis and Clark-class cargo ships had been named for famous explorers or people who made significant contributions to the military, as called for in Navy conventions.

    He named a littoral combat ship after former Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, Arizona Democrat, who was seriously wounded in a January 2011 assassination attempt.

    He named a San Diego-class docking ship after another Democrat, the late Rep. John P. Murtha of Pennsylvania. The previous nine ships had been named after U.S. cities, a park and a county, following Navy conventions.

    Mr. Murtha was a Marine in Vietnam and supported the defense budget. He angered the Marine community in 2005 when he charged that Marines had killed civilians “in cold blood” in the Iraqi village of Haditha.

    In January Mr. Mabus again broke with past tradition. He named a fleet replenishment oiler, TAO-205, after civil rights icon Rep. John Lewis, George Democrat. Mr. Lewis voted for removing all U.S. troops from Iraq in 2007 and from Afghanistan in 2011.

    Navy guidelines had said such ships are named for rivers or people instrumental to maritime and aviation design and production.

    But Mr. Mabus changed the convention last year, saying the 17 oilers will be named after civil and human rights activists.

    The 2012 Navy report to Congress stated: “The foregoing discussion helps preview one of the central themes of this report: US Navy ship naming policies, practices, and ‘traditions’ are not fixed; they evolve constantly over time.”

    The Navy report also defended Mr. Mabus‘ decision-making.

    For example, it defended the naming of the Gabrielle Giffords: “Secretary Mabus was well aware that Congresswoman Giffords is much younger than those Members of Congress previously so honored and, as a result, her record does not equal theirs in numbers of years served or in the general level of attention applied to military or naval matters. He also knows from many visits to hospitals that hundreds of young service men and women have received wounds as grievous as Ms. Giffords’s, and agrees they all rightfully deserve respect and recognition. However, given the extraordinary circumstances surrounding this case, he felt it both fitting and appropriate to exercise his discretion — established by the very first Secretary of the Navy over 210 years ago — to make an exception to a ship naming convention to honor Congresswoman Giffords.”

    In an August 2009 ceremony to name a destroyer after Marine Cpl. Jason Dunham, a posthumous Medal of Honor recipient for valor in Iraq, Mr. Mabus talked of the importance of a warship carrying a hero’s identity.

    “Today, Jason takes his rightful place in naval history alongside his storied legacy in the annals of the Marine Corps,” he said. “Though Jason is no longer with us, his name will live on in this magnificent warship that represents the best our nation has to offer.

    “Jason’s spirit — as a warrior, fighter and one who never gave up, even in the face of great challenges — lives on to lead all of the men and women who will ever serve aboard USS Jason Dunham, in home waters and abroad. In the fighting spirit of its namesake, the men and women of USS Jason Dunham will never back down from any challenge put before them.”

    Rep. Duncan Hunter, California Republican, on Tuesday sent a letter to Mr. Mabus asking him to explain his departure from convention in naming the Carl Levin.

    “It is important that the Navy adhere to its own ship naming rules and takes every effort necessary to avoid politicization of this process,” Mr. Hunter said.

  20. #160
    Creepy Ass Cracka & Site Owner Ryan Ruck's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    24,882
    Thanks
    50
    Thanked 77 Times in 75 Posts

    Default Re: The Leftist Plot to Destroy the US Military


    In Marines' New Fitness Plan, Pullups For Women Won't Be Mandatory

    April 18, 2016

    Marine leaders have proposed a new physical fitness test that would still allow women to do the flexed-arm hang — but they're not likely to earn a first-class score without pullups.

    A new plan for the PFT would require most women to do between eight and 10 pullups to net a max score on that portion of the test.

    The potential change is in response to a fitness review ordered by Commandant Gen. Robert Neller. Marine leaders found that “some current [fitness] standards are either not relevant, not challenging or not attainable,” according to a briefing obtained by Marine Corps Times. The plan was presented to Marine leaders last week.

    Women would still be allowed to do the flexed-arm hang under a new proposal, but would be given little incentive to do so. Points for the flexed-arm hang would max out at 50, while one pullup would be worth 51 points.

    Max pullups would vary by age, as is the case with all PFT events. The following would be required to obtain a maximum score:

    Ages 17 to 20: 7 pullups
    Ages 21 to 25: 8 pullups
    Ages 26 to 30: 10 pullups
    Ages 31 to 35: 10 pullups
    Ages 36 to 40: 8 pullups
    Ages 41 to 45: 7 pullups
    Ages 46 to 50: 6 pullups
    Ages 51+: 4 pullups

    The plan would officially reverse a requirement announced by then-Commandant Gen. James Amos in late 2012 that women would soon be required to do at least three pullups to pass the PFT. Eight would needed for a max score, while men have to belt out 20. This was to end the era of the flexed-arm hang.

    The plan never made it off the ground, though. Data collected in 2013 found that 55 percent of female recruits couldn’t meet the minimum requirement. A study of 318 female Marines found that the women could complete 1.63 pullups on average. Roughly 20 percent of those Marines could only hit three pullups if they used their lower bodies in a "kipping" motion.

    At that point, the Marine Corps allowed women to choose between pullups and the flexed-arm hang as officials developed a new plan. The transition was further extended when leadership decided to hold off on any decision until the three-year Women in Service Review wrapped up in 2015. In November, Neller directed top leaders to conduct a full review of the service’s fitness and body composition standards, which led to this latest proposal.

    Some say the proposed test would allow women the option to forgo the exercise if they still haven't quite mastered pullups.

    “I think this is a great way to implement the change as it gives an incentive to increase a score without the fear of failing the PFT," Col. Robin Gallant, II Marine Expeditionary Force’s comptroller, said of the proposal. "As women work on them to increase their score, they can be confident that they won't fail a PFT. I think this is a huge benefit and I'm glad it might become a reality."

    An officer familiar with the proposal who spoke on the condition of anonymity said the Corps is moving in the right direction. Pullups are an “equitable metric more related to combat skills such as casualty [evacuation],” and would “be a step toward removing reducing and eliminating the perceived double-standard that exists."

    “Since the PFT score is tied directly to promotion, there is already a sentiment that the scoring system is not fair,” the officer said. “As women move into combat arms, this already existing problem could be exasperated. This kind of change will help us address conscious and unconscious bias about gender.”

    The officer added that women could one day have the same pullup scoring scale as men, as is the case with crunches. But to do so now would set up many Marines for failure, and negatively impact career progression.

    “This is the right approach,” the officer said. “This will incentivize change without damaging a cohort that has trained their bodies to do specific exercises for many years, in some cases decades.”

    Gallant offered encouragement for women who have never trained their body to do a pullup. She pointed to “zero to 20-plus,” a pullup program created by Maj. Misty Posey that was posted on the Marine Corps’ official website in February. The 55-year-old colonel went from zero to 17 pullups in less than one year, and is still going strong.

    “It is very doable for women to do pullups,” Gallant said. “Most women can get their first pullup after about two weeks of being on the program. I worked on them for about half an hour in the morning and about 10 to 15 minutes in the evening. Once I got my first one, they came pretty quick after that. Once they get up to 10, it's a piece of cake to maintain it.”

    The colonel is confident “women will surprise everyone” if the proposals are adopted.

    Senior leadership addressed the recommendations at an executive off-site meeting held last week at Joint Base Anacostia–Bolling in Washington, D.C. The recommendations were presented by Lt. Gen. Robert Walsh, the commanding general of Marine Corps Combat Development Command.

    The off-site brief was just one step in a months-long review of the Marine Corps' fitness standards, said Maj. Anton Semelroth, a MCCDC spokesman. The review is being led by Training and Education Command officials. Final recommendations are due to the commandant by July 1.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •