This week Leon Panetta said he is going to lift the ban of women in combat.
In order to provide a career path for women to go into the upper echelons of rank in the military they must have combat experience.
The chairman of the Joint Chief of Staffs said they wouldn't lower standards already in place, but if women couldn't meet those standards then the standards would be reviewed. The standards have been in place for decades to separate the exceptional from the norm.
So what are the standards be reviewed for? Are they too high? In that case men who haven't met them will be eligible for combat and special forces now too. It seems to me if the standards can't be met by women then their answer will be to lower the standards. What else could that statement mean?
We will have carnage on the battlefield with special forces having to accept soldiers who don't meet the standards getting slaughtered in the name of social engineering.
In the name of equality we are going to accept women in combat. But are they really going to be equal? No. Women won't HAVE to go into combat, men still will. Women won't HAVE to register for the draft, but men still will. Women can decide to be in combat or not - and they can change their mind. Men don't have that luxury.
So with all things being equal women will still be able to fall back on their sex. I'm a woman I shouldn't have to serve in combat. I should have the choice.
If the country wants to really level the playing field and say women are ready for combat deployments then ALL women in the military should have to put their big girl panties on and serve in combat when directed to do so. Anything less is discrimination.
Social engineering. It is an interesting experiment.
Heard tell they are conducting experiments to make cats bark and dogs meow. Cats are given the option to meow or bark, but dogs are being taught only to meow. It goes against the fundamental nature of the cat or dog to act differently than it has for centuries, but they (the social engineers) know that it is in their best interest to change their behaviors.
Food for thought.