Admiral ready for female SEALs
Jerry920 sent us this link to an article at ABC News about Admiral Eric T. Olson, the commander of SOCOM, who thinks women in the SEALs is a good idea. Why, you may be asking yourself. Let the Admiral explain;
…there are a number of things that a man and a woman can do together that two guys can’t…
Really? Seriously?
You’d think he would expound on that, wouldn’t you? But he doesn’t. I think an explanation is in order here, one that doesn’t necessitate the presentation of pr0n.
Category: Military issues
It’s SOP. Open the field. Examine high failure rates for women. Create quotas, lower or gender norm standard. Pat self of back for being enlightened.
Rinse, repeat.
If the requirements are valid, then they are valid for all.
Ten years from now, this very website will be outing fake female SEALs.
like make SEAL pups?
Welcome to Bizzaro World.
With a quote like that, Admiral Olson has a promising future in Obama’s brillant administration.
He really puts the “special” in Special Forces.
I have three things at home that could only a man and woman could produce. 🙂
Barring some seismic shift in US politics it’s only a matter of time before combat fields are opened to women. When they are they’ll slash and burn the physical rigors of training in places like Infantry School, BUD/S and SFAS. The slice of the female population that can get though the programs as they exist today is infinitesimally small. To not change the standards and SOPs would simply result in endless wasted resources as women were repeatedly put into programs they can’t pass and lawsuit after lawsuit hits the government for “discrimination”. Olson knows it, his SEALs know it and the suits running DoD know it. This is just Olson avoiding bad the press now that he and his organization don’t need by stating the obvious (women don’t belong in SEAL platoons) and getting on the “right side” of history latter.
Stupid! This goes to show there are just as many boobs in SOCOM as in the line units.
7# Yep, I have made many of the same points on this very blog before. I bet Spencer Ackermann is having kittens now.
Well, at least we know the USA/USMC aren’t the only two services about to be rendered impotent.
re #8,
I wouldn’t say “impotent” because the cream will continue to rise to the top but this is a political directive that will do more harm than good for combat arms. The national security apparatus has long enjoyed a degree of insulation from political correctness and “social justice” initiatives but it’s less and less everyday.
…there are a number of things that a man and a woman can do together that two guys can’t…
Is he talking about DADT repeal or something?
Does it matter? There will shortly be very little money for training, or ops, by design, so, maybe they’ll just pencil qualify all these imminently qualified females?
re #11
In a few years SOCOM will be the ONLY organization left with any money. Because of the pending fiscal bloodbath they’ll have to do twice the work but at least they’ll get to keep the lights on at MacDill.
Doc,
I spit wine all over my screen…next time, gimme a spew alert…
No. Female. SEALs. Evah.
#9 The creme anaglogy is not relevant here. I was stating that our line units as a whole in the USA/USMC are about to be massively degraded, RIFed(shrunk), and will simply be much tougher to deploy to a warzone. Is that technically impotent? Well no, but then again they weren’t theoretically in the 70s either, but we had a “hollow” force. I’m not even going to go into the condition of our ground forces before Korea broke out. This has happened twice post 1945.
As for political correctness, I disagree. The pure combat echelon, the battalion level and below has generally escaped over the last 25 years or so, the brigade/regimental level and above has not. That would include the rest of the institution, up through DOD as well.
#12 This is absolutely true, but has been the trend since the mid 80s, its a version of Special Ops Hail Maryism. Only Iraq and maybe Afghanistan, seem to have temporarily reversed this trend. I recall Generals Petreaus(about Kosovo) and Mills(about Afghanistan) touching on this. The ambigous nature of SOCOM makes it a cloak of deniabilty for leaders both political and military.
The farming out of so many basic functions to SOFs, allowed many traditional and historical capabilties in the general purpose forces(GPF) or line units to atroph. This had to be relearned to rectify. Infantry took back the streets of Iraq by policing/securing on foot. The SOF guys were complimentary not substitutes, and could never have turned the war themselves.
15-20,000 operators are going to be executing our foreign policy, they simply will be unable to accomplish many of our national objectives again. Welcome to 90s. Hey, but we still have Delta Force right? No worries.
I meant to add to my second paragraph, that I thought that was about to change.
I will argue another factor, aside from the purely physical. That’s the mental one. Have you ever heard what operators call each other? Like pilots their call signs, are not usually flattering, usually recalling some incident which is horribly embarrassing. It’s toned down since all that nastiness at Tailhook, but Operators can come up with some wicked names. I met a “Sgt dick-breath”, at least that what the other team members called him while I was there. I certainly was NEVER allowed to use that name, but inside the teams, there’s a constant “gut check” going on. Before and After a mission (never during to my knowledge). This is cruel at times, it has to be. They can and do get handed the shit end of the stick on regular occasions, have to make shit up on the fly, are ALWAYS outnumbered, usually outgunned, and have to match numbers, with stealth, tactics and sheer ferocity. You can’t seize up, you can’t take a break, its violence of action personified. Thats a mentality that favors males. Not being sexist being honest.
“That’s a mentality that favors males. Not being sexist being honest”. Excellent point, Doc. I find it just about inconceivable that the powers that be would allow this to continue when the affirmative action commences, so that’ll be something else that will earn the operators a whack on their appendage.
Eventually, the overall quality will degrade, because it just won’t be worth the effort. Or, the bull shit.
As Tailhook showed… damn, I can get fried for “creating a hostile environment” if I say that.
The only thing that readily comes to mind is “self propelled, self heating pocket pussy”.
No, no…you guys have it all wrong. LET the women into the SEALS. Doc Bailey’s right; the SEALs will train ’em up, nice and strong, get ’em all pregnant, and send ’em home. The best males breed the strongest females, and the genetic pool is improved. All at tax payer expense. What’s not to love about a program like that?
/sarc off
Heh!
Adds new meaning to the ringing of the bell.
“…there are a number of things that a man and a woman can do together that two guys can’t…”
Not in today’s Army, sweetcheeks.
Which makes the Admiral’s comment all the more galling. If I wore the Budweiser (trident), I’d be mighty pissed right now knowing that standards are about to hit the shitter in the name of “diversity”.
Diversity is a crock. Females have no business in combat. That’s ALPHA male territory only. Lowering the standards so they quit b*tching about not being treated fairly is a way to degrade the quality of the teams.
I can’t wait to hear what my friends have to say about this. It will be a great laugh.
I would like to ask, and seriously, what ever happened to the days when keeping women far from harm, men protecting them, was a GOOD thing? I know this might be entirely lost on some of you roughnecks, but what ever happened to the Gentleman?
is it really any wonder why there’s so much “gender confusion”? Women are great, awesome in fact because they’re NOTHING like men. I like to be able to open jars a lady can’t, and I am horrified at the very thought of women being shot at, and getting injured. When did that become a bad thing.
#25:
I hear you brother. Too many women running around thinking they’re men, when they ain’t got the hardware or the software to pull it off. It’s not how they are designed, women were designed to COMPLEMENT men, not compete with them.
And speaking strictly for myself, I find the Mark II model human being a serious improvement over the Mark I original for the purposes of big picture stuff like civilization.
Which marks are you referring to?
I would like to ask, and seriously, what ever happened to the days when keeping women far from harm, men protecting them, was a GOOD thing? I know this might be entirely lost on some of you roughnecks, but what ever happened to the Gentleman?
==========
That is my mentality on this issue as well, Doc.
The other side I see is the fact that women are completely unique in that they are the only ones who can continue our circle of life. It’s harsh to say, but men are expendable. We don’t produce life. Yeah, sure, we contribute to reproduction, but we don’t produce life. And we can be replaced.
Not so for women. We lose a woman, and that’s one less opportunity for our culture to reproduce.
http://games.crossfit.com/athletes/annie-thorisdottir
Has all of the physical requirements to be a SEAL. Sure, she is the exception but, who are any of you old, broke dick, haters to limit her? If she also had what it took mentally, why not?
She could kick ALL of your asses.
@#29, but the important questions are, 1. could she hit the broadside of a barn from inside, with an M-4? And 2. Does she know how to make a ham samwich?
After reading her “accomplishments” my mind wanders back to all of those East German “female” Olympians.
Sure, because the standard should be changed because of 1 exception, and we all have time to waste playing “what-if”.
Because you cannot fill a unit with exceptions. Would there have to be separate accommodations for showing? What about the different hygiene needs and the effects of the environment on their body. Women tend to get UTIs because of how their anatomy is. If you are out in the field for a long time that could be a problem.
Also the face that there is a double standard on how Americans view women who die in the field. Not to mention that if the enemy were to capture a female SEAL that what is to prevent them from raping her? How would the American Public react to that?
While this is not combat related, but the reaction to those lost in the Challanger explosion was vastly different for Christa McAuliffe then the rest of the crew.
It is not a good idea and more so when they are reducing the number of Service members across the board.
You know what is bad about these women? They aren’t thinking about all us women who DON’T want to be Seals… Eventually all this damn equality will lead to women having to sign up for selective service, and there are just some damn women who don’t belong in combat. My poor daughter if she is blessed with my height will be pushing 5 feet nothing.
I could list a number of reasons why I shouldn’t be in combat.. but someday these equality bitches will force someone like me to have to do this crap.
[…] the two girls. Hillary chews a chunk of ham and cheese – while whoever’s playing America’s first ever female SEAL puts a round into center mass bin Laden. Obama stares impassively from his corner – Matt […]
#33
Melle1228
Correct-o-mondo.
I am a ‘chick’
Was in Military
Was A Registered Nurse
Know Good Men from Serving Such as Lt Commander Chris Bizer,M.D. and George Watt,M.D. ((from Texas)) Army.
My Uncle Major John R. Welch,USMC
My Uncle USN SEAL Gerald ‘BUS’ Rose…..
ETC.
Being a Nurse was Fine with me.
I loved it. (((No desire to be a SEAL))
Get Real…The SAW or other heavy weapons would break my shoulder.
Suspect Female SEAL Wannabees will discover that too.
#29: Sure, she could probably kick all our asses, right now, because many of us “old, broke dick, haters” have already been there and the toll taken on the body is why we are broke dick. Being in a combat unit is more than just being able to ace the PT test and you don’t get to go grab a shower and a gatorade after your done working out and competing in “games”. Plus, have you asked her if she wants to be an operator? Are you speaking for her because she has shown interest in being a SEAL, or are you just using her as an example of what you THINK is required to be an operator? Why don’t you watch a few rounds of the Best Ranger Competition and then get back to us “haters”?
Plus, as others have stated, it’s not about exceptions to the rule. That’s not about being a redneck, just reality.
The feminists apparently have won. I’m not talking about whether or not a female should be eligible. I’m talking about the head-down, shuffle-the-shoes, aw-shucks-is-anybody-looking apologetic crud that I see here. No female should be in a combat unit. Why? Because when it comes to soldiering, there’s not a swinging dick that isn’t thinking of getting in her pants, up her dress or delivering a tubesteak dinner to her, that’s why. Bull dikes and straight nurses aside, females in service traditionally boink officers, push papers, or both. I like that tradition. One other thing while I’m at it. What’s wrong with being a redneck?