Category Archives: Rangers and Rangerettes

Ray’s Recruiting Rangerettes; Lower Standards, Commissars, to Guarantee Graduation

This rope traverse in Ranger School is a one-time deal, not part of the PT test. One example of the physical demands on the Ranger candidate. The ladies won't be doing this.

This rope traverse in Ranger School is a one-time deal, not part of the PT test. One example of the physical demands on the Ranger candidate. The ladies won’t be doing this.

Army Chief of Staff Raymond Odierno has been having his minions actively recruiting Ranger rats for the first coed Ranger class. The Army has learned from the Marines’ experience with their officer and enlisted infantry schools, and he’s not even going to attempt to have the Rangerettes meet the existing standards.

He’s also emplaced a Corps of Commissars — female officer and NCO “observers and advisers” whose mission will be to ensure that the sisters make it through. Some 31 women were selected out of “more than three dozen” who applied. The Corps of Commissars selectees were given a one-week micro-Ranger-school, according to Military.com (hat tip, The Captain’s Journal):

…so they can work alongside male instructors and help observe the female students selected for the first-ever co-ed class, known as the Ranger Course Assessment, tentatively scheduled for this spring.

The Military.com article has a few more prize quotes. We couldn’t make this crap up:

“Their performance and professionalism over the course of the week was extraordinary,” Maj. Gen. Scott Miller, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence, said of the women, according to a release posted on Fort Benning’s Facebook page. “This group did very well for what was a very physically challenging week for any soldier.”

Hey, that’s the toughest week in the Army, troop. A MG (who, dear God, should not ever be approved by the Senate for three or four stars) says so, and when was a general ever wrong?

Service officials hinted that the number of women actually interested in applying for combat assignments will be relatively small.

The reason they’re “hinting” is because, in the Army now, you can’t say anything about bull dykes, even if they’re hitting on subordinates in their own unit, and you’re the commander. Strike that: were the commander, until you asked them to stop swapping spit in uniform at a unit function.

NATO countries that have opened infantry jobs and similar positions to women report that only about 1 percent of potential female recruits apply for the jobs…

Er, what’s the percentage of….? NTTAWWT. Unless they’re in your unit, disrupting unit discipline (and creeping out otherwise-oriented subordinates), and you know now that you can’t say anything lest you and a platter be making like John the Baptist most ricky-tick.

What’s more, if the U.S. military fully integrates women into all jobs, the services’ various recruiting offices will vie to recruit that small subset of the population, she said.

“Unfortunately, all of us will be competing for those same women,” Sheimo said.

Well, m’dear, you’ll just have to get creative.

Army Secretary John McHugh and Army Chief of Staff Gen. Raymond Odierno, among others, are expected to make a decision sometime after Jan. 1 on whether to approve the plan to allow female soldiers to enroll in Ranger School.

Well, the decision those two payroll patriots are going to make is a real stone cold mystery. Really.

“Holmes, what do you make of this?”

“I don’t know, my dear Watson; for the first time in my career of detection it beats me with a stick.”

This is the picture Military.com used to illustrate their story. Presumably it shows the Corps of Commissars learning how to carry female Ranger candidates through the course.

This is the picture Military.com used to illustrate their story. Presumably it shows the Corps of Commissars learning how to carry female Ranger candidates through the course.

On second thought, we have less doubt than that, after all. Indeed, we’ll give you 10-1 that those two crapweasels make a go decision, except that none of you will take us up on it because we all already know they’ve already made the go decision.

Or to be more precise, they’ve already received the go decision and are letting a suitably decent interval elapse, as if they were thinking, before passing it on.

On Wednesday, Odierno said the service plans to finish by spring or summer assessments to determine the feasibility of opening engineering, artillery, armor and infantry jobs to women.

“It’s going very well,” he said. “We still have some final assessments to do.”

See what he did there? He very nearly spilled that the fix was in (“It’s going very well!”), and then he reeled himself in. It takes talent, and the kind of lips-on experience in sucking up that you can only learn in the best schools, to catch a bobble like that. See, that’s why this weasel is Chief of Staff, and you’re not, you slacker.

“For me, it’s about talent management. We need to take the best, no matter who you are, if you’re qualified. We’re not going to lower the standards. If you can meet the standard, we should give them the capability to service.”

Is it just us, or does that last sentence offend against the good order and discipline of the English language? And does anybody think that what has been described here is a process for finding “the best”? No, it’s a process created because certain women officers are whining about unfairness in their careers. 

Focus on your career long enough, and you turn into Ray Odierno. He was probably a great guy as a company grade officer.

[U]nits have until Dec. 1 to provide names of the volunteers to the Army’s Infantry School. Women selected for the highly competitive slots will be identified in January, Sheimo said.

The Ranger Course Assessment was open to all women in the grades E-4 through O-4 who had the support of their chain of command and whose end term of service, or ETS, was no earlier than Oct. 1, 2016, according to All-Army Activities, or Alaract, notices about the proposal.

Odierno is hardly alone in this, but he is a Chief of Staff who inherited an outstanding Army and will leave behind a weaker, less capable one.

Let’s Go to the Primary Documents!

Here’s the cable to All Army Activities (ALARACT) seeking females for the Corps of Commissars.

ALARACT 221_2014 – FEMALE OBSERVERS_ADVISORS FOR THE UNITED.pdf

It’s a lot of Army bureaucratese, in hard-to-read all caps, but here are some of the most interesting details:

  • it’s optional for the female volunteers to pass the Ranger PT test.
  • Optional to pass the Combat Water Survival Test (which tests your ability to swim about ten feet in uniform without dropping your rubber-duck imitation rifle).
  • Optional to pass land nav (a skill anyone can learn to the relatively low Ranger standard).
  • Optional to complete the 12-mile foot march (again, something anyone can learn to do, men, women and children. The women will be required to carry a 35-pound pack).
  • They can’t fail. Literally can’t fail, although they can quit: “Candidates will not be dropped from the assessment except for injury or by self removal.”
  • It’s not even a week long. It’s 8 days, but Day 1 and Day 8 are travel days with no requirements.

Yeah, Ray Odierno is trying real hard to, what was it he said? “Take the best.” Nothing says you’re taking the best like a standard that tells everybody that nobody can fail.

Here’s the cable to All Army Activities (ALARACT) seeking females for the first Rangerette course.

ALARACT 222_2014 – FEMALE STUDENTS FOR THE UNITED STATES ARMY.pdf

Same complaints about cable formatting apply, but by now you can deal with it, right, Ranger? Hooah. So onward we go to the shorter list of squawks with this document.

  • All the active-duty volunteers will initially be sent to a prep school that the National Guard maintains for pre-Ranger training. (The Guard has, in the past, been embarrassed by some first-day failures and quitters, hence the US Army National Guard, Ranger Training And Assessment Course, which is not available to male active-duty Ranger candidates.
  • Commanders will have to certify that the Rangerette candidates are proficient in all those things that the Rangerette Corps of Commissars was exempted from.
  • For the first time in the sixty-plus-year history of the school, a pregnancy test will be part of inprocessing.

The bigger issue with the special class — they’re calling it an “Assessment,” but that name exists to support the fiction that the conclusions have not been already assumed a priori – is that nobody who’s seen the way the Army handles personnel has any faith that it will be conducted in anything like a fair, objective manner. We could write the Benning press release on this one already and they haven’t even picked a date for the course yet.

The 1968 LRRP Conference on Weapons: Vol. II.

Since we knew you were going to ask, here’s the weapons stuff out of Vol. II., which was the Recondo School presentation. But it’s notable that before they discussed weapons, they discussed two more crucial elements — helicopter support (both logistics, in terms of slicks, and fires, in the shape of a Light Fire Team of attack and scout helicopters). But they did get to weapons in due course.

Weapons – The type of enemy positions, type of operation planned and the AO requires a supply of varied weapons. Most of the time a major commander will make weapons available regardless of the MTOE. However. to solve the problem. a weapons pool at the company or detachment headquarters with some of each type of weapon should be created. This would include such items as the M-79 grenade launchers, M-l6 machineguns, silenced pistols and rifles and other special purpose weapons.

OSS_M3A1_grease_silenced

Straightforward enough. We have always struggled agains the Big Green bureaucracy, in our efforts to maintain a pool of foreign and obsolete weapons, as well as other low-density US weapons, for training and operational purposes. Conventional officers, especially logistical types, tend to come from way out on the left tail of the bell curve, and have a really hard time understanding this. They really hate it when sensible preparations for combat interfere with their systems of orderly and regular inventories.

Next, the report addresses the patrol member’s dream date, the CAR-15 (which is very, very rarely called “XM177E2,” its real Army name, in period reports. Of course, some were XM177s and XM177E1s, and others were combat tested with just a Colt model number, or a Colt GX — “Government Experimental” — model number).

The CAR-15 appears to be a popular and desirable weapon and should be available. However, it is questionable as whether every man should have one. Much of its popularity is due to its newness and novelty. The point man and radio operator should have them to reduce the welight they must carry and because of the convenience offered by their shorter length. Sometimes the accuracy at long ranges of the M-16 is needed and the M.16 rarely malfunctions; therefore, it must also be available.

Of course, Colt’s whole production run of CAR-15s was, according to Colt records, 10,000 weapons. Not counting odd lots and rarities like this “GX” model (“Government Experimental,” usually indicating a toolroom prototype).

Colt GX-5857

 

When the Son Tay Raid was standing up, there were none in the Army’s inventory in new condition, so Task Force Ivory Coast acquired a stock of either Air Force or Export guns. The handful of existing Son Tay photographs show that the carbines resemble Colt Model 639/XM177E2 “submachine guns,” but lack the characteristic forward assist.

 

Even though airborne insertions were never used in RVN by Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol or Long Range Patrol teams, the conference concluded it was valuable:

The group was unanimous in desiring airborne qualification. First of all they felt LRP’s had to be considered on an army wide basis and not just on operations Vietnam. They felt units in Europe would be hindered if this capability was taken away. As a bonus the group contended the airborne qualification increases a man’s ability and confidence. It is not that being a jumper is so important: it is the mere fact that a man has proven to himself that he can go through the training and overcome a natural fear, the fear of leaving an aircraft. He has accomplished something that he had probably felt was beyond his capability. He also has learned to pay attention to detail. You have to see a new jumper or a halo jumper check his equipment to see attention to detail.

An LRP team requires this meticulousness in preparing their weapons and equipment, in planning for the patrol, and in intelligence collecting and reporting. In the CIDG program all of the MIKE forces, Mobile Strike Forces and recon units are sent through jump training. The man who is cocky enough to jump out of an airplane will probably be more willing to move into that hole in enemy territory. Some felt the graduation from Recondo School should be a prerequisite for airborne pay but the majority were opposed to this since there are only a limited number of spaces at the Recondo School.

Interesting thoughts. Even today, 46 years later, most of the world’s elite forces undergo parachute training even if they will never, ever make an airborne insertion. And recent events have proven that an airborne insertion is still a useful capability.

The documents are worth the study, if you’re interested in these things. Part I is the conference, 50 pp: LRRP Conference 1968 Part 1.pdf; Part II is a presentation on Recondo School, 10 pp:LRRP Conference 1968 part II Recondo School.pdf.

The 1968 LRRP Conference on Weapons: Vol. I.

usarv_conference_coverA great deal of mythology about the M16, CAR-15 and other weapons in Vietnam continues to circulate. Here are real lessons-learned as discussed in a period document, the 2-part USARV Long Range Patrol Conference Summary, which discussed a conference held from 9-12 August 1968, in other words, at the height of the US Army’s combat involvement in the Vietnam War. While those attending were primarily officers in grades of 2LT through MG, they clearly brought the experience of the units most involved in running long-range patrols, including the “letter” Ranger companies then of the 51st Infantry Regiment, the greek-letter projects, Mike Forces, MACVSOG, the SAS from OZ, and the Special Forces-run RECONDO school, where LLRP leaders from many US and Allied units trained.

So what did they say about weapons (with, maybe, some operational and equipment digressions)?

f_51 LRP ScrollII Field Force Vietnam (Co. F., 51st Infantry (LRP)), p. 22-23:

Equipment carried by the patrol includes as little food and water as possible, M-16s, a Light Antitank Weapon (LAW), an M-79, and an M-60 MG with 700 rounds. The patrols remain in the area for five days and are extracted only if they have wounded personnel. If the wounds are slight, they will be treated and then reinserted.

Note that this is a 5-6 man patrol. F Company Rangers practiced what they called “saturation patrolling,” where 10 to 14 of these teams would be on the ground seeking the enemy. The heavy firepower assisted in breaking contact by “impersonating” a larger unit. Unlike some other long range patrol elements, they would not be extracted unless a member was wounded; their instruction, and ethos, was “break contact, continue mission.”

Harassing and interdictory (H&I) fire continues in the AO even while teams are being inserted or on the ground. To stop the fire signals the enemy something is happening. The teams move between the fires. The fires are plotted 800 meters from the team, except at night when defensive concentrations are as close as 300 meters or closer if desired.

Details like this, which would have been extremely useful to the enemy, are why the report was classified. It would not be declassified until 31 December 1974, long after the withdrawal of American forces.

In the III CTZ operation areas where shots are heard in the jungle all day, the teams snipe at close ranges. A noise suppressor would be beneficial to assist the sniping.

Another tactic especially effective at night is to set up a trip flare behind a team that is being pursued. If gunships are on the scene, they can fire at the trip flare when the enemy trips it.

Some of these TTPs would work just as well today as they did 50 years ago. Case in point.

The teams use the starlight scope and have found it effective. The LAW is used mainly as a psychological weapon to make the enemy think twice before assaulting a team. The weapon deceives the enemy as to the size of the team. Time pencils and fragmentation grenades are used, especially at night to mislead him on the location of the team. Claymores are used extensively. Wrist compasses are used also. .It saves the man from fiddling with the lensatic and getting it caught in the brush.

Many of these small defensive possibilities have been eliminated since then, by unilateral anti-mining decisions taken by American political leaders. No more grenades with a time fuze, or tripwire Claymores on your back trail. Note that these less-well-resourced patrollers didn’t get toe-poppers and minigrenades like SOG elements did. They didn’t even have CAR-15s:

Survival knives are on the MTOE but extremely hard to obtain. The M-l6, while a good weapon, is not as suitable to LRP operations as the CAR 15 because it is too long and catches in the brush. The present camouflage uniform tears easily and mosquitoes bite through the material. The CIDG tiger suit is better.

It was complaints like these about the ripstop ERDL camouflage uniform that led to the sweat-bag first edition of the abominable BDU — 12-15 years or so later. The survival knives were, of course, pilfered in the supply chain. That still happens; team guys would stop in at Camp Vance and see every clerk in the S4 wearing the high-speed gear intended for the teams but mysteriously never issued.

SAS CrestSpecial Air Service Regiment (Australian Army), pp. 24-25.

The XM 148 is used extensively by the Australians. The trigger arrangement is dangerous as issued–it catches on vines and fires unexpectedly–so it is cut off and the sear is used to fire the weapon. The sights are removed also. Since contact range is normally five to ten meters, the sights are not needed. One XM 148 is carried per patrol.

Another piece of equipment is an anchor device for the McGuire rig or for rappelling ropes. It can be fitted to the UH-l series helicopter in about five minutes and deploys six ropes, three on each side. A pull of a lever releases the rope in an emergency. The UH-IH can extract a six-man patrol with full equipment using this rig. The present McGuire rig lifts only three people and cannot be cut· away in an emergency.

The XM-148 was a Colt-designed grenade launcher (Colt nomenclature was CGL-1 through -4) that preceded the M203. AAI’s M203 would, a few years later, provide the same capability, but without any of the 148’s problems.

Yes, SASR really did roll with XM148s. Three troopers on right have them (left hand guy has an M203) on M16s and L1 FAL. Image source.

Yes, SASR really did roll with XM148s. Three troopers on right have them (left hand guy has an M203) on M16s and L1 FAL. Image source.

The SF STABO rig ultimately adopted that Australian innovation which was, as SAS Major Wade noted, quite superior to the improvised (but working) McGuire rig.

25th Infantry Division, Company F, 50th Infantry (LRP), p. 35:

75th ranger 25th ID scrollThe old AR belt is a very useful item of equipment. It has numerous pouches for ammunition or grenades, which distributes the weight and does not have to be taped. The wrist compass could replace the lensatic if it had a sighting device on it. It is accurate and handy, and is immediately available not in a pocket. Light weight web gear made from CS cannisters [sic] is being experimented with at the present time and also the M-16 noise suppressors. The new face camouflage made by Elizabnth Arden that is used by the SEAl.s seems better than our issue camoufhLge. The time pencils are very useful but hard to get.

The “old AR belt” that Captain Dawson of the 25th mentioned is the BAR belt. The then-standard Army issue equipment, the M-56 field gear, had metal buckles and snaps and, without a liberal application of green tape or duct tape, would make a patrol jingle like Santa’s reindeer. (Garrison-oriented commanders and especially sergeants major and first sergeants tended to oppose addition of tape to issue web gear, and it was a constant source of friction between combat troops and chairborne REMFs, until the M-56 and its equally shoddy successor, ALICE, passed out of service).

101st Airborne Division (Airmobile), Company F, 58th Infantry (LRP), pp. 37-38:

This is actually the later L/75th Ranger scroll. All these scrolls come from this site, airborne-ranger.com.

This is actually the later L/75th Ranger scroll; we didn’t find one for F/58. All these scrolls come from this site: airborne-ranger.com.

The 101st’s program seemed particularly mature and well-thought-out to exploit the Division’s copious helicopter mobility. While their notes on operations and ARVN integration were most personally interesting, they had some interesting observations on weapons and equipment, too:

The use of CS dropped by helicopters has proven successful but required the team to take a gas mask along. This is deemed worth the extra effort. …

Air support is preferred to artillery in the AO due to triple canopy vegetation. It is difficult to observe and adjust ar tillery and a LFT can respond in 10 to 15 minutes.

The first light insertion is utilized most frequently. It allows reaction in case of contact on or near the LZ and an air relay, a U-1A Otter from Phu Bai. can standby during insertion or until the team establishes communication with the base camp or ground relay station. The teams do not move during the noon period or when another team is in contact because a team is less likely to be discovered when it is stationary.

The standard 65-foot Chinook suspension ladder cut in half and strung through a UH-1 model helicopter so that about 12 feet hangs down on each side is effective for insertion and extraction in stumpy areas, thickly vegetated areas, over uneven ground or where rotary clearance is needed. Rappelling is used also but its use makes McGuire rig extraction required, and this is avoided when possible. However, one McGuire rig wHh handcuffs on the riser is used to extract prisoners.

The company has three British Sten guns with silencers which are extremely quiet. They have not been fired in the course of an operation although they were taken along.

36th Mobile Strike Force Command, Vol. 1, p. 42:

(probably fake) mike force patchThe patrols carry one AN/PRC-25 radio with two headsets per patrol (the headset has proven to be the most likely part of system to fail). Their base station has an RTT capability and single side band in addition to the AN/GRC-46 radios. The Americans a.re armed with the CAR-I5 and the Cambodians carry the M-16. There are Sten guns and two pistols, all with silencers, available in the unit. Three of the American members carry the Swedish K submachinegun.

“Swedish K” was the Special Forces nickname for the Swedish Carl Gustav M45B submachine gun, which was commonly carried with 36-round box magazines but could also use 50-round Suomi magazines by removing a retaining pin and magazine housing. We think they could also use the Suomi drum but never tried it ourselves!

The Swedish M45B was copied in Egypt as the "Port Said." It is a typical 2nd-Genrration SMG.

The Swedish M45B was copied in Egypt as the “Port Said,” which is the version seen here (file photo). It is a typical 2nd-Genrration SMG.

The MACV Recondo School, p. 49:

recondopatchPersonal appearance is deemed important by the school. While a student is at school, the individual is required to maintain a high standard of personal hygiene and appearance. Mustaches must be nearly trimmed, haircuts must be short, and the normal appearance ·of an elite l.RP trooper does not include rings in ears Qr bracelets. The school is a MACV school and these standards must be maintained.

The school had previously mentioned some problems they were having with unmotivated students (definitely a problem as Recondo school used the enemy as a training aid). It attributed these woes to poor selection and neglect of published selection standards by sending unit. The school listed the goodies each student got, as well as some problems with what he was expected to bring along:

… provide each graduate with six Recondo patches and a diploma. Honor graduate receives a
special knife purchased from the fund.

USARV Regulation 350-2 contains a list of equipment that the individual should bring to the school with him. Many students do not realize this and the school does not have enough facilities to provide this equipment for every student. Critical items are camouflage fatigues and M-16 magazines.

So as early as 1968, the training base and the troop units were already scamming M16 mags (in those days, 20-rounders) from one another.

One little detail: everywhere in this report M16 (which is the weapon’s actual designation, although the Army model was always the XM16E1/M16A1) is rendered as M-16. This instantiates the well-known idea that, even though an item’s official nomenclature is one thing, the troops may call it something different — even in official reports.

IIIrd Marine Amphibious Force (1st & 3rd Recon Battalions), p. 45.

Once again, the Marine contribution was most interesting for their tactics and operation art, very different from any of the Army approaches. But they did have this to say about weapons, and interesting take on CS gas (non-lethal tear gas):

One way of using CS is to employ it by fixed wing. A ton of it can be placed in the napalm tanks with sand to get it through the jungle canopy. It can saturate 4,000 square meters :in five minutes. It is a good technique for taking prisoners but an extra gas mask must be taken along for the prisoner or he will die.

So, even with normally non-lethal gas, the dose makes the poison. One suspects that was learned at the expense of some fellow named Nguyen.

Note well: these comments are all from Volume I of the Conference proceedings. There’s more cool stuff in the shorter Volume II but we’re already knocking on the door of 2,000 words, awfully long for a web article.

UPDATE

The documents, if you please: Part I is the conference, 50 pp: LRRP Conference 1968 Part 1.pdf; Part II is a presentation on Recondo School, 10 pp:LRRP Conference 1968 part II Recondo School.pdf.

Whining Their Way Up: Women Demand Equal Results for Unequal Effort

Some months ago, in April, actually, we noted the whinging of failed Marine infantry officer Sage Santangelo. She bombed out of the infantry officers’ course, and then hit the WaPo in a welter of finger-pointing.

Here’s a blog entry that we missed at the time, in which a real infantry Marine lets her have it.

In going to General Amos you proved that you are not interested in being a leader. You’re interested in a career. Amos gave you special treatment because you’re a woman, which you accepted. I wonder what General Mattis would have told you. Either way, you’re not qualified to lead troops and they’re going to put you into an administrative billet that’s going to be a cakewalk. It might be great for your career, but I imagine your command is going to hide you in a corner because you’ve already proven that if you have a problem, you’re going to go to the media (when some ruck runs might have been more fruitful to your conditioning, Devil).

Yep, I just devil-dogged you, ma’am. Since I’m a civilian, I’ll even throw in a fully modified knife hand for this next part.

Did any of the 24 male Marines who didn’t pass your IOC class get a sweet-talk from the Commandant? No. Did they go to the Washington Post to complain about it? No. They’re probably training to take the course a second time. What about the other female 2nd Lieutenants, were they given a career boosting deployment to Afghanistan? No. Not to mention, those 24 men were trained to the standard that you say would have allowed you to pass the course, so what caused their failure? I  agree that women should be given a second chance to take IOC, but you have to take responsibility for your lack of preparation. In combat, you can’t call the Commandant. You take charge of the troops under you or good men (and women) die. Aren’t there leadership principles (that you learned in The Basic School) that lay this out for you? # 11. Seek responsibility and take responsibility for your actions.

“We need to set women up to succeed in combat roles,” you said. To put it another way, women need special treatment. This undermines your whole argument of women being equally capable of serving in combat. The Marine Corps needs self-starters in leadership roles, especially in counterinsurgency operations and asymmetric warfare. We don’t promise you a rose garden either, an old recruiting poster states to potential female recruits. Perhaps you need a reminder that it’s called serving your country, and not the other way around.

via Dear 2nd Lt. Santangelo, the Marine Corps Promised You a Rose Garden. | Don’t Ever Call Me A Hero.

The likelihood of Santangelo taking any of this advice? Zero. She’s already learned that all she has to do is pout and whine and be daddy’s girl to the dotty old commandant. Her career, her sole focus, is irredeemably tainted with the stench of special pleading and special favors. Nothing she achieves from here on out will lack an asterisk.

Award-Winning Essay: Women Do Not Belong in the Infantry

rangerette-benjaminLauren Serrano is a Marine officer, and one dedicated to the idea that women ought to serve in the ways that are best for them, and best for the service. It is clearly with great reluctance that she stepped up and touched the Third Rail of military PC these days: the women-in-combat issue. She wrote an essay about it. She submitted it to a Marine Corps Association contest. And she won 1st Prize in the “MajGen Harold W. Chase Prize Essay Contest” for her entry.

She’s going to have a lot of the Sisterhood mad at her. But if a Marine officer can’t take it, who can? Here’s just a taste of her excellent essay:

My argument has little to do with whether women can pass the Infantry Officer Course or Infantry Training Battalion, or endure the hardships of combat. Even those select women who can physically endure the infantry are still posing a threat to the infantry mission and readiness. Female Marines who want to stir the pot by joining the infantry ranks are more interested in their careers than the needs of the Corps—they are selfish. 2dLt Sage Santangelo’s recent article in The Washington Post about why women are failing Infantry Officer Course argued that “the Marine Corps needs to set women up to succeed in combat roles.”2 Why? How will that contribute to a better fighting force, the needs of the Marine Corps, and the success of young enlisted Marines? The time, energy, and conflict associated with setting women up for success in infantry billets will not make the Marine Corps more combat effective.

I have no doubt that there are women who can pass initial infantry schools—and I applaud their strength. However, as Capt Katie Petronio argued in her 2013 Gazette article, “Get Over It! We are not all created equal,” long infantry careers for female Marines will eventually lead to career-ending medical conditions as they get older and their bodies are unable to withstand the years of constant infantry training.3 For the already fiscally strained military, this will lead to an increase in medically retired Marines who rate medical financial support for the rest of their lives.

You would be well advised to Read The Whole Thing™ on the Marine Corps Association website. Among the other points she makes in the article:

  • The people who are pushing this have the least experience in the military. For example, the officers in favor tend to be green 2nd Lieutenants, and a lot of the support comes from people who have never served in the military.
  • Even the careerists who think this is a ticket punch they need for their imagined Courtney Massengale careers are probably wrong: the Marines (like the other services) have a lot of jobs outside of direct ground combat where good leaders are prized — and promoted.
  • She points out that examples like Israel and Kurdistan are not on point, because in those cases the women fight because the alternative is extermination (actually, the Kurds are a bad example, as we’ve seen, but she’s been conned by the same PR campaign that has conned so many).
  • Then, there’s what the military euphemistically calls, “fraternization.” Our Marine’s take on it:

Women in the Marine Corps are already in better shape than the average civilian and it can be assumed that any infantry woman will be a physical specimen. In the young, testosterone-filled infantry ranks, this is asking for love triangles, unit drama, and the potential for intraunit relationships. Platoon commanders in co-ed units already deal with a tremendous amount of drama, pregnancies, and sex in the co-ed unit barracks. Each time an issue arises, the platoon leadership spends a lot of time switching Marines’ barracks rooms, billets, etc.

And finally, there’s the involuntary side of sexual attraction, the sexual-assault and -harassment angle, something the writer has seen from a number of diverse angles.

There’s a lot to read here, so do Read The Whole Thing™ and let us know in comments where you agree (or not). For our part, we strongly agree with the sentiment in Capt Serrano’s essay. Note that it is that Women do not belong in the Infantry, not that Women do not belong in the Marines (or the Army, or Special Operations Forces). Because they do belong there (and she actually cites a SOF example in the essay). But there are things, frankly, that men are better at and women are better at. Infantry’s mission (and that of DA-oriented SOF elements) is to close with and destroy the enemy by fire and maneuver. When women are Division 1 college football and other contact-sports players, then they’ll be ready for the grunts. Not before.

Army Ranger Chicks — Official Message

Soon available in ladies' sizes....

Soon available in ladies’ sizes….

This is the original source document, documenting the first half of the story we had last week — yep, they want chicks in Ranger School. Note that this is a “recruiting effort” directed by the command, but they specify that women will not be commanded to attend. The second part, about the women commissars, was in a separate ALARACT (ALl ARmy ACTivities) message. We note that, while units must fund the attendance of their men at this school, word is that some DA slush fund will fund the attendance of these women, so it costs units nothing to send their females except the absence from duty. (That’s probably why they had to order them not to order women to attend, or every unpleasant female in the Army would be Benning-bound in early ’15 while her leaders and subordinates relaxed). They want a headcount by 1 Nov 14 and names of volunteers by 1 Dec. Other than that, no editorial comment on this. Read our original story for that! — Eds.


SUBJ/ALARACT 222/2014 - FEMALE STUDENTS FOR THE UNITED STATES ARMY
MANEUVER CENTER OF EXCELLENCE (MCOE) RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT
THIS MESSAGE HAS BEEN TRANSMITTED BY US ARMY INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
AGENCY (USAITA) ON BEHALF OF HEADQUARTERS, US ARMY TRAINING AND
DOCTRINE COMMAND (TRADOC)
SUBJECT: FEMALE STUDENTS FOR THE UNITED STATES ARMY MANEUVER CENTER
OF EXCELLENCE (MCOE) RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT
NARR/(U) PURPOSE OF THIS MESSAGE IS TO SEEK ARMY-WIDE SUPPORT OF
ELIGIBLE FEMALE STUDENTS TO PARTICIPATE IN THE MCOE RANGER COURSE
ASSESSMENT(DECISION REGARDING EXECUTION OF ASSESSMENT WILL BE MADE IN
JANUARY 2015).
1. (U) BACKGROUND: AS PART OF THE ARMY SOLDIER 2020 INITIATIVE TO
ENSURE THE BEST-QUALIFIED SOLDIERS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE IN
ANY POSITION WHERE THEY ARE CAPABLE OF PERFORMING TO STANDARD, THE
MCOE MAY CONDUCT A RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT IN 3RD QTR FY15 (EXACT
DATES TBD).
1.A. (U) MCOE MAY CONDUCT A RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT TO INFORM FUTURE
DECISION MAKING.
1.B. (U) FEMALE VOLUNTEERS SELECTED TO ATTEND THE RANGER COURSE
ASSESSMENT (EXACT CLASS TBP) WILL BE REQUIRED TO MEET ALL COURSE
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND TRAINING REQUIREMENTS.
2. (U) ARMY COMMANDS (ACOMS), ARMY SERVICE COMPONENT COMMANDS
(ASCCS), AND DIRECT REPORTING UNITS (DRUS) WILL CONDUCT A RECRUITING
EFFORT TO IDENTIFY FEMALE VOLUNTEERS FOR THE RANGER COURSE
ASSESSMENT.
3. (U) PREREQUISITES FOR ENTRY INTO THE RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT CAN
BE FOUND IN THE ARMY TRAINING REQUIREMENTS AND RESERVATION SYSTEM
(ATRRS). ADDITIONAL STUDENT INFORMATION AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
CAN BE FOUND ON THE AIRBORNE AND RANGER TRAINING BRIGADE (ARTB) WEB-
SITE UNDER THE STUDENT INFORMATION LINK
(HTTP://WWW.BENNING.ARMY.MIL/INFANTRY/RTB/)
3.A. (U) ADMINISTRATIVE RESTRICTIONS PROHIBITING WOMEN FROM ATTENDING
THE RANGER COURSE ARE SUSPENDED FOR SELECTION INTO THE RANGER COURSE
ASSESSMENT.
3.A.1. (U) THE RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT IS OPEN TO ALL FEMALE
VOLUNTEERS IN THE GRADES E4-O4.
3.A.2. (U) FEMALE SOLDIERS MUST BE VOLUNTEERS. FEMALE SOLDIERS WILL
NOT BE DIRECTED TO PARTICIPATE IN THE RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT.
3.A.3. (U) ALL FEMALE VOLUNTEERS MUST HAVE AN END TERM OF SERVICE
(ETS) NO EARLIER THAN 01 OCTOBER 2016.
3.A.4. (U) FEMALE VOLUNTEERS MUST COMPLETE AN APPROVED RANGER
PHYSICAL EXAMINATION (DD FORM 2807-1, DD FORM 2807-2, AND DD FORM
2808) AND AUDIOGRAM (DD FORM 2216) PERFORMED IAW AR 40-501, CHAPTER
8. FEMALE VOLUNTEERS MUST PROVIDE COPIES OF ALL LABORATORY OR
SPECIALIZED CONSULTATIONS SIGNED BY A DOCTOR AND DENTIST, DATED
WITHIN 18 MONTHS OF COURSE START DATE. VOLUNTEERS MUST MEET MEDICAL
FITNESS STANDARDS IAW AR 40-501, CHAPTERS 2, 5-3, AND 5-4.
ADDITIONALLY, VOLUNTEERS MUST PROVIDE A CURRENT COPY OF MEDPROS THAT
INCLUDES A ROUTINE ADULT + H1N1 MODULE AND A ROUTINE IMMUNIZATION
SUMMARY.
3.A.5. (U) FEMALE VOLUNTEERS WILL BE ADMINISTERED A PREGNANCY TEST
DURING IN-PROCESSING. POSITIVE TESTS WILL RESULT IN DISENROLLMENT.
3.A.6. (U) ALL FEMALE VOLUNTEERS WILL BE REQUIRED TO ATTEND THE US
ARMY NATIONAL GUARD, RANGER TRAINING AND ASSESSMENT COURSE (RTAC)
CONDUCTED AT FT BENNING, COLUMBUS, GA PRIOR TO ENROLLMENT IN THE
RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT CLASS.
3.A.7. (U) ALL RTAC COURSE (ATRRS) RESERVATIONS, IN SUPPORT OF THE
RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT, WILL BE COORDINATED THROUGH THE US ARMY
INFANTRY SCHOOL (USAIS).
3.A.8. (U) ALL FEMALE VOLUNTEERS WILL HAVE A COPY OF THEIR COMMANDERS
VALIDATION LETTER FOR IN-PROCESSING. IN-PROCESSING PREREQUISITE
INFORMATION, INCLUDING AN EXAMPLE COMMANDERS VALIDATION LETTER, CAN
BE FOUND ON THE ARTB WEB SITE UNDER THE STUDENT INFORMATION LINK
(HTTP://WWW.BENNING.ARMY.MIL/INFANTRY/RTB/).
3.A.9. (U) THE COMMANDERS VALIDATION LETTER WILL CERTIFY ALL
PARTICIPANTS ARE PROFICIENT ON RANGER TASKS AND RANGER ASSESSMENT
PHASE REQUIREMENTS, INCLUDING: THE RANGER PHYSICAL ASSESSMENT (49
PUSH-UPS, 59 SIT-UPS, 5-MILE RUN IN 40 MINUTES, and 6 CHIN-UPS); 12-
MILE FOOTMARCH IN 3 HOURS; THE COMBAT WATER SURVIVAL ASSESSMENT
(CWSA); AND LAND NAVIGATION. THE 12-MILE FOOTMARCH IS CONDUCTED IN
THE ARMY COMBAT UNIFORM, BOOTS, FIGHTING LOAD CARRIER (FLC), PATROL
CAP, AND RUCKSACK WEIGHING A MINIMUM OF 35 LBS (WITHOUT WATER) WHILE
CARRYING AN INDIVIDUAL WEAPON.
3.B. (U) VOLUNTEER IDENTIFICATION AND ENROLLMENT TIMELINE.
3.B.1. (U) UNITS WILL PROVIDE USAIS THE NUMBER OF POTENTIAL
ASSESSMENT VOLUNTEERS NLT 3 NOV 14.
3.B.2. (U) UNITS WILL PROVIDE USAIS STANDARD NAME LINE INFORMATION OF
ASSESSMENT VOLUNTEERS NLT 1 DEC 14.
3.B.3. (U) DETAILED SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AND INFORMATION WILL BE
PUBLISHED IN A SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE. ALL ATRRS RANGER COURSE SEATS
FOR THIS ASSESSMENT WILL BE HELD AND MANAGED BY THE USAIS.
3.C. (U) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION:
3.C.1. (U) FEMALE VOLUNTEERS ARE ENCOURAGED TO COMPLETE THE 90-DAY
RANGER COURSE PREPARATION PROGRAM ON THE ARTB WEB SITE
(HTTP://WWW.BENNING.ARMY.MIL/INFANTRY/RTB/).
3.C.2. (U) ALL WOMEN WHO SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETE AND GRADUATE FROM THE
RANGER COURSE WILL RECEIVE A GRADUATION CERTIFICATE AND BE AWARDED,
AND AUTHORIZED TO WEAR, THE RANGER TAB. UNTIL FUTURE INTEGRATION
DECISIONS ARE MADE AND REQUIREMENTS UNDER TITLE 10 US CODE, SECTION
652 ARE SATISFIED, FEMALE GRADUATES WILL NOT RECEIVE THE ASSOCIATED
RANGER SKILL IDENTIFIERS OR BE ASSIGNED TO RANGER CODED UNITS OR
POSITIONS.
4. (U) FUNDING INFORMATION FOR ASSESSMENT PARTICIPANT ATTENDANCE AT
RTAC AND THE RANGER COURSE ASSESSMENT WILL BE PUBLISHED IN A
SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGE.
5. (U) POINTS OF CONTACT (POCS).
5.A. (U) INITIAL REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION WILL BE SENT TO
THE USAIS AT USARMY.BENNING.TRADOC.MBX.OCOIWEB@MAIL.MIL OR BY VOICE
MESSAGE AT (706) 545-0458; DSN 835-0458
5.B. (U) INDIVIDUAL POCS (FOR FUNDING, ORDERS, AND ATRRS) WILL BE
IDENTIFIED IN SUPPLEMENTAL MESSAGES.

The Kurdish Women Warriors — Fiction and Fact

Arturo in comments asked about the women in the Pesh Merga’s infantry outfit, which have, it turns out, been held out as an example of the potential of women in infantry combat. And they’re largely (per the photos) rather pretty looking, which is the opposite of what the Army’s PR flacks were asking for last year.

Kurdish Chick Fighters5

Yeah, they’re quite a thing — in the western media, something the PKK is rather adept at manipulating. The stories have appeared in more Western outlets than we can count, and the Kurdish women have been cited in a Marine Corps Association award-winning essay (which we’ll cover here soon) by a decorated woman Marine officer. But there’s a Potemkin Village aspect to these female units.

In actual fact, while the Pesh Merga have some stone-hard killers and guerilla fighters, and while their women are committed as can be to the success of their resistance, the female unit is not engaged in ground combat, despite the media narrative. One dead give-away: the gals are always depicted in shiny, fresh, new uniforms. Usually with earrings and make-up. The US press, in particular, zeroes in on the most attractive females.  This should surprise nobody — look at any Cosmopolitan cover to see what turns American feminists on.

Tough, but vulnerable, lady Death Eater seeks American reporters as pen pals, reply to Box 069, Irbil.

Tough, but vulnerable, lady Death Eater seeks American reporters as pen pals, reply to Box 069, Irbil.

Apart from the racy bra-strap shots (trust us, that is racy in the Middle East) there’s the obligatory images of women doing hand-to-hand on other women. Quentin Tarantino has made a whole career of staging these kinds of cat fights.

"And then, the ISIL guy left the toilet seat up! Eeeyaaargghhh!"

“And then, the ISIL guy left the toilet seat up! Eeeyaaargghhh!”

But the most recent (Aug-Sep 2014) spate of Kurdish Amazonia is me-too journalism at its “best.” In alphabetic order by outlet:

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/08/iraq-kurdistan-female-regiment-peshmerga-fight-is.html

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-female-fighters-kurds-20140910-photogallery.html

http://www.express.co.uk/news/world/499372/Female-fighters-of-the-Peshmerga-who-are-fighting-against-the-Islamic-State

http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/09/02/isis-fighters-terrified-death-at-hands-female-pkk-warriors/

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/anushay-hossain/kurdish-female-fighters_b_5689904.html

http://www.ijreview.com/2014/08/167994-meet-isiss-worst-nightmare-women-battalion-kurdish-fighters/

http://mashable.com/2014/09/12/pkk-women-fighters-battling-isis/

http://www.military.com/daily-news/2014/09/01/female-pkk-fighters-may-be-isils-worst-nightmare.html
(this is a repop of the Stars and Stripes article. Some of the others may be dupes, too).

http://www.msnbc.com/ronan-farrow-daily/watch/meet-the-women-warriors-fighting-isis-320578627605
(video repop of the Vocativ article).

http://nypost.com/2014/08/14/kurdish-women-take-up-arms-against-islamic-state/

http://www.stripes.com/news/female-fighters-of-the-pkk-may-be-the-islamic-state-s-worst-nightmare-1.300259

http://www.vocativ.com/world/iraq-world/female-peshmerga-fighters/

Pack journalism is alive and well.

Note that as the outlet gets more American and more liberal, the focus on the most attractive women in the photos increases (NTTAWWT, some Kurdish women are very beautiful!) and the degree to which the writers extrapolate from these women’s combat exploits to the future of women in the US service increases. For example, the HuffPo claims that the 2nd Battalion singlehandedly recaptured the Mosul Dam. Er, no. They didn’t. Vocativ’s story, by two feminists, naturally, is full of unintelligible undergrad gender-theory cant and claims the unit was a reaction to ISIL (it dates to the Clinton era, FFS. 1996 — if not earlier. And it was a reaction to Saddam’s attacks on the Kurds). Why, gender roles are so broken down in the Pesh Merga that the women are organized in their own battalions, like the US did in WWII, and segregated from the men.

Kurdish Chick Fighters4

To give you an idea what the PKK really thinks of the unit, the female battalion commanders (LTC or jr. COL) report to a female brigade commander (COL)… who reports to a male lieutenant. Note also that all the photos are close-ups of individuals or small groups. The one shot we saw of a “large” formation had 18 women in it … being marched by a lieutenant colonel.

We’re sure ISIL are quaking in their sandals, and soiling their manjams. But then, these gals would probably stand and fight better than the Iraqi Army has done so far. (At least the Syrians, damn their eyes, are fighting).

Iraq: Women Peshmerga Of The 2nd Battalion Military Exercise

On second thought, screw “vulnerable.” Eat lead, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi! (Well, technically, “Eat steelcore.” But you get the idea).

But story after story talks about the combat prowess and exploits of these women, with no evidence at all. Well, we’re going to give one one data point of evidence. A real, no-$#!+ indicator of the combat-arms status of the unit comes from the NY Post story:

Although there have been no battle losses during the 18-year history of the 2nd Battalion, three soldiers were injured in 2003 during the battle of Kirkuk as the US invaded Iraq.

Got it? They’re not only superwomen, they’re also bulletproof! (Or maybe they, like the cameras that capture them so often, aren’t exactly in the front lines).

The Iranians have show units of women like this, too, which may be where the PKK got this predigested-for-lazy-journalists idea. So did Libyan oddjob Muammar Qadhafi. It looks like there are one or two stringers with photogs who went to press events in Irbil, and the rest of Journo World is all just copying off each other and making up more details.

Lethal aid for the Kurds is finally flowing though (which may be why the Turks’ noses are out of joint, or it may just be that Erdogan’s islamists are siding with their Islamic State pals). The US aid that’s enumerated in these articles is all ammo: 7.62 x 39, 14.5mm, and all sizes of comblock mortar rounds. (We’re taking “80mm” as a typo or journalist or PR-flack “braino”). The US is making pinprick raids on individual ISIL vehicles or emplacements, with one eye on domestic politics (“We better look like we’re doing something, we’re getting killed in the polls.”)

Bottom line — we have no doubt that Kurdish women are willing to fight. We’ve heard more than one Afghan woman express her desire to cut some Taliban throats. Remember that every Kurdish family has tales of victimization (and not the bullshit “microaggressions” that pampered collegiates whine about over here. Real, macro aggressions that leave family members dead). But they probably serve their country best in this propaganda role, frankly. Of course, that means we’re going to be hearing for decades from Social Justice Warriors™ and Women In Sensible Shoes® about ever-more-exaggerated Peshmerga-ette exploits.

We’ll tell people we’re reading the articles, but we’ll probably just look at the pictures.

 

Note

This story is a follow-up, thematically at least, to Breaking: Rangerettes, two different kinds! from 13 Sep 14, a report on the Army brass’s latest moves towards women in combat arms. We continue to develop the situation.

Breaking: Rangerettes, two different kinds

rangerette-benjaminA Friday night bad-news blast launched the Army’s latest iniquity into the weekend. The fix continues to be in for sending women to Ranger school in the Army. Indeed, they’ll be coming on two different pathways, both designed to use the halo of Ranger School and the Ranger Tab to burnish the packets of female careerists.

The first is for actual attendees at the school.

First, the Army is seeking female soldiers who want to attend Ranger school as students. Women in the ranks of specialist through major can apply. They must meet the physical qualifications and prerequisites required to attend Ranger School.

Those prerequisites are:

Physical requirements to attend Ranger school include completing at least 49 pushups in two minutes, at least 59 sit-ups in two minutes, at least six pull-ups, and a five-mile run in 40 minutes or less. Candidates also are required to complete a combat water survival assessment consisting of equipment removal and 15-meter swim in the Army Combat Uniform and boots.

These physical qualification tests must be done within 90 days of reporting to Ranger school.

Enlisted applicants must have a standard General Technical score of 90 or higher and 12 months or more active-duty service remaining after completion of Ranger school.

Those are not “fog a mirror,” but they’re also not insuperable requirements for reasonably fit women, especially the way most Army units grade female pushups — a nod of the head will do. But half the men who enter the course, after meeting that standard (with real pushups, even), drop. How’s the Army going to keep its hothouse flowers from wilting? Well, they’ll have a cadre of “observers” watching to make sure the gals are not held to the same standard as the guys.

Second, female soldiers can volunteer to serve as observers and advisors to the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade. These slots are open to staff sergeants through master sergeants, chief warrant officers 2 and 3, and first lieutenants through majors.

These volunteers will not be Ranger instructors, and they won’t evaluate students in the course.

Nope. They’ll just be The Sisterhood’s eyes and ears, and any RI who writes up a dud female for a Major Minus Spot Report, or who fails a female 2LT for the things that 2LTs frequently bolo on a graded patrol, will have a notation in his file that may say some other words but will translate to: “Sexxxxxist! Career over.”

Of course they’ll have to meet high standards:

Women who volunteer to serve as observers must undergo a selection process that includes a fitness test, land navigation, a combat water survival assessment, an operations order test, as 12-mile road march with a 35-pound ruck, and review boards, according to the Army.

Note how much lower the standards than the ones for attendees. Translation: “We expect them to fog a mirror.” Note that this PT test is only to the much lower sex-normed PT standards. After all (to put it in language the President might understand), we can’t expect the Rangerettes to drive from the men’s tees.

The Army wants packets by 10 Oct 14 and the first graduates participants (can’t get ahead of the narrative) will be identified in December.

If approved, the Ranger course assessment will have male and female soldiers training together, according to the Army.

“If approved.” How droll. Let’s see, what are the odds that something that’s being dictated — including its outcome — by the E Ring suits to the Army chain of command will not be “approved”?

The standards will remain the same, and there will be no change to current performance requirements or graduation standards, officials said.

We have always been at war with Eastasia. The sugar ration has been raised from 25 to 20 grams. The standards will remain the same. I promise I’ll respect you in the morning.

“We will be prepared to execute the assessment professionally and objectively if directed,” said Maj. Gen. Scott Miller, commanding general of the Maneuver Center of Excellence and Fort Benning, Georgia, in a statement.

The one fact in that whole paragraph is that Fort Benning is in Georgia. This is a command-directed outcome, and the assessment will produce the outcome directed, and Miller thinks we’re ammunition-handler material if he expects us to believe him. (Well, with the press, he may have a point).

All female candidates selected for the course will be required to attend the Army National Guard Ranger Training and Assessment Course at Fort Benning before the start of their Ranger school class.

Translation: “We’re so sure this is going to be a success, that we’re going to run a prephase to see just how much coddling and how heavy a thumb on the scale will be required to achieve that success!”

via Women invited to apply for Ranger School | Army Times | armytimes.com.

UPDATE 15 Sep 14

We continue to follow this up with more reporting. Here’s a little cold water of truth on the mating dogs of the press and their Kurdish Women Warriors meme that’s going around. More to follow.

Combatives — They’re doing it wrong

Here’s a video for all you fans of women in the infantry. Female combatives! Alas, we can’t tell which one is Sage Santangelo. But that’s just our cismale gendernormative cryptofascism coming out, wise young people (like the ones in the video) tell us.

Should probably give you a pair of warnings: (1), foul language; and (2), overweening stupidity.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rniCtyDoRrs

Sorry about the video being eight plus minutes of full retard, but that’s what it is.

The only surprise is that one of these two young, er, “ladies,” thinks to use a weapon. (When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have shovels!) It’s no surprise that the other one survives a shovel upside the head — it’s not clear that neither the duellists, nor the seconds, nor the Pajama Boy who’s method-acting the Gay Friend role, has anything in a head that can be damaged. Except maybe hair follicles.

UPDATE: 

Well, intercourse. YouTube has ganked the video (believe it or not, we didn’t understand what Miles meant at first until Samuel commented. Per YouTube:

This video has been removed because its content violated YouTube’s Terms of Service.

And yes, Jim, it was the one with several pathetic fights starting and then a full-handled shovel launched like a javelin and whacking one of the belligerents upside the head with a resounding clank. Shovel-victim, whose last several minutes of behavior have left us bereft of any sympathy for her, lies on the ground crying while the coterie of Mean Girls and Gay Friend circle in voyeuristic shock.

It leaves you wishing they could all be gobsmacked with shovels, or better yet, do it to one another unto death and save us the cost of incarcerating the ill-bred children they will soon spawn.

There are several shorter versions of the shovel-bonk video online, but you really needed the full 8 or 9 minutes of interpersonal relations failure to appreciate what losers these kits are (shoveler, shovelee, and eggers-on alike).

A Rangerette Roundup

rangerette-benjaminPut down the ropes, pard. Not that kind of roundup. We’re going to round up a few Rangerette stories about how our military is doing, marching off into the bright sunlit uplands of the Future with the New Soviet Non-Gendered Person in the vanguard of the proletariat.

Or something.

Navy: Chick Stands Watch. Man Dies For It

First, you all did catch the quixotic attack on the US Navy by a guy who was apparently a common-and-garden-variety ex-con with, quite possibly, some mental illness. The Navy’s in the deepest of deep denial, but the reason there’s a good sailor dead, MA2 Mark Mayo, is because the Petty Officer of the Watch on USS Mahan was a slight woman who was overpowered by, and gave up her sidearm to, the intruding ex-convict.

You all know about NCIS? No, not the one on TV with the hot chicks and all, the one in the real world, with a bunch of wannabe detectives in polyester doubleknit pants? That one. It has the responsibility for the investigation. The head of NCIS is not some grizzled old admiral or even a Naval officer, but he’s a gun-control ideologue, Andrew Traver, who was unable to get confirmed to his dream job as head of ATF, even by the Democratic Senate. Traver’s a politician, not an investigator, and the most interesting story that’s going to come out of this is what he buries and how he tries to bury it.

MA2 Mark Mayo 2The first fact they’re burying is the identity and even the sex of the overpowered Petty Officer of the Watch. If you look at news stories, like this one, they focus on the heroism of Mayo, who was forced to such an extreme by the failure of his shipmate. They don’t mention that shipmate’s name, and are careful even not to use a pronoun that might let the news leak that our she-sailors are not all Gorgonic Amazons.

The events occured in this order, according to preliminary reports (usual warnings about preliminary reports apply). These events took place on Monday, 24 March 2014, late at night.

  1. Jeffery Tyrone Savage, who’d done time for, among other things, voluntary manslaughter, had no authorization to be on base, but he had a standard transport worker’s pass, a Transportation Worker Identification Credential, and the gate guards passed him through. (This was not itself sufficient documentation, but the guards accepted it). He was driving a 2002 Freightliner tractor.
  2. He also had no authorization to be on Pier 1 where Mahan was berthed, but his pass and his patter got him through there, too.
  3. The last line of defense for a berthed ship is the ship’s own quarterdeck watch. On Mahan, the watchstanders were armed. Several (two? three?) of the ship’s watch approached Savage, suspicious of his behavior.
  4. Savage attacked and disarmed the Petty Officer of the Watch.
  5. Mayo reportedly dived in front of the PO. Savage fatally wounded Mayo with more than one shot fired from the Petty Officer of the Watch’s issue sidearm.
  6. Another armed Mahan watchstander, firing from aboard the ship, shot and killed Savage.

And… we are not making this up… the Navy called in grief counselors for the crew of USS Mahan. But there’s really only one person on that crew who should need grief counseling. Or, to be more precise, survivor’s-guilt counseling.

Might she have held on to the gun, if she knew the strange intruder was already a multi-time and a multi-time con? She might have tried harder, anyway. And she might still have failed.

A Side Note of Non-Rangerette Fail

Who issued Savage (aptly named guy) his credential? Who else, but the very Fortress of FAIL itself, the Transportation Security Administration. No one good, decent, moral, honest, ethical or intelligent has ever been employed by the TSA in any capacity whatsoever.

Go Army, Beat Navy… at Academy Beancounting

That was then...

That was then…

Once, Army was a football powerhouse. Of course, that was around 1950. Since then, you’d think the annual Little Big Horn that the Army-Navy game has become would inspire a new resolve in the Army that almost beat the North Koreans, that nearly defeated the People’s Republic of Vietnam, and that almost won Afghanistan and Iraq. And that, after all, did eke out wins over Grenada and Panama. You’d think that the new Commandant would be determined his Academy would win… at something. 

And you’d be right. Because LTG Robert Caslen is determined to beat Navy where they’re clobbering Army right now — in beancounting of women and minorities. Right now, the Navy is ahead in the very biggest statistic in Caslen’s crabbed little world — they have 22% female cadets, and West Point has only 16%.

West Point’s new superintendent said the moves — which include more outreach and the cultivation of competitive candidates — will help keep the storied academy ahead of the curve now that the Pentagon is lifting restrictions for women in combat jobs.

This is now.

…and this is now.

Translation: “more outreach” means dropping standards, and “cultivation of competitive candidates” means quotas and incentives. And dropping standards.

“We obviously have to increase the female population for a number of reasons. One is because there are more opportunities in the branches for the females,” Lt. Gen. Robert Caslen Jr. said.

Explain how they help the US beat a Russian or Chinese army in, say Poland or Burma or Taiwan. Explain how they help the US beat Iran, should we have to fight there. Explain why the Russians, Chinese and Iranians will lose because their military academies waste time focusing on excellence instead of “diversity.”

Women have been a presence at the nation’s military academies since 1976. Female cadets here can grow their hair longer than the standard military buzz-cut and can wear stud earrings. But they carry the same heavy packs, march the same miles and graduate with the same second lieutenant bars the men here do.

They’ve let up on the male cadets that much, eh? Maybe Caslen can argue that he might have only 16% women, but he’s way over 22% pussies. Of course, the womyn cadets don’t see it that way:

“I carry the heavy weapons whenever we do field training exercises,” said Cadet Austen Boroff, a woman who refuses to be out-soldiered by her male peers. “I’ll take the machine guns, so I’m taking more weight.”

Austen! Daddy wanted a boy, huh? Reminds us of the character Larry Correia named for an australian submachine gun, but Larry’s character was named after the good one.

[D]irector of admissions Col. Deborah McDonald said there has been an increase in the number of female nominees.

Col McDonald 2

Col. Deborah McDonald, USMA Beancounter-in-Chief Director of Admissions

McDonald is a sometime speaker at “diversity” events. Sisters gotta look out for themselves….

And the academy has begun targeting top-tier female candidates and guiding them through the demanding application process. They already do that for standout scholars, soldiers, athletes and minorities.

OK, so it is a hand-coddling affirmative action program. What did we tell you? Now they will say there are no quotas…

Caslen said there’s no long-term goal yet for a percentage of female cadets. Also, final numbers on the incoming Class of 2018 won’t be known until the new group arrives for cadet basic training July 2.

What did we just tell you? But there really are quotas…

But West Point, as of this week, has admitted 229 female applicants and as many as 36 other females from the academy’s prep school will be considered.

“I have no concerns at all that we won’t actually move right beyond the 20 percent mark,” McDonald said. “It might even be as high as 22 percent.”

So what’s the quota, Deb? Just coincidentally, Navy’s 22 percent?

Any other admissions secret weapons?

West Point women’s lacrosse team is moving up to Division I in 2015, which also is expected to draw more interest from top female athletes who now choose other schools.

Ah yeah. Women’s lacrosse. What will West Point do with its share of the TV sponsorship money? Put on The Vagina Monologues? 

In a 2012-13 affirmative action Supreme Court case, a group of “diversity” (of the bean-counting kind) -desiring generals and admirals submitted a brief for racial discrimination in college admissions.

While the Marines have had a lot of publicity for their publicity-hound female LTs who flunk out of Infantry officer basic school, females in the class that entered West Point last year, and all subsequent classes, will be allowed to go infantry if they choose, and they will still only be held to the lower sex-normed fitness standards.

What’s more likely to succeed, counting beans or promoting merit? Everyone knows the answer to this, which is why the proponents are trying to redefine beancount (“diversity”) as a form of merit, valuable for its own sake.

Exit question: Academy graduates incur a five-year obligation, unless they make a commitment (such as flight school) that extends it. Women can escape the obligation at their option if pregnant, but otherwise must complete it like men, unless injured. The most recent class that has passed their basic obligation date, then, will be the Class of 2008 (2009 is coming up). So the question is: excluding officers who extended their obligation, what percentage of the West Point women of the Class of 2008 are still serving? What percentage of the West Point men?

And How Do Non-Careerist Women Feel About Combat?

Well, nobody asks them, because this is a big project of the lesbo-feminist Official Sisterhood and is underway for the benefit of careerist ticket-punchers, who are attracted to the military for the power and the ability to inflict their passive-aggressive or just plain aggressive personalities on lower ranks who have to sit and take it. (Don’t believe us? Meet Holly Graf. Let us Google that for you. The abominable Graf, by the way, got a break a man wouldn’t get for assault and other crimes: full retirement at O-6).

The vast majority of female soldiers/sailors/airmen/Marines, who do vital jobs every day for reasons susprisingly similar, to you old-timers, to that of their male brothers and cousins who are also in uniform, don’t want any part of it. Consider these lines from a non-military story that interviewed a female Army vet whose boyfriend pressed her to take a gun for defense:

What Jewell was trying to do, she said, was convince her to keep a gun for her own protection. He meant to show her that guns are safe.

Jackson, a U.S. Army veteran, said she’s always felt uncomfortable around firearms.

“I don’t like just the uncertainty of whether or not it’s going to go off,” she said.

That gal is the sort of female trooper who’s not being interviewed. In the service, we saw lots of them (and men who were afraid of firearms, too, although the men tried to mask it). No doubt she served honorably and well, and did something useful while in uniform.

But the sisterhood thinks she needs to shup up, ruck up, and accept the Holly Graf level of leadership that comes from some of our ambitious academy women.