It’s up to Congress now.
That is, it’s up to Congress to salvage from the damaging impact of social experimentation the U.S. military, the strongest and most effective military ever, according to an organization that focuses on the readiness of the nation’s forces.
The nation’s lawmakers urgently need to intervene, according to a new report from Center for Military Readiness, because without that, women will be ordered into combat.
But wasn’t the recent campaign by President Obama and others supposed to allow women in the military to access all those opportunities denied them earlier?
The reality is that “once a person joins the military, there is no such thing as ‘voluntary,'” the report. “Women will be required to go where they are ordered. On January 24 Joint Chiefs Chairman General Martin Dempsey called for the assignment of ‘significant cadres’ of women to create a ‘critical mass’ in formerly all-male combat arms battalions.
“Enlisted women, who outnumber female officers five to one, will not have the option or choice to refuse assignments that unfairly treat them like men in a military social experiment testing Amazon Warrior myths.”
The CMR’s chief, Elaine Donnelly, earlier said the announcement by former Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta that all positions in the military would be opened to women was unwise.
Women earlier had been denied the opportunity of being in tip-of-the-spear units that physically confront enemy contingents.
Donnelly warned then that Marine and Army field commanders “who desire promotion will be compelled to pursue gender-based quotas by ordering women into direct ground combat (infantry) battalions.”
The Pentagon, under Barack Obama’s direction, said just weeks ago virtually every ground-combat job now will be opened to women.
The new report said the announcement from Obama’s administration Jan. 24 abolishing the exemption for women from direct ground combat battalions “will impose unprecedented social burdens on our military.”
“Standards will be compromised, combat effectiveness reduced, violence against women increased, and both men and women will be put at greater risk. In addition, unsuspecting civilian women eventually will be subject to Selective Service obligations on the same basis as men,” it explained.
“No one should be fooled by the administration’s pretense of prolonging women-in-combat plans over three years. Congress is being cut out of the decision, and current military leaders are not free to dissent from ill-advised policies already made. Long before decisions are ‘final’ in 2016, military officers will be promoted or selected for high rank only if they support gender-based ‘diversity’ in ground combat,” the report said.
“A better approach is needed to bring law and policy in line with current realities and lessons learned since Sept. 11, 2001. Congress must support the majority of military women, and act to preserve high, uncompromised standards in tough training that saves lives. The only way to do these things and to maintain the legal rationale for women’s Selective Service exemptions, is to codify women’s exemption from assignment to direct ground combat. Before incremental plans become irreversible, Congress must assert its authority and act.”
The report reiterated the concerns that woman physically are not the match of men.
“No one should assume that gender-mixed training standards will remain the same. Instead of dual standards, there will be lowered standards − equal but far less demanding than male-oriented standards are right now. The
tipoff came at the January 24 news conference, when Gen. Martin Dempsey said ‘if a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it,’ the services will be asked, ‘Does it really have to be that high?'”
Further, it warns that assigning women to direct ground combat would increase, not reduce, sexual assaults.
“According to an Army Gold Book report, violent attacks and rapes in the ranks have nearly doubled since 2006, rising from 663 in 2006 to 1,313 in 2011. Even worse, the Army reported that violent sex crime was growing at an average rate of 14.6 percent per year, and the rate is accelerating,” the report said.
Regarding having women across the nation all of a sudden eligible for a military draft, there are polls and surveys that use the word “allowed” instead of “required” when talking about the new “opportunities” for women, the report said.
“In recent civilian and military surveys, support dropped off dramatically when mandatory orders or a possible draft were mentioned, or when questions were asked about combat effectiveness. There is no evidence that enlisted women in the Army and Marine Corps want to be forced into violent close combat on land,” the report said.
“Superb female athletes win Olympic medals, but they do not compete against male athletes. Some women can run marathons faster than male colleagues, but not with 100-pounds loads and an enemy to fight at the end. The National Football League does not promote ‘diversity’ by fielding female players in non-lethal ‘combat’ on the gridiron,” the report said.
“In contrast, our military is being forced to send women into lethal combat, where they do not have an equal opportunity to survive, or to help fellow soldiers survive. … To preserve the culture of our military as the finest in the world, Congress must treat this is a serious national defense issue and intervene before it is too late.”
Donnelly recently pointed out in a Washington Times commentary that female officers were invited last September to participate in the grueling 13-week Marine Infantry Officer Course at Quantico, Va.
“Of the two women who volunteered, one left on the first day, and the second dropped out (along with 27 of 109 men) several days later,” she writes.