I am starting to think that maybe the SecDef Gates, CJCS Admiral Mullen, and many others in the civilian-military leadership of the DoD wants to gut the Marines and Army of all of their Infantry soldiers. It first started with the supposed DADT survey that was sent out which had a overwhelming number of those who responded that were from combat arms jobs in the Army and Marines saying the repeal would have a negative effect. 

 
Q68c. 85% of Marine Combat Arms, 75% of Army Combat Arms, 64% overall say Negative, Very Negative, or Mixed impact on unit trust if DADT is repealed.

That result along with others demonstrated that those troops who are in the most stressful jobs at the pointy end of the spear which does what armies do, kill people don’t want this repeal. They know (as does this blogger) that this repeal will cause issues in those front-line units which are full of stress and danger. In fact I have already heard from several in the Infantry that they are thinking about getting out after their current enlistment expires. That was all before the panel came out suggesting that women should serve in frontline combat units, to include special operation units. 

That suggestion is a pure joke and could single-handily crush the effectiveness and abilities of our most experienced combat forces. These are forces that have been trained, honed, and shaped in the rigors of close combat over the last 10 years. That is a lot of experience to lose due to a “brain-drain” caused by soldiers getting out. I know to some, they may think that “hey if you can’t change then get out” but that statement has much more of an impact that someone may realize. 

Here is the bottom line, women do many great jobs in the military and by virtue of those jobs they get promoted, get accolades, etc. all the time. I mean we have a female Four-Star General in charge of Army Material Command for goodness sake. So don’t tell me they can’t get promoted. Women do not belong in those types of units, flat out. I watched the interview of my friends Eve Chase and Jim Hansen (www.blackfive.net/main/2011/01/women-in-combat-.html) and even though I think the world of Eve she is just wrong. Her and I served in Afghanistan at the same time and I know where she was and what she went through, but doing either her kind of job or the job that many women have found themselves in during combat is completely different than being in an Infantry Platoon. 

If you don’t agree or am not sure you know what I am talking about, watch Restrepo or Severe Clear and then ask yourselves how a female would fit into a unit like that or what impact a female would have on the cohesiveness and closeness of a unit in places and situations like this. I am not talking about a truck driver or military policeman or intel analyst. I am talking about a 27.6lb M240B machine-gun carrying, enemy killing, infantry soldier who doesn’t just happen to end of up in a close combat fight because they are in a asymmetrical battlefield, but has signed up to spend their entire military service as a killer. An infantryman is not some general soldier/marine who happens to be run convoys and maybe get hit by IEDs or far-ambushes, it is a guy who wants to find, fix and kill the enemy up close and personal. It is their entire job and all they train to do. 

All of those other jobs can go back and do their truck driving or traffic stops or paperwork filing or whatever it is they do when not on a patrol in a combat zone. An infantryman (or other combat arms profession) does nothing but train to develop skills that allows them to kill more effectively while ensuring their buddies to the left and right don’t die. 

Not wanting women in combat arms isn’t a sexist thought, it is a troop safety thought. The soldiers/marines in combat arms positions are not trained to be sexists pigs in basic training, they are made that way by birth. Unlike the cultures of many in middle-eastern countries, we as westerners are trained from birth to protect the weak, the underdog, and especially the female gender. Think about how you were raised and what you were told “never hit a girl”, “always open a door for a woman”, ” women and children first on the escape rafts”, etc. etc.

So what would happen if a soldier was heavily engaged in a firefight and one of their buddies gets hit and yells out in pain, and that “buddy” is Sherry not Steve, and that yells is a blood-curdling, high-pitch cry? I will tell you what would happen, the soldier would have their DNA response kick in and they would forget the fight they are in or be distracted from watching the flanks and instead they would render aid and try to protect the female. They will resort to primal instinct… instinct that they have been taught since birth. Soldiers could very well pay more attention to the training they have received for their entire life and not training they have known for a year or two in the military. 

I mean no disrespect to the female gender when I say this, but women have no reason to be in combat arms. It isn’t a sexist thing, it is a troop care thing. I care about soldiers and I care about our military winning its battles. If the leadership of the military cares about soldier’s lives they will never make this change. If female soldiers care about fellow soldiers, they will never push for or try this. 

So in looking back over the last month or two I am really getting convinced that the leadership in the Administration and/or the Department of Defense are trying to cut out military and save money by getting rid of all of the frontline warfighting soldiers we have today. Sad really if you ask me…