Post: #26

Well, women could bring the sandwiches to the drone operators.

There, I have found a useful place for them in the military!

Post: #27

I think this officially means that the US has jumped the shark...

Post: #28

I'm sure all will be well if they trained the protective nature out of the male soldiers and gave them access to other women outside the units.

The problem being you will create monsters out of them.

Post: #29

(04-09-2015 12:47 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  This is why I gave up watching the 'Strike Back',

I like shows with guns / swords and tits. They're my guilty pleasures.

I can stand Strike Back more than other similar shows because those women you refer to get killed in that show. The chick that bossed the 2 leads around was overly arrogant and got shot in the face as a result.

I checked out Banshee and didn't last more than a few episodes due to that main chick kicking way too much arse with her fragile body

Post: #30

(04-08-2015 07:27 PM)Dusty Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 02:38 PM)SteveMcMahon Wrote:  

Would capture as POW's.

Asian in the middle

Yeah, I'd give her a pair of pink socks for Christmas.

Post: #31

(04-08-2015 11:05 PM)StrikeBack Wrote:  But...but... every Special Ops unit on TV and in the movies I've seen has very capable arse-kicking sexy women who often outperform all men in the unit except maybe the alpha leader that they sleep with???

Unfortunately there is only one Ronda Rousey

Speaking of that her book is banned at wal-mart of all places.

Post: #32

Just because American men won't hit women doesn't mean that many Eastern countries wouldn't. Are they banking on the "you can't shoot me because I'm a woman" clause?

Post: #33

Earlier this week I watched a 25 year old video tape (VHS) of my brother in special forces winter environmental training. 30km moves over difficult terrain in deep snow on skis and snowshoes with 100 pound backpacks of winter survival and combat gear in temperatures down to 30 below zero F into a live fire assault exercise.

Is it "uninformed men" that are the problem or "unrealistic women"?

Post: #34

(04-09-2015 12:28 PM)Engineer Wrote:  Earlier this week I watched a 25 year old video tape (VHS) of my brother in special forces winter environmental training. 30km moves over difficult terrain in deep snow on skis and snowshoes with 100 pound backpacks of winter survival and combat gear in temperatures down to 30 below zero F into a live fire assault exercise.

Is it "uninformed men" that are the problem or "unrealistic women"?

I ran an exercise last year where I had an understrength weapons squad and one of the girls had to carry one of the heavy guns.

A hundred meters into the movement she was toast. No difficult terrain, no snow, moderate temps. It was hilarious.

I also think it's funny how people are talking about the pleasure brigade as a hypothetical scenario. It's almost a reality. Chicks get passed around in the military like people wouldn't believe.

Post: #35

It's really interesting how SJWs and feminists and the like use the words "uninformed" and "ignorant" to describe people who have different opinions, people who don't share their ideology, or people who bring up long known and accepted facts that don't support their ideology.

It's almost like a Freudian slip in that they're essentially saying that since you're saying these things, you obviously haven't been indoctrinated yet.

Post: #36

(04-08-2015 08:18 PM)Renzy Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 02:21 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  So pathetic, but expected.

What will happen is that the capable men will simply gravitate to each other and try to form their own units by one way or another.

I was thinking that an unintended consequence of all this will be even more reliance on private military contractors as men start to see them as an alternative to escape these sorts of PC social engineering experiments.

This is true. One of my closest friends was a security contractor and fought in Iraq from 2006-2008. He told me he met several former rangers, marines, etc who was tired of the red tape, political correctness, and other nonsense the military has to deal with nowadays.

Post: #37

(04-09-2015 03:30 PM)Old Fritz Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 08:18 PM)Renzy Wrote:  

(04-08-2015 02:21 PM)Quintus Curtius Wrote:  So pathetic, but expected.

What will happen is that the capable men will simply gravitate to each other and try to form their own units by one way or another.

I was thinking that an unintended consequence of all this will be even more reliance on private military contractors as men start to see them as an alternative to escape these sorts of PC social engineering experiments.

This is true. One of my closest friends was a security contractor and fought in Iraq from 2006-2008. He told me he met several former rangers, marines, etc who was tired of the red tape, political correctness, and other nonsense the military has to deal with nowadays.

It sounds like this will be the future natural progression of all elite soldiers. More and more will choose to go into private contractor work or will form their own firms after getting out. They will just join the military to acquire the skillset, gain experience, and then leave asap. There's no reason to be a career soldier in the U.S. military anymore especially with the infiltration of SJW politics in the ranks.

This new P.C. shit actively endangers the lives of these elite soldiers. Imagine going through SF training and then getting tasked to babysit some grrrl power soldiers in an armed conflict region because..politics or getting slapped with punitive action over some off color remarks.

I also predict the whole fad with women in special ops roles will end in the mainstream when we get the first video of Jihadists running a train on a female combat soldier before beheading her.

Post: #38

Not to mention that soldiers are leaving the military in droves for the PMCs because the pay is massively higher. Add in the bureaucratic red tape as another incentive. Now in addition to those two things guys need to deal with political correctness and leftist social engineering fucking up unit cohesion. That pretty much saps the patriotic drive to serve your country as it now stands for irrational ideologies and socially destructive policies, as we saw with the excellent article on ROK last week. That attitude is there.

The presence of PMC's on the battlefield and in the backrooms influencing politics is a major theme that I actually explore in my book. When the patriotic drive fails, will you serve something that essentially has no history and is only out for itself, that is incentivized to find conflict and fight wars because that's what's good for it? What does this mean for the very thing we expect governments to do - use force?

This is dangerous ground we are treading. It is very conceivable that, like so many other things, the .01% will get to have an efficient military force protecting them, while the Third Estate gets an "army" that has been hamstrung and can no longer serve its function, allowing Troy to burn while they escape to greener pastures.

The thought of women trying to get through BUD/S is humorous though.

Post: #39

(04-09-2015 06:30 PM)Libertas Wrote:  This is dangerous ground we are treading. It is very conceivable that, like so many other things, the .01% will get to have an efficient military force protecting them, while the Third Estate gets an "army" that has been hamstrung and can no longer serve its function, allowing Troy to burn while they escape to greener pastures.

The thought of women trying to get through BUD/S is humorous though.

In IRAQ the PMC's are already higher than the official troops.

This will be the future at least as long as the US can afford it - because make no mistake - it is much more expensive.

The military always belonged to the 0,01%, but it will be more open now with going private.

Post: #40

(04-09-2015 06:33 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 06:30 PM)Libertas Wrote:  This is dangerous ground we are treading. It is very conceivable that, like so many other things, the .01% will get to have an efficient military force protecting them, while the Third Estate gets an "army" that has been hamstrung and can no longer serve its function, allowing Troy to burn while they escape to greener pastures.

The thought of women trying to get through BUD/S is humorous though.

In IRAQ the PMC's are already higher than the official troops.

This will be the future at least as long as the US can afford it - because make no mistake - it is much more expensive.

The military always belonged to the 0,01%, but it will be more open now with going private.

Base staffing will be the center of all this crap. Real warzones will be "outsourced". American troops won't be deployed, therefore there won't be an official bodycount.

Post: #41

What makes PMC's so effective is a solid tactical foundation that is achieved through hardcore military training and combat experience. Who knows if the U.S. will even have people with those qualities in another 20 years. When Jihadists run a train on an American female military member, society in the US will do what it does best. Cut and run from the conflict where she is gang raped and become distracted by the next Kardashian media ploy.

Post: #42

No doubt there will be a lot of Special Forces guys retiring and going into the private sector.

(04-09-2015 12:47 AM)AnonymousBosch Wrote:  This is why I gave up watching the 'Strike Back',

Female operatives are necessary in intelligence units like the SRR to provide surveillance and fill support positions, but are not and never will be suited to front line combat positions.

Post: #43

Ah fuck it, let them try. The wash out rate will speak for itself.

Post: #44

The problem is that the more political it gets the more the standards will be lowered to accommodate these political whims. Just look at female cops and firefighters.

Post: #45

El Chinito Loco is spot man. The concern is the evolving double standard that is becoming more and more common. I have personally observed women pass training when they did not meet the standard and guys fail when they made the same fuckups as the women. Gotta love it!

Post: #46

PMC's are just another form of mercenaries which has a long history. Machiavelli has some good thoughts about them which basically states is that you can't expect them to fight as hard as patriots will. If anything depending on them too much shows a weakness that can and will be exploited by these organizations.

Post: #47

(04-09-2015 06:33 PM)Zelcorpion Wrote:  

(04-09-2015 06:30 PM)Libertas Wrote:  This is dangerous ground we are treading. It is very conceivable that, like so many other things, the .01% will get to have an efficient military force protecting them, while the Third Estate gets an "army" that has been hamstrung and can no longer serve its function, allowing Troy to burn while they escape to greener pastures.

The thought of women trying to get through BUD/S is humorous though.

In IRAQ the PMC's are already higher than the official troops.

This will be the future at least as long as the US can afford it - because make no mistake - it is much more expensive.

The military always belonged to the 0,01%, but it will be more open now with going private.

I believe PMCs are actually more cost effective and cheaper. A US soilder costs at least 150K to maintain a head; I glanced at one point that a PMC costs around 70K.

Post: #48

Women get too influenced by their favorite TV shows and they want to LARP thinking it's all fantasy

I maintain that western civilization needs a major military conflict on its shores to snap it back to reality.

Post: #49

(04-10-2015 08:39 AM)Dark Knowledge Wrote:  I maintain that western civilization needs a major military conflict on its shores to snap it back to reality.

It will never happen. It'll be a slow process of assimilation as the U.S. and its identity gets consumed into the latin fold. Latinos will dominate politcs and blacks will own pop culture eventually. Conquista by Spaniards several centuries removed from the major historical pivot points. A cultural slow burning time bomb.

The islamic and Chinese threat is almost comedic. Better brush up on Espanol quickly.

Post: #50

(04-10-2015 02:01 PM)El Chinito loco Wrote:  

(04-10-2015 08:39 AM)Dark Knowledge Wrote:  I maintain that western civilization needs a major military conflict on its shores to snap it back to reality.

It will never happen. It'll be a slow process of assimilation as the U.S. and its identity gets consumed into the latin fold. Latinos will dominate politcs and blacks will own pop culture eventually. Conquista by Spaniards several centuries removed from the major historical pivot points. A cultural slow burning time bomb.

The islamic and Chinese threat is almost comedic. Better brush up on Espanol quickly.

So finally the doomsayers will be mostly right: America won't be Rome, but it'll certainly be speaking a bastardised form of Latin.