Make the Military Weak Again !!!!

[sgtcall]

So for those of you that haven't been keeping up, during the Obama admin the Army decided to come up with a new 'Combat Focused' fitness test that would be one test for both male and female. This went on during the Trump admin and now the Biden admin has their hands in it. What originally started with one gender neutral test became a gender neutral test for 'Combat Arms', 'Combat Support' and 'Combat Service and Support' the testing and scoring changing for each field. There was even a time when they wanted a different test for different branches of 'Combat Arms' so Infantry added a full combat gear 1 mile run and Tankers added something like how to sling your poop bags off the top of the tank. Kidding, I don't know what the tankers added.

I tested multiple times on different variations of the Infantry test and I will say that none of them were all that hard to do but were a PIA to grade because many of the events were subjective and relied on the grader to determine the outcome. But, in the end, we had a test that could work and was doable.

Then some dumb ass decided to let females into the Infantry and all hell broke loose.

My last year in the Army we (across the entire force) did a test run of the new 'Combat Arms" test and about 85% of the females failed it compared to less than 20% of the males. So they scraped that one and then came out with the same test but using gender standards so that the females could pass.

What's the point of all this? Well this is just another example of how the woke government is destroying our military. There was never a good reason to allow females into 'Combat Arms" much less the Infantry and changing the fitness test is pointless. The new test just makes units have to focus on passing the events instead of allowing commanders to focus a program that challenges their unit. Add to that the Woke BS that wants us to all have feelings and worry about offending someone. There is no reason that a Warfighter should have feelings and if someone is offended then they need to find a new line of work.

Here is the article that started this rant.

More Changes Brewing for Embattled Army Fitness Test
https://www.military.com/daily-news/202 ... _230217.nl

[Tbeck]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

[Herb]

This is exactly what the problem is with the "woke" crowd.

"There is no reason that a Warfighter should have feelings and if someone is offended then they need to find a new line of work."

[sgtcall]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

No they shouldn't. The main reason is not physical but that does play into it. The main reason is that females tend to make decisions based on their feelings and they more easily let their feelings and emotions dictate their actions. It's not a bad thing in everyday life but it is complete shit in a bad situation.

For the physical part I was a Jackson Drill (go ahead make fun but I had no choice) so I had females in my platoons. About the 3rd cycle we started wearing the IBA with plates (body armor) everywhere we went. As soon as we started this the females stared getting pelvic fractures that were bad enough to put them out of the Army. Combining the IBA, a light ruck and other gear they were wearing about 40-50 pounds yet still getting injured on a regular basis. So how are they going to hump 90-120 pounds up the mountains of Afghanistan for days at a time? Simple answer, they won't. Even Ranger School lowered their standards to get females through.

The last reason, and I have seen this several times, is pregnancy. An Infantry squad is designed to be 9 men and we really need all nine to do the job. All 9 should train together and deploy together. I know someone can break a leg but I can't stop that. I have known several females that got pregnant right before a deployment, and a couple during the deployment, just to get out of going. Normally they were dual military and this allowed one parent to stay home with the other kids. If females want in the infantry then a pregnancy that interferes with a deployment should be an automatic discharge. When I deployed as part of a Brigade Headquarters we had 5 females get knocked up after we got orders and another 2 got knocked up down range. One of those was married but her husband wasn't deployed he was an MP at home station.

[sgtcall]

This is exactly what the problem is with the "woke" crowd.

"There is no reason that a Warfighter should have feelings and if someone is offended then they need to find a new line of work."

You know my jump buddy in Airborne School was a Marine. I got picked for a tasking that required jump status but the tasking never happened and I still went to the school. Anyway Gunny Coyne and I were both E7s so we ended up hanging out. My favorite thing to do was to point out when some Marine in our class was doing something stupid and watch him blow his top. He didn't care what we were doing at the time he would just start screaming and charge over to the guy fucking up. I think it was more because he didn't want the Marine Corps embarrassed in an Army school than anything else. It was still fun for me.

But now this is how I feel when I see the changes the Army is going through. It just makes me want to blow my top.

[Herb]

Sgtcall, I know the feeling. I retired in 2005 and it had already started happening in the Corps. I wasn't disappointed when I hit 30 and had to retire.

[sgtcall]

I have always said that any change in the military should result in increasing the lethality of the force.

I just saw this on LinkedIn but it fits.

The US Military is not in existence to be a social experiment. The military has but three purposes - to defend the nation, support our allies, and implement US foreign policy by other means. This typically involves killing our enemies and destroying their assets. "Wokism," aside from being a tool of communist indoctrination, is inherently incapable of developing a useful fighting force. It is, however, quite good at tanking morale, undermining unit cohesiveness, and destroying military readiness - which is exactly why Marxists continue to drive its implementation within the private sector, and make it a requirement in public policy. The "Woke Agenda" needs to be stomped out of existence, else it will end ours as a nation and world power.

[HARRIS]

AS GEN PATTON SAID : THE PURPOSE OF WAR IS NOT TO DIE FOR YOUR COUNTRY ... IT'S TO HAVE THE ENEMY DIE FOR HIS ....

[RoadKing]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

TV videos often show perhaps thousands of Chinese troops marching in formation before their leaders. They don’t look gender neutral to me. Pray there is never a shooting war with China. Anyone who thinks the weakening of our country is BS, I have to expect they are communist sympathizers. What else can I think?

[hillsy v2]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

[RoadKing]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

The Navy Seals set standards that exclude ANYONE not fit. To date that excluded all women. This is not a freaking social experiment, it’s the survival of the nation! No set standards for skill sets is appalling to me. If we don’t have enough men with necessary skill sets, we are in bad trouble. Ground troops win wars.

[hillsy v2]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

The Navy Seals set standards that exclude ANYONE not fit. To date that excluded all women. This is not a freaking social experiment, it’s the survival of the nation! No set standards for skill sets is appalling to me. If we don’t have enough men with necessary skill sets, we are in bad trouble. Ground troops win wars.

OK whatever

[RoadKing]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

The Navy Seals set standards that exclude ANYONE not fit. To date that excluded all women. This is not a freaking social experiment, it’s the survival of the nation! No set standards for skill sets is appalling to me. If we don’t have enough men with necessary skill sets, we are in bad trouble. Ground troops win wars.

OK whatever

“OK whatever” A lame response. Pacific nations such as Australia and New Zealand will be among the first to fall to China without a powerful US presence.

[hillsy v2]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

The Navy Seals set standards that exclude ANYONE not fit. To date that excluded all women. This is not a freaking social experiment, it’s the survival of the nation! No set standards for skill sets is appalling to me. If we don’t have enough men with necessary skill sets, we are in bad trouble. Ground troops win wars.

OK whatever

“OK whatever” A lame response. Pacific nations such as Australia and New Zealand will be among the first to fall to China without a powerful US presence.

WTF has that got to do with assessing soldiers?

[RoadKing]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

The Navy Seals set standards that exclude ANYONE not fit. To date that excluded all women. This is not a freaking social experiment, it’s the survival of the nation! No set standards for skill sets is appalling to me. If we don’t have enough men with necessary skill sets, we are in bad trouble. Ground troops win wars.

OK whatever

“OK whatever” A lame response. Pacific nations such as Australia and New Zealand will be among the first to fall to China without a powerful US presence.

WTF has that got to do with assessing soldiers?

Sort it out, you seem to be smart enough.

[hillsy v2]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

I think T meant there was no difference in the grading between male and female. Not gender identity.

The Navy Seals set standards that exclude ANYONE not fit. To date that excluded all women. This is not a freaking social experiment, it’s the survival of the nation! No set standards for skill sets is appalling to me. If we don’t have enough men with necessary skill sets, we are in bad trouble. Ground troops win wars.

OK whatever

“OK whatever” A lame response. Pacific nations such as Australia and New Zealand will be among the first to fall to China without a powerful US presence.

WTF has that got to do with assessing soldiers?

Sort it out, you seem to be smart enough.

Lame response.

[RoadKing]

Troop assessment based on lowered standards is flawed, no matter how you try to justify. All my civilian life I loved my sisters but only wanted my brothers in a street fight. If you can’t sort that, you have lived a very nice comfortable life and I envy you.

[sgtcall]

WTF has that got to do with assessing soldiers?

The simple fact is that if you make a fitness test that is hard enough to root out the weak males it will still be to hard for the majority of females. Lets take the 2 minute push-up standard for the Army for 17-21 year olds. The Army standard to pass any event on the PT test is 60%. For a female to get 100% she needs 42 push-ups but this same number (42) would be bare minimum 60% for a male. For a female the minimum 60% is 19 push-ups. So you could split the difference and say that 31 push-ups is the 60% minimum for everyone but would you be strengthening the force by making it easy for the men and still almost impossible for most females? Then you would have the issue of almost half the females failing the test and missing promotions, getting discharged and then there would be the "violating our civil rights" thing, bla bla bla.

I have a daughter and want the best for her but the simple fact is females are weaker than males and in the military, especially combat arms, the job does not change to fit the person. If I need someone to hump the mortar plate up the hill the person I pick is based on the mission. I can't have my machine gunner hump the plate because my rifleman is weak.

[sgtcall]

Sgt, the whole thing was a bunch of BS and adding gender specific grading doesn't make it any worse, or better for that matter.
When I was in I had the opportunity to deploy with many different foreign combat unit's and most were gender neutral. So women are more than capable of performing in combat related field's, US women should therefore be up to this duty.

Most were gender neutral? Anyone else pick up on that statement? Identify as neither man nor woman? WHOH! Hard to believe. If that is so, the country has already derailed and left me behind. Can anyone explain that statement?

TV videos often show perhaps thousands of Chinese troops marching in formation before their leaders. They don’t look gender neutral to me. Pray there is never a shooting war with China. Anyone who thinks the weakening of our country is BS, I have to expect they are communist sympathizers. What else can I think?

He was taking about combat arms units that are made up of both genders. There are several European Armies that have been allowing females in combat arms for years. I spent some time as an Observer Controller (grader) during multinational exercises and graded a few platoons that had females. One thing I noticed was that in general they always had to make allowances for the females. Except I did have a female platoon leader from Estonia once that was just a bad ass, she would make Chuck Norris shit his pants.

[navigator]

But which bathroom should they use?