First real female Green Beret

[Historian]

28 minutes ago, Silentpoet said:

Which head?

I really don't think it matters at that point in a relationship.

[Wyzz Kydd]

38 minutes ago, Silentpoet said:

Which head?

Exactly!

[Al Czervik]

On 6/20/2020 at 4:09 PM, Fnfalman said:

Sometimes the basics are all a person would need. 

Not that this has anything to do with the real content of this thread, but I buy a couple of these a year.  Way better than the stuff in plastic.  It just sits on the counter.  We eat it on a daily basis.  Friends look at it with skepticism, but then want moar.  

A nice crusty loaf of fresh bread, a few slices of this, and some wine are all I need.

[26isbest]

2 hours ago, Al Czervik said:

Not that this has anything to do with the real content of this thread, but I buy a couple of these a year.  Way better than the stuff in plastic.  It just sits on the counter.  We eat it on a daily basis.  Friends look at it with skepticism, but then want moar.  

A nice crusty loaf of fresh bread, a few slices of this, and some wine are all I need.

When I was stationed in Rota Spain late 78 to late 81 every bar in Andalusia had a leg of jamon serrano hanging from the ceiling to carve tapas from. Great stuff!

[Fnfalman]

14 hours ago, Al Czervik said:

Not that this has anything to do with the real content of this thread, but I buy a couple of these a year.  Way better than the stuff in plastic.  It just sits on the counter.  We eat it on a daily basis.  Friends look at it with skepticism, but then want moar.  

A nice crusty loaf of fresh bread, a few slices of this, and some wine are all I need.

Oh my, is that jamon iberico?

[Fnfalman]

On 6/23/2020 at 7:41 AM, JW3 said:

Where's your Ranger tab or SF tab?

Where are yours?

[Fnfalman]

On 6/22/2020 at 12:55 PM, Wyzz Kydd said:

True.  Zero SF experience.  A lifetime's experience with female bodies and how they differ from male bodies.  Some fairly intense experience with working as a team under pressure, morale, depending upon your shipmates when your life is on the line.  Little stuff like that. 

 

Submarines should not have mixed sex crews in my opinion. There is zero demonstrable benefit and clear disadvantages.   

 

I believe that morale, and cohesiveness are pretty universal.  Human nature is human nature, whether you're a snake eater or a bubblehead.

So...your experience with inferior 1980s navy chicks gave you the expertise to pass judgments on ass kicking 21st century’s GI Jane?

[Fnfalman]

On 6/22/2020 at 2:19 PM, Silentpoet said:

Still no answer on the hotness question.

Any chick who’s sporting the jump wings and SF tab would automatically be HAWT. In that scary yet titillating way. 

[Wyzz Kydd]

41 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

So...your experience with inferior 1980s navy chicks gave you the expertise to pass judgments on ass kicking 21st century’s GI Jane?

In the 80s Waves didn't serve on submarines, nor have anything to do with our off crew work.   BTW, I never said they were inferior, that's a pretty loaded statement, and not accurate in my view.  They're different, not inferior.

[Fnfalman]

1 hour ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

In the 80s Waves didn't serve on submarines, nor have anything to do with our off crew work.   BTW, I never said they were inferior, that's a pretty loaded statement, and not accurate in my view.  They're different, not inferior.

Different. Not inferior. Agreed. 
 

so, what’s your beef against Ranger and SF females again?  Different, not inferior...right?

[Wyzz Kydd]

2 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

Different. Not inferior. Agreed. 
 

so, what’s your beef against Ranger and SF females again?  Different, not inferior...right?

Part of my concern isn't related to a specific gender but to the mixing of genders in combat/high pressure situations where the participants are young 18-32.  My experience, and plenty of studies, indicate that morale and unit cohesiveness suffer.  Young people, wanting to do what young (and most old) people like to do, but faced with very limited prospects.  Not good.   Looking at just that point of view I think an all female submarine crew would do as well or better as an all male crew. 

Looking at the physiological side, women are not as strong as men.  They are generally smaller, weaker, have smaller hearts, less lung capacity, can't run as fast, jump as high, carry as much, nor SHOOT as well as men do.  These are facts, not opinions.  Yeah there are some women on the super high, 99.999 percentile side who are beasts and can kick butt when up against the majority of men, but when you stack a women in that percentile up against a man in that percentile the woman is going to get her butt kicked. 

Don't believe me, where are the women competing in the NBA/NFL/MLB?  Heck the top women golfers can't make it on the PGA tour and golf is about as easy as you can get physically.  But you think they're just fine in combat?  Show me a woman who can play linebacker in the NFL and I might believe they can make it in combat.  The best female athlete in the world wouldn't survive one quarter without being hospitalized.

 

[Al Czervik]

7 hours ago, Fnfalman said:

Oh my, is that jamon iberico?

I usually buy one around Easter or 4th of July and one around Thanksgiving or Christmas.  Over the years, I have become quite good at slicing paper thin jamon with a 300mm suminagshi blue #1 custom jamon knife.

7 hours ago, Fnfalman said:

Any chick who’s sporting the jump wings and SF tab would automatically be HAWT. In that scary yet titillating way. 

Man, I've been around jumper chicks since the 80s.  Real jumper chicks are NUTS.  Not in a good way.  I've met hundreds or more all over the world, been with scores, and let's just say, if I hadn't taken the precautions that I did (like really checking my pins, housing, routing, etc), I wouldn't be typing right now.

[JW3]

9 hours ago, Fnfalman said:

Where are yours?

The same place where yours is.

[Historian]

On 6/24/2020 at 4:19 PM, Fnfalman said:

Different. Not inferior. Agreed. 
 

so, what’s your beef against Ranger and SF females again?  Different, not inferior...right?

That's an interesting comment. I once knew a guy who was an accountant for the navy.  That's what he did...in the navy.  He was attached to a seal team.  Not as a shooter...but..as an accountant.  Because they have needs for people like that.

OF course they could have parachuted him behind enemy lines where he cooked their books and screwed them up financially.

Urban camo....dropped in to cook the books!

Blends in nicely with indig accountants.

 

Edited June 27, 2020 by Historian

[26isbest]

7 minutes ago, Historian said:

That's an interesting comment. I once knew a guy who was an accountant for the navy.  That's what he did...in the navy.  He was attached to a seal team.  Not as a shooter...but..as an accountant.  Because they have needs for people like that.

OF course they could have parachuted him behind enemy lines where he cooked their books and screwed them up financially.

 

Disbursing Clerk, DK rating, generally arrogant a holes who like to make Jr enlisted - who don't know better - wait for a check they are owed when reporting to a school or permanent duty station so they can **** off a few extra days. On checking back in to base after a 30 day leave as a freshly promoted E4 it felt good to tell the arrogant bastards that they could either have my check ready that afternoon or explain to my command, via the SDO, why it wasn't ready.

Not all are bad but most generally have the big turd in a small bowl complex.

[Fnfalman]

15 hours ago, JW3 said:

The same place where yours is.

Cool. So both of our opinions about spec ops chicks are equally worthless...just like the rest of the opinions held by the other non-Tabbers in this thread. 

[Wyzz Kydd]

13 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

Cool. So both of our opinions about spec ops chicks are equally worthless...just like the rest of the opinions held by the other non-Tabbers in this thread. 

Only if you accept the premise that you have to have experience in SF to have a valid opinion.  I don't accept that premise.   You advanced it, you prove it.

[Historian]

19 hours ago, 26isbest said:

Not all are bad but most generally have the big turd in a small bowl complex.

I think he was one of the good ones.   Someone had to account for the money internally.

All the branches have official historians.   That would be an interesting job (for me at least).

But far less deadly than an accountant with a gun.

[Fnfalman]

23 hours ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

Only if you accept the premise that you have to have experience in SF to have a valid opinion.  I don't accept that premise.   You advanced it, you prove it.

So...I had zero experience with commanding a US warship, hell, I never even ride on one. Yet my opinions on things Navy are valid?

 

got it. 
 

BTW, your opinions on anything special operations related are about as valid as mine on anything naval operations related. 

Edited June 26, 2020 by Fnfalman

[Wyzz Kydd]

1 hour ago, Fnfalman said:

So...I had zero experience with commanding a US warship, hell, I never even ride on one. Yet my opinions on things Navy are valid?

 

got it. 
 

BTW, your opinions on anything special operations related are about as valid as mine on anything naval operations related. 

When someone with SF experience weighs in perhaps I’ll defer to ‘his’ opinion. Until then it’s much ado about nothing.

Your opinions are just that, opinions. Some opinions are more informed than others. Some opinions are informed by experience, some by observation, some by deductive reasoning, and some aren’t informed at all.

[Fnfalman]

23 hours ago, Wyzz Kydd said:

When someone with SF experience weighs in perhaps I’ll defer to ‘his’ opinion. Until then it’s much ado about nothing.

Your opinions are just that, opinions. Some opinions are more informed than others. Some opinions are informed by experience, some by observation, some by deductive reasoning, and some aren’t informed at all.

The people with SF experience already weighed in.  They’re are her instructors.  

Edited June 27, 2020 by Fnfalman

[26isbest]

23 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

The people with SF experience already weighed in.  They’re are her instructors.  

And those with ambitions to remain in and get promoted know that careers have been sidelined by disagreeing with the Brass and still can be. General Singlaub was an unusually public example but hardly the Lone Ranger. Lt Col Anthony Herbert is another example that comes to mind.

http://www.nytimes.com/1978/06/03/archives/general-forced-into-retirement-charges-carter-ignored-joint-chiefs.html

[Wyzz Kydd]

39 minutes ago, Fnfalman said:

The people with SF experience already weighed in.  They’re are her instructors.  

I get the impression you never served or if you did you either forgot what the military was like or weren’t paying attention. 
 

I come from a long line of folks who served in pretty much every major conflict dating back to the Revolutionary War (excepting only the Korean War). Things haven’t changed other than better weapons. Go along to get along. Protest to much and you don’t get the check mark in your personnel file and you languish as a E6, or O4-O6, maybe even get RIFed shortly before you hit 20 years.

True warriors who get promoted to significant rank, like Patton and Grant, are the exception. For every Patton there are 100+ McClellens. For every Mattis 1,000 Colin Powell’s.

If your uncle or grandfather or great-grandfather sat you down and explained what it takes to make Flag rank NOT in a time of war you might have less faith in the military bureaucracy.

[26isbest]

3 hours ago, Fnfalman said:

The people with SF experience already weighed in.  They’re are her instructors.  

But they are required to carry out policies that are determined by civilians. The Commander in Chief of all branches of the US military is the President as per article 2 section 2 of the Constitution. The President is a civilian. Likewise the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy and Secretary of the Air Force are all civilians. Likewise the Senate and House, which are comprised of civilians, have oversight on the military and have contributed heavily to US military policies pertaining to women in combat roles. See Pat Schroeder, DiFi et al way back in the Tailhook hearings to get a good idea of how Feminazis in the legislative branch can scare the piss out of Flag Officers and bend the military to their will. 

If the policy dictated to the DOD is that women will be billeted in combat roles than the chain of command in any given military branch is required to follow that policy or GTFO and let someone who WILL follow that policy in to institute it.

We have both served in the military and I presume we both know what pencil whipping is. The female that is the subject of this thread may, or may not, have legitimately passed the SF course. But it would be naive, to put it mildly, to dismiss out of hand the notion that the US Army Brass Hats may have pressured their subordinate command to get a woman through SF training thereby resulting in the possibility of  altered standards or flat out pencil whipping being used to get the desired result.

I am not going to flat out claim that this woman didn't pass. I am also not going to dismiss altered standards or pencil whipping as realistic possibilities.

Anyone who has seen an unsat military member hidden away from a command inspection during change of command ceremony or observed millions of dollars of aircraft parts or other valuable material **** canned during an IG inspection will know very well that honesty is not always considered the best policy in the US military.

Edited June 27, 2020 by 26isbest

[Fnfalman]

On 6/27/2020 at 4:25 PM, 26isbest said:

But they are required to carry out policies that are determined by civilians. The Commander in Chief of all branches of the US military is the President as per article 2 section 2 of the Constitution. The President is a civilian. Likewise the Secretary of Defense, Secretary of the Army, Secretary of the Navy and Secretary of the Air Force are all civilians. Likewise the Senate and House, which are comprised of civilians, have oversight on the military and have contributed heavily to US military policies pertaining to women in combat roles. See Pat Schroeder, DiFi et al way back in the Tailhook hearings to get a good idea of how Feminazis in the legislative branch can scare the piss out of Flag Officers and bend the military to their will. 

If the policy dictated to the DOD is that women will be billeted in combat roles than the chain of command in any given military branch is required to follow that policy or GTFO and let someone who WILL follow that policy in to institute it.

We have both served in the military and I presume we both know what pencil whipping is. The female that is the subject of this thread may, or may not, have legitimately passed the SF course. But it would be naive, to put it mildly, to dismiss out of hand the notion that the US Army Brass Hats may have pressured their subordinate command to get a woman through SF training thereby resulting in the possibility of  altered standards or flat out pencil whipping being used to get the desired result.

I am not going to flat out claim that this woman didn't pass. I am also not going to dismiss altered standards or pencil whipping as realistic possibilities.

Anyone who has seen an unsat military member hidden away from a command inspection during change of command ceremony or observed millions of dollars of aircraft parts or other valuable material **** canned during an IG inspection will know very well that honesty is not always considered the best policy in the US military.

 

So...Trump as CIC, did not MAGA (Make Army Great Again)?  After all, he's POTUS and CIC, right?