Jump to content

Gunboat1

Platinum Patron
  • Posts

    660
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Converted

  • Location
    Tennessee! Freedom lives here.

Converted

  • Interests
    Shooting, sailing, kayaking, cycling, reloading, debunking liberalism

Converted

  • Occupation
    Instructor

Recent Profile Visitors

1,412 profile views

Gunboat1's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/9)

1.6k

Reputation

  1. Hi, everyone. Just to inform you, if any of you purchased the e-book version of my book, I recently revised and updated it. You can download the revised version of the book at no cost using your Kindle ap or device. http://www.amazon.com/gp/digital/fiona/manage Hope you enjoy the newest version. GB1
  2. SEN Cotton is absolutely right. The degradation of standards to allow women to "succeed" is poison to combat readiness and American security. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4063055/posts "Only 52 percent of active-duty enlisted women, compared to 92 percent of the men, were able to pass the Army Combat Fitness Test. It was gratifying to watch Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton questioning Christine Wormuth, the first female Secretary of the Army, at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. Sen. Cotton, a Ranger-qualified infantry veteran, respectfully chastised Wormuth for the “fiasco” that the new Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) has become. For the past three years, the Army has tried but failed to implement “gender-neutral” standards in the new Combat Fitness Test — mainly because of high failure rates among female trainees. After women in combat rules changed in 2015, the Army designed the ACFT to be sex-neutral, with identical requirements and scoring tables for men and women. The new ACFT would replace the long-standing Army Physical Fitness Test, which was sex-normed with different requirements and scores to allow for male/female physical differences. At that time, women were not eligible for direct ground combat (infantry) assignments. Now that they are, sex-normed training standards are untenable. There is no sex-norming on the battlefield. Cotton read back to Wormuth her own 2021 testimony promising that the new ACFT would have sex-neutral standards. When former Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered all combat positions to be opened for women in 2015, he and the Army’s official Implementation Plan promised that concerns about combat effectiveness would be addressed by “effective leadership” and “gender-neutral standards.” Dangerous Lowered Standards Nevertheless, after several versions of the ACFT failed, this year the Army dropped sex neutrality and reinstated sex-norming. Secretary Wormuth acknowledged the Army’s stunning reversal, suggesting that the new ACFT was “more challenging.” Cotton responded bluntly: “The new standards are pathetic — They are absolutely pathetic.” Cotton noted that soldiers qualifying for the infantry will have to do only 10 push-ups instead of 35. He also quoted the Army’s Frequently Asked Questions webpage stating that commanders may not set higher standards for acceptance or retention in a combat unit. “This,” said Cotton, “is going to get people killed.” " "Cotton read back to Wormuth her own 2021 testimony promising that the new ACFT would have sex-neutral standards. When former Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered all combat positions to be opened for women in 2015, he and the Army’s official Implementation Plan promised that concerns about combat effectiveness would be addressed by “effective leadership” and “gender-neutral standards.” In other words, they LIED to the Congress and the American people, and then quietly changed the rules to indulge the misbegotten badass fantasies of a few would-be Rambettes. We MUST hold the DOD leadership accountable for this dangerous travesty.
  3. But doing so puts many other soldiers and sailors at extreme risk. They lessen the capability of every combat unit they are assigned to, including ships and submarines.
  4. No, they joined for equal pay and benefits without bearing an equal share of risk and responsibility.
  5. "Cotton read back to Wormuth her own 2021 testimony promising that the new ACFT would have sex-neutral standards. When former Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered all combat positions to be opened for women in 2015, he and the Army’s official Implementation Plan promised that concerns about combat effectiveness would be addressed by “effective leadership” and “gender-neutral standards.” In other words, they LIED to the Congress and the American people, and then quietly changed the rules to indulge the misbegotten badass fantasies of a few would-be Rambettes. Just as I predicted, and was repeatedly attacked for saying. We MUST hold the DOD leadership accountable for this dangerous travesty.
  6. More from the article: "Gender-neutral standards did not work in the ACFT, and as we have already seen in the Special Operations Forces Command, “diversity and inclusion” mandates encourage minimal standards, not meritocratic excellence. A recent Rasmussen poll found that 59 percent of respondents favored women in combat, but even more, 66 percent, said that women should pass the same physical fitness requirements as male soldiers. What if women don’t meet equal standards? Cotton said he was “disappointed and borderline appalled” by the situation, and he would not allow it to stand. He and Secretary Wormuth were talking about two different things — combat effectiveness on his side and “fairness” to certain “subgroups” on hers. Congress should re-evaluate female combat assignment policies, putting meritocracy and military readiness first."
  7. https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/4063055/posts "Only 52 percent of active-duty enlisted women, compared to 92 percent of the men, were able to pass the Army Combat Fitness Test. It was gratifying to watch Arkansas Republican Sen. Tom Cotton questioning Christine Wormuth, the first female Secretary of the Army, at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee hearing. Sen. Cotton, a Ranger-qualified infantry veteran, respectfully chastised Wormuth for the “fiasco” that the new Army Combat Fitness Test (ACFT) has become. For the past three years, the Army has tried but failed to implement “gender-neutral” standards in the new Combat Fitness Test — mainly because of high failure rates among female trainees. After women in combat rules changed in 2015, the Army designed the ACFT to be sex-neutral, with identical requirements and scoring tables for men and women. The new ACFT would replace the long-standing Army Physical Fitness Test, which was sex-normed with different requirements and scores to allow for male/female physical differences. At that time, women were not eligible for direct ground combat (infantry) assignments. Now that they are, sex-normed training standards are untenable. There is no sex-norming on the battlefield. Cotton read back to Wormuth her own 2021 testimony promising that the new ACFT would have sex-neutral standards. When former Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter ordered all combat positions to be opened for women in 2015, he and the Army’s official Implementation Plan promised that concerns about combat effectiveness would be addressed by “effective leadership” and “gender-neutral standards.” Dangerous Lowered Standards Nevertheless, after several versions of the ACFT failed, this year the Army dropped sex neutrality and reinstated sex-norming. Secretary Wormuth acknowledged the Army’s stunning reversal, suggesting that the new ACFT was “more challenging.” Cotton responded bluntly: “The new standards are pathetic — They are absolutely pathetic.” Cotton noted that soldiers qualifying for the infantry will have to do only 10 push-ups instead of 35. He also quoted the Army’s Frequently Asked Questions webpage stating that commanders may not set higher standards for acceptance or retention in a combat unit. “This,” said Cotton, “is going to get people killed.” " Senator Cotton gets it absolutely right. Read the entire article. When they say "equality", what they MEAN is special privileges for women.
  8. In case anyone is interested, I appeared on a popular YouTube podcast, "The Team House" last Friday evening, talking about the book (books) and the subject of Book #1. Here is the link if anyone wants to watch it. Hope you enjoy. If you do, please hit the "Like" button.
  9. That is exactly right. From the first days of her training to her retirement, her career was carefully nurtured, not due to any expectation that she would or could be a combat leader. It's all virtue signalling.
  10. The whole US Military apparatus feminist lobby and their Congressional lackeys all conspired together to ensure that women get to volunteer to go into more harm’s ways and get themselves properly killed reap the career, pay, educational, medical and training benefits of military service, while not having to meet the same physical standards as their male counterparts. And to appease the feminazi extremists whose false belief system insists that women can do anything men can do, they allowed a few women to indulge their badass fantasies and apply for combat units. And when they didn't/don't measure up, they pass them anyway as an abject surrender and sign of progressive virtue signalling. And they simply don't care if a few of them, or their male peers, get killed as a result. Its a small price to pay to break that "glass ceiling" and to smash that patriarchy...and to simultaneously weaken America. And the most senior military leadership either makes or lets it happen, or they are run out in career-ending disgrace. Those who knuckle under or facilitate the lies prosper. Those who don’t get cashiered. Welcome to the 21st Century wussified military.
  11. What a compelling argument. You must be a master debater. Ain't nobody buying it but you. Facts are facts. And pinhead is as pinhead does. Maybe you could be a military expert for Sesame Street or NAMBLA News.
  12. Typical. When you've lost the argument, sling personal insults. Clearly, you never outgrew the playground. I'm quite comfortable with my career record and my testosterone quotient. And I know that the facts are that women have no place in combat units. Any Armed Force that places them there is more serious about PC policies than they are about victory.
×
×
  • Create New...