« | »

Obama To Put More Women In Combat Roles

From a joyous ABC News:

Pentagon to Lift Some Restrictions on Women in Combat

By Luis Martinez
February 8, 2012

The Pentagon on Thursday will propose rule changes that will allow more women to formally serve in jobs closer to the front lines.

Defense officials say as many as 14,000 positions could be opened up, though the restrictions on women serving in infantry combat units will remain in place.

The rule change reflects the ongoing reality that in a decade of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, women were already dying in combat with the blurring of the traditional definition of front lines. Nearly 300,000 women have served in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and 144 of them have died in those conflicts.

Which was always the plan. Get women as close to combat as possible. Then, when they are inevitably killed, say there is no sense in them not being on the front lines.

The rule change is included in a report required by Congress as part of last year’s Defense Authorization Bill that has been overdue for months. The new rules likely will not go into effect until the summer if Congress raises no objections to the change.

Women will still be barred from serving in infantry combat units, defense officials say, but the changes will formally open up new positions at the combat battalion level that, until now, have been off limits.

The changes will also create more female combat deaths, and female hostage situations, like that of Jessica Lynch — which, of course, the news media and the peaceniks will love.

They will also make are rapidly shrinking armed forces that much more feminine. (As will the removal of DADT.)

But, after all, that is a good thing if you are only going to be doing humanitarian missions, such as delivering aid.

The new jobs opening up for female service members will be combat support positions, including communications, intelligence and logistical positions, defense officials add. Typically, these jobs have been made available at the combat brigade level, but not at the lower battalion level, which was deemed too close to combat situation

The left always gets their way by taking ‘baby steps.’

This article was posted by Steve on Thursday, February 9th, 2012. Comments are currently closed.

6 Responses to “Obama To Put More Women In Combat Roles”

  1. Rusty Shackleford says:

    Just another version of Fast & Furious. This time without the cheerful and cooperative Eric Holder, though.

    • Rusty Shackleford says:

      However, with the new gay-i-fied military, will that mean that more gays will be put on the front lines or will they leave them in a “rear-area”? Just askin’

      And, interesting point of order, only one MSM outlet I saw, which was quite accidental, was BBC America on PBS which noted that Bradley Manning is going to be court-martialed. The news erroneously reported that he “could face life in prison”. Since it was a time of war, a declared war, even, Manning could get shot by firing squad. ‘Course the last guy to have that happen was Private Slovik but it was for desertion. It has a somewhat interesting story to tell in its own right.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Execution_of_Private_Slovik

    • Steve says:

      The TV-movie version of ‘Private Slovak’ is why Martin Sheen (and even his son) are still the darlings of Hollywood:

      The Execution of Private Slovik – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Execution_of_Private_Slovik

  2. proreason says:

    The purpose of this is to destroy the American military.

  3. finebammer59 says:

    this is great!

    this creates an opportunity to reduce the number of abortions just like our president promised!!

    sarc/off.

  4. GetBackJack says:

    Something Trans-human this way comes.


« Front Page | To Top
« | »