Marine Corp Delays Pull-Up Requirement for Female Marines

joko104 said:

Like I said, a bitter grunt who hates democracy and could never be in command incapable of following orders because thinks he's a Napoleon. It is your attitude that is what gets our troops killed. Incapable of accepting necessary change and thinks throwing men at the machine guns is how to win a war.

Click to expand...

:lamo Yea buddy, keep telling yourself that.

If you think Congress or President Obama's opinions on what makes an effective military are worth a hill of beans on the ground, you are living in lala land.

"Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die."

- Alfred, Lord Tennyson

>"The concern that there are “too few female General officers,” is a faulty extrapolation based on a failed assessment purported as a critical need. It is rank feminism at its most destructive, sacrificing the defensive capability of a Nation to satisfy the selfish desires of a few. Being a member of the United States military does not entitle one to anything other than the service contract and the obligations therein. All members of the Armed Forces are known as servicemembers. Any man or woman who places career desires above that of service to the Nation is a danger to all under their charge..."<

The above excerpt is from the Marine Corps "think tank" Marine Corps Association publication.

More excerpts:

>" And what about sex? The desire is natural, mutual, essentially continual and unchanging. The truth is that "integration" erodes combat effectiveness--lowering behavioral and proficiency expectations and riddling the force with time-consuming misconduct issues. We put men and women in a position to fail, discipline them when they do, and tell commanders “this is a leadership issue.” Never mind that we have created a reality based on “how things should be,” rather than how they are..."<

Full article: -> Women In Combat: The Issue Hasn't Been Settled | Marine Corps Gazette

joko104 said:

I'll ask you the same question. Can you name one incident when women in combat has caused one of our troops to be killed - since that is the incessant claim?

Click to expand...

The incessant claim is that the presence of women detracts from team cohesion, which has the effect of degrading combat efficiency. Incidents have been described multiple times in this thread for you.

joko104 said:

Was there a show called "The Marine?" What the hell are you talking about?

Click to expand...

This movie? The plot of this movie is roughly what your "Story" sounds like.

IOW, it sounds like the complete and utter BS that someone who had no intention of mirroring how the Marine Corps actually functioned, but who wanted to tell a really badass story, would come up with. You will note it was instantly picked up on by all the vets on this story as a fraud. If someone has told you this story, they have lied to you. Sorry.

braindrain said:

That STORY that you told was such utter BS that if you actually believe it than anything else you say about the military should be ignored by everyone because you obviously have no idea about how the military functions. I can gaurantee 100% that almost nothing in that story actually happened. If you would like I can go back through it and point out the bs or you can just believe me. Just let me know

Click to expand...

Point it out. There were aspects I did not believe, particularly about boot camp and he gave his explanation. Explain how it's wrong or "bs."

apdst said:

I'm all for women in all females combat arms units, that have to meet the same standards as males in male units.

Click to expand...

So what you oppose is any diversity in the military - that no one in the military can do anything other than exactly what everyone else does. What an absurd concept.

APACHERAT said:

The above excerpt is from the Marine Corps "think tank" Marine Corps Association publication.

More excerpts:

>" And what about sex? The desire is natural, mutual, essentially continual and unchanging. The truth is that "integration" erodes combat effectiveness--lowering behavioral and proficiency expectations and riddling the force with time-consuming misconduct issues. We put men and women in a position to fail, discipline them when they do, and tell commanders “this is a leadership issue.” Never mind that we have created a reality based on “how things should be,” rather than how they are..."<

Full article: -> Women In Combat: The Issue Hasn't Been Settled | Marine Corps Gazette

Click to expand...

This. A hundred times this. Politically Correct Stories =/= Reality, and forgetting that gets' people killed.

Maybe we will now be told that the Marine Corps Gazette is ridiculous nonsense written by people who are faking their service?

joko104 said:

Point it out. There were aspects I did not believe, particularly about boot camp and he gave his explanation. Explain how it's wrong or "bs."

Click to expand...

You got smacked down on his story the last time you tried to use him as a fig-leaf for substituting uninformed opinions for experience.

cpwill said:

The incessant claim is that the presence of women detracts from team cohesion, which has the effect of degrading combat efficiency. Incidents have been described multiple times in this thread for you.

Click to expand...

Just BS. I don't buy that our troops are so emotionally frail then can't handle the distraction and "drama" - as one put - of women. What makes it BS is NO ONE can give any example of anyone getting killed because of women in combat. Not ONE incident has been given of that happening. Just bitching about women.

cpwill said:

This. A hundred times this. Politically Correct Stories =/= Reality, and forgetting that gets' people killed.

Maybe we will now be told that the Marine Corps Gazette is ridiculous nonsense written by people who are faking their service?

Click to expand...

Let's go back an post the navy's opinion that aircraft could never sink a battleship.

joko104 said:

Just BS. I don't buy that our troops are so emotionally frail then can't handle the distraction and "drama" - as one put - of women. What makes it BS is NO ONE can give any example of anyone getting killed because of women in combat. Not ONE incident has been given of that happening. Just bitching about women.

Click to expand...

There haven't been any women in combat arms units, so the point is irrelevant.

You can't point to any examples of child soldiers getting our regular men killed in combat either. I wouldn't take this fact as being evidence that they should be allowed to serve.

cpwill said:

You got smacked down on his story the last time you tried to use him as a fig-leaf for substituting uninformed opinions for experience.

Click to expand...

Actually, you conceded because you had to rely on lying to make your point. You lied. I never wrote he said he had no boots. LIAR. I never wrote he said he was the first to walk through villages. LIAR again. He stated his was the first squad to reach the Pakistan border in that district.

I suspect there may be Marines on the forum that would dispute your claim that the Marines were only in force in groups of "thousands" as you put it. At this point, we should figure everything you post on these topics of personal experience is a lie - because you think lying wins issues.

He did speak of the Army/Guard - which he called "cowboys." That they do tend to move in large numbers and rely on mechanization and massive fire power. And when then would arrive they'd screw everything up by shooting up and blowing **** for the hell of it.

He said "Marines walk. Army rides." That the Marines walk into a village. The Army and Guard come in Hummers with 50 cals.

He stated his squad had rifles with a grenade launcher, that their rifles were not full auto, but they had one full auto gunner - which he said he saw as only being of value if they were in danger of being overrun. He described the area he was in as very remote and rural, low population.

I have no doubt you have no experience with the Marines whatsoever. I think everyone who knows anything about how the Marines functioned in Afghanistan knows that your claim that they only acted groups of "thousands" of Marines means you are who doesn't know what the hell you're talking about.

I was recounting was I was told. True or not. You? You just outrighted lied on top of lies about what I wrote, then ridiculed your own lies. You got nothing. All you did was discredited yourself.

ANYONE want to back up CP's FACT-CLAIM that the MARINES never went anywhere in Afghanistan but they didn't move around in groups of a thousand or more? In his words, it is the army that relies on mass numbers, massive firepower and mechanized transport. Not the Marines.

I'm getting the feeling those boasting of their great military experience were weekend warriors sent to Iraq or Afghanistan - squealing all the way. Now, afterwards, decided you were the ultimate warriors.

EDIT ADD: Tone that down 50% and you got my response.

joko104 said:

Point it out. There were aspects I did not believe, particularly about boot camp and he gave his explanation. Explain how it's wrong or "bs."

Click to expand...

Hey Joko :2wave:

Have I ever told you about my combat exploits during the Vietnam War on Operation Kerry ?

Our Marine battalion's mission was to strike deep into North Vietnam across the DMZ and we ran up against an Imperial North Vietnamese army division. We got hit hard. With in minutes I was the only one alive and was down to ten rounds of ammunition.

Then Charley yelled "BANZAI" ! and 300 Red Diaper Chinese soldiers advanced on my position. I fired off all ten rounds and took down 50 of the enemy. I then fixed bayonet and counter attacked and eliminated the other 250.

Then to my right a Jap machinegun opened fire and I drew my K-Bar and attacked the Jap machinegun nest. I got hit 32 times in my chest but I continued to advance. Once I was on top of them I showed no mercy and cut off their ears before I slit their throats.

Thinking the battle was won I all of a sudden heard the sound of tanks ! It was a German Panzer company. I out flanked the tanks and pulled the tank treads off the tanks with my bare hands. With the Panzers disabled the German soldiers surrendered.

After reading the Germans their Miranda Rights we grilled some brats and downed some brewskies until we heard the wop wop wop wop of the 1st Air Cav coming in to mop up and take credit for winning the battle.

When I got back to the States, LBJ personally pinned the Good Conduct Medal in my chest.

RabidAlpaca said:

I can give you plenty of real life examples where lacking physical capabilities can cost lives. Imagine you're patrolling up a mountain in enemy territory, loaded with 100+ lbs of gear, and the entire patrol has to wait for the weakest link, and people have to start carrying that person's gear for them, thus weighing the team down even further. Because of this delay you can't make your rendevous point and your ride out (helicopter, which you have very limited use of), has to come back at another time, so your patrol is stranded in enemy territory. I know, because I've personally seen this happen.

The fact is simple, women have a fraction of the physical requirements, even in the infantry, that men do. That is a HUUUUGE problem. These women that passed will be the weakest links in their units. I'm confused why you would defend lowering the quality of our combat arms. Physical fitness DOES matter, and it matters a LOT. If women want to be part of combat arms, they should meet the same requirements their teammates do.

Frankly though, the unit would just put that weak link back in the fob watching a radio or something, but then again maybe she'll complain of discrimination and they'd have to take her anyway.



I have personally been outside the wire without resupply for weeks at a time. This is a very real scenario, please do not talk about things you have ZERO idea or experience of.



Your massive ignorance of the physical requirements of modern combat is undeniable. You seem to picture all war as riding around a tank in the middle of baghdad.

When in reality it looks like this:

Click to expand...

CPWILL says you're a goddamn liar. In his vast experience, he has declared that the military NEVER moved thru remote areas unless at least ONE THOUSAND men did so. So either YOU'RE LYING - or he is just making up crap. I am confident that from what I've been told by those who were there that YOU are who is telling the truth - and CPWILL is full of ****.

APACHERAT said:

Hey Joko :2wave:

Have I ever told you about my combat exploits during the Vietnam War on Operation Kerry ?

Our Marine battalion's mission was to strike deep into North Vietnam across the DMZ and we ran up against an Imperial North Vietnamese army division. We got hit hard. With in minutes I was the only one alive and was down to ten rounds of ammunition.

Then Charley yelled "BANZAI" ! and 300 Red Diaper Chinese soldiers advanced on my position. I fired off all ten rounds and took down 50 of the enemy. I then fixed bayonet and counter attacked and eliminated the other 250.

Then to my right a Jap machinegun opened fire and I drew my K-Bar and attacked the Jap machinegun nest. I got hit 32 times in my chest but I continued to advance. Once I was on top of them I showed no mercy and cut off their ears before I slit their throats.

Thinking the battle was won I all of a sudden heard the sound of tanks ! It was a German Panzer company. I out flanked the tanks and pulled the tank treads off the tanks with my bare hands. With the Panzers disabled the German soldiers surrendered.

After reading the Germans their Miranda Rights we grilled some brats and downed some brewskies until we heard the wop wop wop wop of the 1st Air Cav coming in to mop up and take credit for winning the battle.

When I got back to the States, LBJ personally pinned the Good Conduct Medal in my chest.

Click to expand...

I suspect the real story is you were drafts and squealed all the way, kept your head low, came back and have told war-glory stories ever since.

joko104 said:

CPWILL says you're a goddamn liar. In his vast experience, he has declared that the military NEVER moved thru remote areas unless at least ONE THOUSAND men did so. So either YOU'RE LYING - or he is just making up crap. I am confident that from what I've been told by those who were there that YOU are who is telling the truth - and CPWILL is full of ****.

Click to expand...

Are you really so clueless as to not understand the difference between Light Infantry or SF counter-insurgency operations and theater level mechanized warfare? :roll:

I hate to break it to you man, but armored vehicles don't work so well on rugged mountain terrain. Our enemies know this, and so tend to position themselves accordingly. Sending in men on the ground to root them out is often the only means available to us of eliminating the threat such enemies represent.

This isn't exactly "war college" level stuff here.

Since the real world experience of seasoned combat veterans is insufficient, lets see what Veteran's Health Administration says about it.

Heavy Loads Could Burden Women's Infantry Role | Military.com

The average female will have trouble as infantry soldiers must carry a load often weighing more than 80 pounds for many hours at a time over rugged terrain in some cases, said Dr. David Cifu, national director of physical medicine and rehabilitation at the Veterans Health Administration.
“I’m certain the majority of women doing this won’t be physically able to do it as long as the men. It’s a matter of body size and body mechanics,” Cifu said.

Click to expand...

Army reports already have shown that female soldiers, even in training, sustain injuries at a higher rate than men. A study cited in “Musculoskeletal Injuries in Military Women,” noted that cumulative injury incidence among women in basic combat training was 52 percent compared to 26 percent for men. In advanced individual training, it was 30 percent for women and 24 percent for men.

Click to expand...

Keep in mind the above statistic is simply basic training, Infantry School, Ranger School, and SFQC are harder.

These standards designate strength requirements for infantry as “very heavy” -- meaning a soldier will occasionally have to lift more than 100 pounds, but frequently or constantly be capable of lifting more than 50 pounds. In reality, infantrymen carry anywhere from 60 to 120 pounds of gear in the field depending on their job, Army officials have said.

Click to expand...

Gathomas88 said:

Are you really so clueless as to not understand the difference between Light Infantry or SF counter-insurgency operations and theater level mechanized warfare? :roll:

I hate to break it to you man, but armored vehicles don't work so well on rugged mountain terrain. Our enemies know this, and so tend to position themselves accordingly. Sending in men on the ground to root them out is often the only means available to us of eliminating the threat such enemies represent.

This isn't exactly "war college" level stuff here.

Click to expand...

You have us mixed up. It is CPWILL that claims no small units are ever sent out. The account I gave was of a Marine who lead a squad doing exactly what you said is done. To root them out in remote, rugged terrain. On foot. Small unit. Carrying only small arms.

Whatever he did certainly got some people's attention. His parents are friends with my wife's parents, and her father is their family minister. They had not wanted him to go into the Marines for the reason he was - to literally within the legal context of war hunt and kill people. That was his specific reason. And I know him well enough to know is someone ideally suited to do so. A hunter since a young child. 4.0 smart. State wrestling champ, though not a big guy. Had a couple bigger brothers who'd beat him up, until it came where he could. A natural leader.

He was offered a high paying position training special ops teams - to train them, not lead them - as this to become an increasing direction the military is headed - to take out specific persons and targets including when drones can't get the job done. His family thought he should accept it. He turned it down. That he had done what he set out to do and has no intention of putting up with all the BS he'd have to put up with in such a position.

He stated (repeating it) "that Marines walk into battle." I suspect the picture you showed is exactly what he and his squad did, though in his words they preferred to move to small village to small village as temp. base of operation. He wanted the "outsiders" (enemy/insurgents) to see them as vulnerable - particularly at night - but that they actually did most their hunting at night - adding the advantage that they had night vision gear. Most their kills occurred at night.

Is anyone saying that the military never deployed such tactics? To send out search-and-destroy patrols that stayed out more than a few hours? The army would show up as would air support time to time. He said that the army just screwed up their relationship with the locals and when air power showed up they were wasting their time as the enemy would just go into hiding. His view was that if his squad was seen as alone, undermanned and without support then the insurgents were more likely to try to ambush or take them on. The challenge - to his mind - was not successfully killing the enemy. It was getting the enemy to come out of hiding and fleeing to engage them. He also had some tactics to get local villages to give them info of who and where to hunt.

CPWILLs claims it fact that our military never does anything that doesn't involve the movement of at least 1000 troops as a unit. I say that's BS.

joko104 said:

So what you oppose is any diversity in the military - that no one in the military can do anything other than exactly what everyone else does. What an absurd concept.

Click to expand...

I don't believe in coed combat arms units.

joko104 said:

Just BS. I don't buy that our troops are so emotionally frail then can't handle the distraction and "drama" - as one put - of women. What makes it BS is NO ONE can give any example of anyone getting killed because of women in combat. Not ONE incident has been given of that happening. Just bitching about women.

Click to expand...

Our troops are human. They're not machines, nor do we want them to be.

joko104 said:

CPWILL says you're a goddamn liar. In his vast experience, he has declared that the military NEVER moved thru remote areas unless at least ONE THOUSAND men did so. So either YOU'RE LYING - or he is just making up crap. I am confident that from what I've been told by those who were there that YOU are who is telling the truth - and CPWILL is full of ****.

Click to expand...

Do you have any idea how idiotic you sound?

joko104 said:

Actually, you conceded because you had to rely on lying to make your point. You lied. I never wrote he said he had no boots. LIAR. I never wrote he said he was the first to walk through villages. LIAR again. He stated his was the first squad to reach the Pakistan border in that district.

I suspect there may be Marines on the forum that would dispute your claim that the Marines were only in force in groups of "thousands" as you put it. At this point, we should figure everything you post on these topics of personal experience is a lie - because you think lying wins issues.

He did speak of the Army/Guard - which he called "cowboys." That they do tend to move in large numbers and rely on mechanization and massive fire power. And when then would arrive they'd screw everything up by shooting up and blowing **** for the hell of it.

He said "Marines walk. Army rides." That the Marines walk into a village. The Army and Guard come in Hummers with 50 cals.

He stated his squad had rifles with a grenade launcher, that their rifles were not full auto, but they had one full auto gunner - which he said he saw as only being of value if they were in danger of being overrun. He described the area he was in as very remote and rural, low population.

I have no doubt you have no experience with the Marines whatsoever. I think everyone who knows anything about how the Marines functioned in Afghanistan knows that your claim that they only acted groups of "thousands" of Marines means you are who doesn't know what the hell you're talking about.

I was recounting was I was told. True or not. You? You just outrighted lied on top of lies about what I wrote, then ridiculed your own lies. You got nothing. All you did was discredited yourself.

ANYONE want to back up CP's FACT-CLAIM that the MARINES never went anywhere in Afghanistan but they didn't move around in groups of a thousand or more? In his words, it is the army that relies on mass numbers, massive firepower and mechanized transport. Not the Marines.

I'm getting the feeling those boasting of their great military experience were weekend warriors sent to Iraq or Afghanistan - squealing all the way. Now, afterwards, decided you were the ultimate warriors.

EDIT ADD: Tone that down 50% and you got my response.

Click to expand...

1. When the Marines went into Helmand, thousands of guys did touch down. There was no "first one", as you claimed. Three beefed-up battalions hit the ground, with numerous support units. The standard Marine patrol is a 13 man squad.

2. The utter and complete BS of your war story has been identified by multiple veterans who know full well when someone is making ridiculous crap up.

3. People on this forum have known me before and in the Marine Corps. People on this forum have met me in the Marine Corps. Trust me - you have literally no idea what you are talking about. You are only embarrassing yourself.

APACHERAT said:

Hey Joko :2wave:

Have I ever told you about my combat exploits during the Vietnam War on Operation Kerry ?

Our Marine battalion's mission was to strike deep into North Vietnam across the DMZ and we ran up against an Imperial North Vietnamese army division. We got hit hard. With in minutes I was the only one alive and was down to ten rounds of ammunition.

Then Charley yelled "BANZAI" ! and 300 Red Diaper Chinese soldiers advanced on my position. I fired off all ten rounds and took down 50 of the enemy. I then fixed bayonet and counter attacked and eliminated the other 250.

Then to my right a Jap machinegun opened fire and I drew my K-Bar and attacked the Jap machinegun nest. I got hit 32 times in my chest but I continued to advance. Once I was on top of them I showed no mercy and cut off their ears before I slit their throats.

Thinking the battle was won I all of a sudden heard the sound of tanks ! It was a German Panzer company. I out flanked the tanks and pulled the tank treads off the tanks with my bare hands. With the Panzers disabled the German soldiers surrendered.

After reading the Germans their Miranda Rights we grilled some brats and downed some brewskies until we heard the wop wop wop wop of the 1st Air Cav coming in to mop up and take credit for winning the battle.

When I got back to the States, LBJ personally pinned the Good Conduct Medal in my chest.

Click to expand...

AAAAHHHH I literally am having trouble typing fromlauging so hard :lamo :lamo :lamo

joko104 said:

I suspect the real story is you were drafts and squealed all the way, kept your head low, came back and have told war-glory stories ever since.

Click to expand...

Other than the (above) piece of hilariousness, I have yet to see him tell an unrealistic war story. That's the most reliable indicator - since liars are looking for some kind of credibility that isn't theirs, their stories are more usually completely ridiculous in such a way that makes them look cool.

You know, sort of like the stories you tell of your buddy .

cpwill said:

1. When the Marines went into Helmand, thousands of guys did touch down. There was no "first one", as you claimed. Three beefed-up battalions hit the ground, with numerous support units. The standard Marine patrol is a 13 man squad.

2. The utter and complete BS of your war story has been identified by multiple veterans who know full well when someone is making ridiculous crap up.

3. People on this forum have known me before and in the Marine Corps. People on this forum have met me in the Marine Corps. Trust me - you have literally no idea what you are talking about. You are only embarrassing yourself.

Click to expand...

Apparently you are correct that no squad was the first to reach the Pakistan border in that district less than 1000 strong as you claimed - and when they did they all landed 1000 all together at the Pakistan border. Or at least one person completely agrees with you that is indisputable fact.