‘My Gosh’ Military Women in Combat: ‘What a Great Idea!’

The deconstruction / corruption of the US military continues on its course of ignoble dissolution. Open homosexuality is protected and women, some of whom are mothers, will be side by side with men fighting unjust wars for the imperium on the front lines while their children are left motherless.

NBCNews: Placing American women in combat is “a great idea,” especially because “my gosh, women have served in the military since World War I,” said Terri Kaas, an Air Force veteran who spent time in Bahrain and Germany. Read more here.

 

Share, Bookmark, Like: Facebook, Twitter, etc.

  • GeneDe

    This is sick. As I have mentioned before, when I was in my machine gun bunker (in Vietnam) — with a black brother — and the mortars opened up right in front of us and rounds started flying over our heads, I felt sure that a VC ground attack would follow. But it didn’t. But never — and I mean never — in a million years would I ever have thought that a female might be my bunker buddy with the possibility of being blown to bits or shot up. I would have acted differently seeing that my “sister” was next to me bleeding, possibly dying. Never in a million years!

  • schmenz

    Pushed though by Leon Panetta who ten days ago was in Rome and heard from the Pope these words: “Thank you for helping to make the world safe”.

    http://www.theeye-witness.blogspot.com/2013/01/did-pope-really-say-this.html

  • tsyseskey

    Women in Combat: Ranger School Debate

    Wednesday, June 13, 2012
    James M. Kushiner
    Touchstone Magazine
    touchstonemag.com/merecomments/2012/06/women-in-combat-ranger-school-debate/

    Apparently the changes in policies in the military we’ve seen over the last decades have now moved on to Army Ranger School, with the question of whether women should be admitted to this elite training and regiment. Having read the exploits of various Army Ranger units, I dare say, “Why?” To prove a woman can kill as good as a man? Is it important that we make such a statement? This article in the WSJ argues against a new policy that would allow women to enter Ranger School, and frames it around the question of “me” versus what the military is as a service. This Touchstone article from the archives [ http://www.touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=23-01-023-f ], Mothers in the Line of Fire, addresses not just Ranger School but women in combat from the perspective of motherhood. But that brings it around to the matter of the sexual differences and natures, which our society seems bent on denying: motherhood in a culture of Roe v. Wade and promiscuity is secondary, an afterthought, and if a woman can boast about killing a child in her womb (cf. the T-Shirts about Abortion), then why wouldn’t such a woman want to have the opportunity to be the best Ranger she can be, if that’s her choice?

  • John

    …The most terrible punishment which God can inflict upon a diocese, a province, a kingdom, is to send them such scandalous priests. Behold what he says by one of his prophets: How shall I strike you anew? Super quo percutiam vos ultra? Out of the treasure of my vengeance I will take unfaithful priests; I will raise in the midst of you ministers whose depravity will be scandalous. (from Sacerdotal Meditations, Father Chaignon, S. J., translated from the French, page150-151)

  • Tomas de Torquemada

    I’ve always hated the idea of women in the armed forces, let alone in combat. But efficacy and common sense, as well as standards of decency, count for very little in today’s military. This is equally true of police and fire departments (as well as the boxing ring!) — all that matters is giving free rein to nihilistic social experimentation and engineering, and to an exceptionally fatuous and downright insane utopianism.

    One can imagine how the media are already planning to distort and exaggerate the supposed heroism of some fictitious homosexual version of Audie Murphy (who must be spinning in his grave at what’s been done to This Man’s Army). They already did so with a woman, who in fact did
    nothing but get captured. And recall how Mayor Giuliani bestowed the title of Hero upon a female police officer, who did nothing more than manage to have her gun taken from her.

    Women and our gay brothers and sisters (better known known as in-your-face perverts) in the U.S. military…yet another sign of a culture in irreversible decline.

  • Dan Buckley

    Military women is hardly a new concept. The Iliad mentions group of
    accomplished military women – the Amazons. They were called
    “Amazons” because they were without one breast, a breast they had
    removed so they could draw the bowstring more readily. Lesson?
    Women can certainly act as a military force, but their womanhood will
    suffer irreparably

  • GeneDe

    Yes, their womanhood will suffer (and has already suffered), but I absolutely disagree: they should NOT act as a military force. Never. Anyone who has been in a combat/war zone/free-fire zone will testify to that. I can get into more detail, but at this point in time, I will not.

  • http://catholicism.org/author/bam Brother André Marie, M.I.C.M.

    Both the ancient Celts and the ancient Germans had women in combat, or so I have read. (The actual extent of it may have been quite limited: any specialists out there?) If these historical claims are true, then in both instances, Christian civilization changed these people for the better. In this as in so many instances, we are seeing a reversion to pagan morals. The consequent degeneration of women and of femininity is accompanying it, too.

  • Mr. Brian Batty, O.P.

    I don’t know much about ancient German culture. Celtic myths, particularly the Irish cycles and folktales, are abundant with examples of formidable female warriors and highly skilled combatants. These tales too often now becomes pseudo history for cultural revisionists. What evidence we have from real life isn’t as romantic.

    The ancient Irish Brehon Laws required women to respond to war levies if they owned land and wasn’t changed until very late 7th century. This may seem strange considering the tradition that St. Patrick codified the Brehon Laws but I’ve read speculations that this probably indicated the female landowners were expected to provide warriors, not participate directly. (And yes, some of those provided warriors may have been women).

    Some women did participate in battles but this eventually became outlawed completely. You are spot on Br. Andre for attributing this change to Christian civilization in Ireland! In 697 The Brehan Laws were altered in this area by the “Cáin Adomnáin” (Canon of Adomnán) making it illegal for women to take part in battle and warfare. This was thanks to St. Adomnán who was abbot at Iona. He rightly saw the need to halt what he recognized as the unChristian pagan savagery of Irish warfare. This not only included barring women from combat, but legal protections for innocents and non-combatants in war, and codified punishments for crimes of child murder, cleric murder, rape, etc.

    I feel I should point out, before more feminist minded commentators start shouting about how “this is an example of a male saint in a chauvinistic, patriarchal Church restricting women,” that the exclusion of females in war was the requested of St. Adomnán’s BY HIS MOTHER, who had witnessed the atrocity of women combating!