"WASHINGTON (The Borowitz Report)—The spending cuts mandated by the sequester may hamper the United States’s ability to invade countries for absolutely no reason, a Pentagon spokesman warned today."That's good.
This article sets up four arguments for putting women in combat, then refutes them.
"The most fundamental differentiator between men and women of course is mutual sexual attraction. That fact has become an increasing source of weakness to US military units, and will weaken them still further when full combat integration is achieved. Where men and women are put together, sex will follow. So will pregnancy - which is of course grounds for removing women from active duty. Sex is sometimes consensual. It is is sometimes coerced. And it is sometimes sold."And it always adds stress to people who already facing the greatest stress in the world because they are fighting for their lives.
"It is on the point of "fairness" that Browne expresses himself most scathingly. It's not the military's job to be "fair." It is the military's job to win wars. Our society values freedom of speech. It values the right to elect leaders. It values individual choice and market competition. All of those values are suspended in the military, sacrificed to the paramount need for military effectiveness."This is a good job, but I don't believe it address the real motives for putting women in the military. The primary motive is the military needs bodies. Perpetual war is using up bodies and degrading the military, so they keep expanding roles for women to obtain new bodies. The second reason is that when a woman is killed or captured, it whips up support for the war in the US. With the vast majority of Americans wanting to end the wars, our rulers need a game changer to re-energize support for perpetual war. Setting up women to be killed, captured and tortured provides that game changer.
Obama claims power to assassinate Americans on US soil.
Syrian warplanes and rebels attack Iraq.
No comments:
Post a Comment