Woke Military

Roosh

Cardinal
Orthodox
Every sub crew that went to test depth since 1985 is extremely lucky that nothing happened.


We now have a female sniper.

Oddly enough, the position of sniper is one of the most suitable combat roles for women. They are far from the action (i.e. they don't get scared) and are not required to perform heavy physical activity. Russia had some renown female snipers during WW2.

That said, her promotion is almost certainly a result of politics, not her skill.
 

La Águila Negra

Ostrich
Protestant
 

get2choppaaa

Ostrich
Orthodox
Oddly enough, the position of sniper is one of the most suitable combat roles for women. They are far from the action (i.e. they don't get scared) and are not required to perform heavy physical activity. Russia had some renown female snipers during WW2.

That said, her promotion is almost certainly a result of politics, not her skill.
Actually it is a very physically demanding job.

They have to be able to infiltrate and exfiltrate areas. Carry in their own gear. Carry out their own gear.

It's a grueling physical job. Something very very few women can do in a combat scenario.

But you're right. Standards were undoubtedly lowered for her to be there and this is politically motivated.
 

Dr Mantis Toboggan

Pelican
Catholic
Gold Member
Actually it is a very physically demanding job.

They have to be able to infiltrate and exfiltrate areas. Carry in their own gear. Carry out their own gear.

It's a grueling physical job. Something very very few women can do in a combat scenario.

But you're right. Standards were undoubtedly lowered for her to be there and this is politically motivated.

I don't know a ton about the Eastern Front in WW2 but there were undoubtedly some very highly accomplished female snipers on the Soviet side--not sure where they served in a geographic sense though. A modern sniper in the US military does what you describe, but in an urban conflict like much of the EF it might be more manageable for a woman.
 

get2choppaaa

Ostrich
Orthodox
I don't know a ton about the Eastern Front in WW2 but there were undoubtedly some very highly accomplished female snipers on the Soviet side--not sure where they served in a geographic sense though. A modern sniper in the US military does what you describe, but in an urban conflict like much of the EF it might be more manageable for a woman.
The second we start using women in RECCE/Sniper roles is the second we lose or are forced to change our unit constructs and tactics.

I agree a designated marksman role may be viable in an urban area... But I would not indulge in the Fantasy that a woman is capable of performing at the level of a man under the way our modern construct for Snipers/Reconnaissance are used.

I suppose if we are scrapping our current construct then it's possible.

With Berger's pledge to make the Marines more diverse who knows where we are going.
 

Easy_C

Peacock
Oddly enough, the position of sniper is one of the most suitable combat roles for women. They are far from the action (i.e. they don't get scared) and are not required to perform heavy physical activity. Russia had some renown female snipers during WW2.

That said, her promotion is almost certainly a result of politics, not her skill.
Yes and no.

To get into a good position snipers may be required to travel for miles at a time, maintaining a rapid pace, while carrying about 65lbs of equipment (45lbs standard load + 20lbs for the weight difference between an M4 and M82). Not many women can do that.
 

MartyMcFly

Kingfisher
Other Christian
The second we start using women in RECCE/Sniper roles is the second we lose or are forced to change our unit constructs and tactics.

I agree a designated marksman role may be viable in an urban area... But I would not indulge in the Fantasy that a woman is capable of performing at the level of a man under the way our modern construct for Snipers/Reconnaissance are used.

I suppose if we are scrapping our current construct then it's possible.

With Berger's pledge to make the Marines more diverse who knows where we are going.
I think female snipers are fine if things are extremely bad. For example, if we are invaded and we are losing the war (or it is a stalemate) and many men have been killed or are fighting elsewhere, having females learn basic combat skills and having the top ones handle combat jobs like being snipers may be necessary and is preferable to them being captured and possibly killed and/or raped. The Soviets were having a very tough time against the Germans. They had good reasons for using females (plus it fit their communist ideology). The war came to them, it was not just a adventure to make a few companies wealthy and to have some fun (as US wars seem to be lately).

The USA could reduce the full-time military by 70% and be fine. Females are not needed in combat roles at all. The US needs to send the soldiers back to the USA to defend USA borders only, let Syria and Afghanistan and Iraq choose their own governments. Not many snipers are needed to deal with invaders crossing US borders. A few months in a labor camp and deportation will stop 95% from attempting to come and most others will flee after warning shots or rubber bullets fired by average soldiers.
 

get2choppaaa

Ostrich
Orthodox
I think female snipers are fine if things are extremely bad. For example, if we are invaded and we are losing the war (or it is a stalemate) and many men have been killed or are fighting elsewhere, having females learn basic combat skills and having the top ones handle combat jobs like being snipers may be necessary and is preferable to them being captured and possibly killed and/or raped. The Soviets were having a very tough time against the Germans. They had good reasons for using females (plus it fit their communist ideology). The war came to them, it was not just a adventure to make a few companies wealthy and to have some fun (as US wars seem to be lately).

The USA could reduce the full-time military by 70% and be fine. Females are not needed in combat roles at all. The US needs to send the soldiers back to the USA to defend USA borders only, let Syria and Afghanistan and Iraq choose their own governments. Not many snipers are needed to deal with invaders crossing US borders. A few months in a labor camp and deportation will stop 95% from attempting to come and most others will flee after warning shots or rubber bullets fired by average soldiers.
When you are talking about total warfare and all people in a nation being conscripted in total war that is one thing. There are women who can shoot rifles/pistols well. There are women that can kill men with a gun. There are women that can do the basic job of establishing a sniper's hide, getting into position, and using the combination of math/science/technique required to dial in their sights and fire the weapon on target.

I think there is a fundamental misunderstanding of what Snipers do currently in our military... based off of Hollywood glorification and portrayal. As EasyC said, you're looking at hiking in and out quickly with between 70-100+ lbs of kit (weapon/gear/radio/batteries/food/water) and being self sustaining in a sniper's hide or moving discretely to a new location. No doubt that this has happened that women in an urban setting have been able to do some of this successfully(I believe Kurdish YPG had a prominent female sniper) SDF/YPK/PKK all have female units and have had some success. Does not mean this is an optimal construct for the female OR the optimal allocation of force training.



The fact is that we have reached a point of no return. During the Marine Corps exploration of this, 30+ Million in studies were demonstrated to show that this had negative repercussions on the readiness of units. Didnt matter. Jam it through. We are never going to see the detention camps or events like you're talking about Marty. Operation Wetback was a one time thing.


We know General Milley is all in on the cult of white rage. General Berger (Commandant USMC) tows the same line the rest of the political Generals do. Here is his planning guidance for recruitment into 2030. He strongly pushes for Diversity, Equity... making the Corps reflect the nation as a whole (instead of being the Southern White Male Gun Club we all know and love....)

 

Renzy

Pelican
Catholic
Biden Joint Chiefs Nominee Embraces 'Gender Advisers' for Troops



---

President Joe Biden's nominee for the vice chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff told the Senate "gender advisers" for combat troops are critical to the United States' success, a position some veterans say is nothing more than a left-wing initiative that distracts from the military's core duties.

The revelation came during a Dec. 8 exchange with Sen. Jeanne Shaheen (D., N.H.), who asked how Adm. Christopher Grady intends to implement "women, peace, and security" legislation within the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

"The role of a gender adviser is a way to attack a very significant issue, and if confirmed, I look forward to leveraging those advisers who can make me think better and smarter about the issues that you raise," Grady said. "So I look forward to, if confirmed, understanding that ecosystem and helping advance that cause going forward again."

The Women, Peace, and Security Act of 2017 required the Department of Defense to require training in "security initiatives that specifically addresses the importance of meaningful participation by women" and to develop "effective strategies and best practices for ensuring meaningful participation by women."

"We would have won that battle if only we'd had more 'gender advisors'..." - said no General ever...
 

Elipe

Pelican
Protestant
Biden Joint Chiefs Nominee Embraces 'Gender Advisers' for Troops



---



"We would have won that battle if only we'd had more 'gender advisors'..." - said no General ever...
A peer war would be so illuminating.
 

DanielH

Ostrich
Orthodox
Biden Joint Chiefs Nominee Embraces 'Gender Advisers' for Troops



---



"We would have won that battle if only we'd had more 'gender advisors'..." - said no General ever...
You know all these talking suits opposed gay marriage 10, 20 years ago. How can they live with themselves?

I think this thread has somewhat petered out because none of this is surprising anymore; there's no level of degeneracy I don't expect at this point. We're going to have gay bars and strip clubs on military bases soon, how else can the gays practice their s*d*my without fear of retaliation from the patriarchy?
 

Renzy

Pelican
Catholic
A peer war would be so illuminating.

I agree but I get the impression that our elites are completely unconcerned about a peer war ever happening, despite what they might say. Nothing in their actions indicates that they are deeply afraid of America's enemies. They certainly don't act like they believe our nation will ever be truly tested in a war.

If anything, I get the impression that our elites are so confident in America's military might and our ability to project power that they can self-handicap and fritter away time and money on things like 'gender advisors' to ensure women get their "meaningful participation" feminist merit badge in our military. Our Army is putting out recruitment ads with 115lb sorority girls yammering about marching at pride parades and having two gays moms. That doesn't sound like a nation that's worried about being challenged *at all*.

I sometimes wonder if all this isn't some sort of peacocking (to borrow a red-pill term) - a way to show off just how safe we feel and how much security we have that we can get way with this sort of behavior with our fighting force. It's analogous to conspicuous consumption where someone displays their wealth with ostentatious purchases in order to signal that they're just so rich they can throw money around wastefully and still be OK financially.

We're so confident that we'll never face a real threat from an actual peer rival, that we can lower physical standards, push women into combat roles, alienate conservative straight white males, push homosexual and trannie propaganda...and even then, we'll still be too powerful to mess with. We have that much leeway because we really are that strong, and will be for the foreseeable future, so we can keep getting away with weakening our military because even weakened, we're still more powerful than everyone else.

It's either that or these people are so brainwashed with this woke ideology that they're leading us down the primrose path to getting steamrolled in our next major conflict.
 

Dr Mantis Toboggan

Pelican
Catholic
Gold Member
I agree but I get the impression that our elites are completely unconcerned about a peer war ever happening, despite what they might say. Nothing in their actions indicates that they are deeply afraid of America's enemies. They certainly don't act like they believe our nation will ever be truly tested in a war.

If anything, I get the impression that our elites are so confident in America's military might and our ability to project power that they can self-handicap and fritter away time and money on things like 'gender advisors' to ensure women get their "meaningful participation" feminist merit badge in our military. Our Army is putting out recruitment ads with 115lb sorority girls yammering about marching at pride parades and having two gays moms. That doesn't sound like a nation that's worried about being challenged *at all*.

I sometimes wonder if all this isn't some sort of peacocking (to borrow a red-pill term) - a way to show off just how safe we feel and how much security we have that we can get way with this sort of behavior with our fighting force. It's analogous to conspicuous consumption where someone displays their wealth with ostentatious purchases in order to signal that they're just so rich they can throw money around wastefully and still be OK financially.

We're so confident that we'll never face a real threat from an actual peer rival, that we can lower physical standards, push women into combat roles, alienate conservative straight white males, push homosexual and trannie propaganda...and even then, we'll still be too powerful to mess with. We have that much leeway because we really are that strong, and will be for the foreseeable future, so we can keep getting away with weakening our military because even weakened, we're still more powerful than everyone else.

It's either that or these people are so brainwashed with this woke ideology that they're leading us down the primrose path to getting steamrolled in our next major conflict.

Our elites are at best completely unconcerned with how we would fare in a peer war and more likely would actively wish for our defeat.
 

Pointy Elbows

Woodpecker
Orthodox
You know all these talking suits opposed gay marriage 10, 20 years ago. How can they live with themselves?
I understand the point but don't agree on the claim. Almost 30 years ago, I was a soldier when President Clinton enacted "Don't ask, don't tell" policy that basically authorized gays in the military. It prohibited the chain of command from asking about a soldier's sexuality, and at same time kind of/sort of/maybe prohibited soldiers from advertising it.

In a discussion with my company commander about it, I joked "someday your guidon (the flag that travels officially with the unit commander) will be handed to an artificially inseminated lesbian in tennis shoes." Pregnant women in tennis shoes instead of boots (feet-swelling) was already a thing and a regular joke in the Army all-male units.

His response (paraphrasing): "Oh, that's nonsense. Nobody will ever allow gay marriage. It's no big deal." Well, the rest is history.

Now, look where the military is: a social science petri dish with excellent firepower.

Goes to show how effective the Overton's Window has been. Now, they are shifting Overton's Window to encompass pedophilia. In 30 years the artificially inseminated republican lesbian commander will be passing that same guidon to some pervert with an 8 year old boy-husband.

Edit - it is a maddening phenomenon that the officer's corps is always at the leading edge of these social changes in the military. These men should be, by definition, inclined to "preserving the way of life" that brought the country to life and nurtured it to greatness (i.e. - Christian heritage, conservative moral and social ideas, etc.). Instead, they are so often in a race to the top of the woke pyramid.
 
Last edited:

get2choppaaa

Ostrich
Orthodox
I understand the point but don't agree on the claim. Almost 30 years ago, I was a soldier when President Clinton enacted "Don't ask, don't tell" policy that basically authorized gays in the military. It prohibited the chain of command from asking about a soldier's sexuality, and at same time kind of/sort of/maybe prohibited soldiers from advertising it.

In a discussion with my company commander about it, I joked "someday your guidon (the flag that travels officially with the unit commander) will be handed to an artificially inseminated lesbian in tennis shoes." Pregnant women in tennis shoes instead of boots (feet-swelling) was already a thing and a regular joke in the Army all-male units.

His response (paraphrasing): "Oh, that's nonsense. Nobody will ever allow gay marriage. It's no big deal." Well, the rest is history.

Now, look where the military is: a social science petri dish with excellent firepower.

Goes to show how effective the Overton's Window has been. Now, they are shifting Overton's Window to encompass pedophilia. In 30 years the artificially inseminated republican lesbian commander will be passing that same guidon to some pervert with an 8 year old boy-husband.
I remember when it was "well they wont allow women into combat arms" With in 2 years it was "well they wont allow trannies into the military" within 2 more years "the VA will never pay for chop-dick surgery"

I honestly have no clue what sort of full on faggotry is left? I suppose we are going the way of Rome with conscripting barbarians (illegals) as our fighting forces whom have no loyalty to heritage America and are merely there for the benefits....
 

Pointy Elbows

Woodpecker
Orthodox
I remember when it was "well they wont allow women into combat arms" With in 2 years it was "well they wont allow trannies into the military" within 2 more years "the VA will never pay for chop-dick surgery"

I honestly have no clue what sort of full on faggotry is left? I suppose we are going the way of Rome with conscripting barbarians (illegals) as our fighting forces whom have no loyalty to heritage America and are merely there for the benefits....
I think the idea behind "military service is a path to citizenship" is a back door into the situation you describe. In the creeping mechanism of defense we employ now: We have "heritage soldiers." We have "illegals becoming legal" soldiers. We use spook warriors in covert agencies. Next are our blackwater style "security contractors," our proxy friends ("hey England, do us a solid and we'll hook you up later"). I guess the only thing left is to conscript barbarians that have little/no empathy for us to do our dirty work - just for money.

From another angle, think of Our Greatest Ally!!. They have basically enlisted the western armies into servitude, by a proxy-control sort of way. But deep down, we all know that Christendom is not compatible with their way of life. Slowly, us peasants are figuring it out. It may present a problem for them in the out years. Not necessarily open hostility, we're a long way from that, but a general reluctance of westerners to get involved in yet another of their scripted conflicts. Well, again, an old guy can dream.
 
Top