This is the Archive site for Firedoglake. To go to the main site please click on the following link

Thursday, May 19, 2005

Why Do the Republicans Hate the Military So?

Once again, without warning, the seemingly autistic Republicans on the House Armed Services subcommittee have decided that women are delicate flowers and must be taken out of support services (medics, truck drivers, canteen suppliers, etc.) that help supply combat units in Iraq.

Probably just doing it at the behest of the military, right? This is something the top brass are really burning for, but they just can't break away from the iron grip of PC feminazis, so wingnuts to the rescue, eh? Er -- no. The military collectively freaked, as a matter of fact. It's not bad enough that they're missing their recruitment goals by 15% this year -- the resolution, if passed, would force them to pull 22,000 female soldiers from their current jobs and replace them with men. Not to mention the grand moral booster it would be for the troops right now, who are so damned happy about being in Iraq in the first place.

The idea is the brain fart of the Armed Services Committee chairman Duncan Hunter (R-CA), who pressured the subcommittee chairman John McHugh (R-NY) to introduce it at the last minute. No advance notice, no hearings or new studies, they just blindsided Democrats with this flash of penetrating insight into the sexual politics and current deficiencies of the US military.

For a glimpse at the marvelous foresight that went into this brilliant tactical maneuver, let's check with our clever friends at The Corner:
Duncan and McHugh’s amendment is supported by biological fact. An average female soldier is five inches shorter than her male counterpart, and has half the upper-body strength and a lower aerobic capacity. While the courageous women of our military do many things as well as men, the heavy lifting of ground-combat support isn’t one of them.
Right-o. I'm guessing the military is just full of pretty little girls too weak to do their jobs. Every minute or two no doubt they are batting their eyelashes at some big, strong man and distracting him from his duties by asking him to lift a jeep or something.
Of course, these facts mean little to those whose purpose is to make a point about gender equality. They include the Army’s Clintonized generals — who, one suspects, are the real force behind Harvey’s innovation. Elaine Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, recently wrote: “More than one general has told me that the objective [of allowing women in forward support companies] is to ‘grow’ the careers of female officers, including their own daughters.”
Presumably the military only assigns individual women to jobs they feel they can fulfill, and nobody's complaining but a bunch of desk jockeys in the 101st Fighting Keyboardists, but screw all that -- it's All Clinton's Fault. Sorry, we momentarily forgot our mantra.
That’s a fine goal. The thought of its attainment will bring great comfort to the wounded Marine who lies on the ground, bleeding to death, because no one is there to carry him to safety.
Excuse me? I'm sorry, I didn't follow that. That last statement is just too screamingly stupid to even snark at. If you'd like a shot, have a go, 'cos even Rumsfeld came out against this particular piece of highwire lunacy. I don't have a clue what these less than stable asshats are thinking, if indeed it can even be characterized as thinking, but one wishes they would just content themselves with staring at Jesus in some driveway oil stain and leave the rest of us alone.