Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image Image

Women in Combat

The Women in Combat Debate and Celebrating Veterans' Day on Fox

November 10, 2006 | By | No Comments

Fox News here in Your Nation’s Capital is taping a segment on women in the military. The interview will air on the 11th. Veterans’ Day. I will be discussing the contribution of women in the uniformed services.





DoD photo by: SGT R. KLIKA

Date Shot: 20 Jun 1985Our women in uniform are serving with distinction and honor in our Armed Services. The nation is proud of our women in uniform for their outstanding contribution to the security of our nation. They have faithfully discharged their duty and oath of office to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution. We are grateful for their service.

To defend out institutions and our way of life. Our women in the military have made sacrifices. And for too many, the supreme sacrifice.

Women have served with distinction in Iraq and Afghanistan in the global war on terror. There is no debate, no question on the patriotism of our women in the military and their contribution to our national security.

Nothing that has happened in Iraq and Afghanistan changes the debate on women in combat. That women have been placed in combat.

The President, the Commander in Chief, has said that women willl not be in [land] combat.

Congress has decreed that women will not be in land combat.

Army rule and req have forbidden the placement of women in land combat.

The American people have demanded that women not be placed in land combat.


Women are dying in combat.

Todate, 67 women in the service have died in Iraq and Afghanistan. In the Vietnam era only 17 women were killed. And most of those female casualties were nurses. We do not have to sacrifice our women in combat.

What has changed?

During the Clinton era army regulations were weakened to where women are now exposed to a substantial risk of capture. The end results of this change has been tragic. As we now have seen with the capture, torture and murder of our female soldiers.

We are proud of our women in the military. But we did not send them off to a war zone to be killed and captured in combat.

Double Standards involving Women (DSIW)

…here’s what a 22-year-old man and woman must do to “max” (get a perfect score of 300) the physical fitness test in each service.

Marine men must do 20 pull-ups, 100 sit-ups and run three miles in 18 minutes. Women Marines must hold the flexed-arm hang for 70 seconds, do 100 sit-ups and run three miles in 21 minutes.

Army men must do 75 push-ups, 80 sit-ups and run two miles in 13 minutes. Women soldiers must do 46 push-ups, 80 sit-ups and run two miles in 15:35.

Women are held to lower physical standards than men. Lower physical standards can jeopardize mission accomplishment and evacuation of wounded fellow soldiers.

Only about 3% of military women test as well in physical training as the average male. Women have much to offer in knowledge, skills and abilities to our armed forces. Man-handling an 80 pound back isn’t one of them.

If one of our soldiers is wounded, do we know that a female could move her buddy to safety?

This doubt, this hesitation on rescue is what destroys unit cohesion.

Women in combat does not improve the ability of our Army to fight and win.


US Marine Corps Drill Instructor Staff Sergeant Schliesman and the other Drill Instructors of the 2nd Battalion, H Company, watch as new recruits do dead hang pullups at Marine Corps Recruit Depot Parris Island, South Carolina. (Released to Public)

Pullups. Men have to do them. Women don’t. Double standards. For the feminists.


Thank you (foot)notes: Update: The interview was bumped. We’ll let you know when segment is re-scheduled. Your Business Blogger serves as the Vice President of the Center for Military Readiness

16 Oct



Karin Agness President of Network of Enlightened Women and Mallard Fillmore

October 16, 2006 | By | 2 Comments

How does one know when one has arrived?

When you are the subject of a cartoon.


We were honored to have Karin Agness, President of NeW, as one of our panelists for the Center for Military Readiness Celebration last week.


Karin Agness at the Center for Military Readiness Briefing


Was this helpful? Do comment.

Consider a free eMail subscription or RSS for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Karin L. Agness is the Founder and President of the Network of enlightened Women (NeW), which helps female college students to confront radical feminists and liberals on fifteen college campuses. Ms. Agness is a Phi Beta Kappa member and student of law, University of Virginia. She has collaborated with the wife of Your Business Blogger, Charmaine Yoest, Ph.D..

Read Rebecca Hagelin’s take at TownHall.

The Virginia Senate Race: George Allen vs. Jim Webb

October 6, 2006 | By | One Comment


The Feminist and Women in Combat, Scott Maxim

Your Business Blogger is honored to report to Elaine Donnelly who heads The Center for Military Readiness. We have been asking questions of both candidates to clarify their positions on women in combat. Yesterday CMR released this information.

From Elaine Donnelly, President, Center for Military Readiness, 5 October 2006:

In the Virginia Senate race, the issue of women in combat has suddenly become a matter of great controversy. The Center for Military Readiness is non-partisan and neutral in that race. We do not endorse candidates at any level. As a public policy organization our primary mission is to provide accurate information and background on issues of concern to CMR.

On September 12 Senator Allen raised the issue of women in combat by sponsoring a high-profile news conference featuring female Naval Academy graduates. The former officers criticized Mr. Webb’s 1979 Washingtonian article opposing women in combat, titled “Women Can’t Fight.” Video from the news conference is prominently displayed on Allen’s campaign website and in a series of ads regarding respect for women. Webb apologized for some of the statements in the article, and one of the news conference speakers subsequently said that if she lived in Virginia, she would vote for Webb.

Others can debate the etymology of Allen’s unfortunate slang word or Webb’s seventies-era rhetoric. CMR is more concerned about the issues that matter today. One of these two men will be sworn in as Virginia’s Senator in January 2007. Since both candidates have put the issue of women in combat front and center, we believe the voters are entitled to answers on their records and future plans on military personnel issues of concern to CMR

To determine the candidates’ positions on current issues — not just things that were said in the past — CMR submitted four specific questions to Senator Allen and to Jim Webb. We had hoped that we would have written answers to report by now, but we have yet to receive answers from the Allen campaign. A spokeswoman for Mr. Webb provided verbal answers to three of the four questions. Our inquiries and the Webb campaign’s partial answers are posted here.

On September 17, Tim Russert of NBC’s Meet the Press put several valid questions to Allen and Webb about the Army’s practice of placing female soldiers in certain support units that are collocated or embedded with direct ground combat troops. These units are required to be all male. For months CMR has been reporting on these illegal practices, which were the subject of a major debate in the House Armed Services Committee in May 2005. Neither candidate, however, seemed prepared to answer current questions on women in land combat or related issues. Erroneous statements were made by both.

In the interests of accuracy and context, we have also posted some points of information to correct or clarify issues of concern to CMR that came up during the Meet the Press debate. This information has been shared with both candidates.

If we receive answers to our inquiries from Senator Allen or James Webb, we will let you know right away.

The four questions are at the jump.


Was this helpful? Do comment.

Consider a free eMail subscription for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:

A Reminder – Join Us on October 12!

In the meantime, we are finalizing plans for our Eleventh Annual CMR Issues Briefing on Thursday, October 12.

By coincidence, our scheduled panel discussion could not be more timely or relevant to issues being discussed today. I am looking forward to joining distinguished panelists Kate O’Beirne of National Review, attorney Charles Gittins, and Karin Agness of the Network of enlightened Women (NeW) in discussing: Respect for Women: Where is the Military Taking Us?

You will not want to miss the panel discussion, which will be followed by the CMR Celebration Reception — our main fundraising event of the year. This reception gives us the opportunity to share good conversation and refreshments with friends from around the country.

Read More

What Were Feminists doing on September 10, 2001?

September 11, 2006 | By | No Comments

Following is background from Your Business Blogger in an article published just after 9.11. Things have changed since then. A little.

Booby traps at the Pentagon: Charmaine and Jack Yoest introduce you to the Pentagon’s babes in arms. What do they want? An “open dialogue” on breastfeeding. (Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services)

Originally published in The Women’s Quarterly; January 01, 2002;


Pentagon attack

ON SEPTEMBER 10TH, [2001] the Defense Advisory Committee on Women in the Services, the group most responsible for promoting women in combat, gathered in Pentagon Conference Room 5C1042. This civilian advisory committee, whose members have the protocol status of three-star generals, monitors the concerns of women in uniform. And what was the topic on the eve of the worst attack in U.S. history?

After briefings from representatives of the Army, Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, and Coast Guard, DACOWITS, as the committee is known, issued a formal request for more information on what they deemed a matter of paramount military significance:


As the terrorists prepared to hit the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon itself, our military leaders were directed “to engage in open dialogue” on lactation tactics.

The Defense Advisory Committee on Women celebrated its fiftieth anniversary last April. At the birthday party, President Bush’s deputy secretary of defense, Paul Wolfowitz, a man well regarded for his level-headed and conservative approach to military issues, lauded DACOWITS in his address as an outstanding organization” and told the assembly of earnest women that he “looked forward to [their] advice.”

Read the article.


California Conservative has Open Post 9.11

17 Aug



Hiring Super Stars vs Tolerating Turkeys

August 17, 2006 | By | 2 Comments

Microsoft has one real point measurement for hiring.


Your Business Blogger has hired (computer) coders, sales reps…and government bureaucrats.

When given the option of head count and budget flexibility, I always recommended to my managers to hire the most expensive talent possible — the Super Stars.

Even when hiring government workers.

Into Good and Evil reminds us that when talent really counts, when talent determines life and death, who would get hired? He points us to Professor Kingsley Browne in The Ace and the Turkeys,

“Given the cognitive and temperamental patterns required, it is not surprising to find that the ability to fly aircraft successfully in combat is an ability that not many have. Indeed, it is not an ability that even all combat pilots have. Aviation analysts recognize that the majority of combat kills are scored by a small minority of pilots. Mike Spick has observed: “The gulf between the average fighter pilot and the successful one is very wide. In fact it is arguable that there are almost no average fighter pilots; just aces and turkeys; killers and victims.”

Fighter pilots, like sales guys in a role playing exercise, can practice and give a passable presentation, but,

As one Air Force pilot stated, “Most guys can master the mechanics of the systems, but it’s instinctive to be able to assimilate all the data, get a big picture, and react offensively. Not a lot of guys can do that.”

But the Air Force has a challenge most sales managers don’t: Separating the Aces from the Turkeys,

Ideally, one would have only “aces” or “killers,” leaving the “turkeys” and “victims” to another career path. The difficulty lies, however, in the fact that there is no known way to separate the aces and the turkeys prior to combat. Unfortunately, many of those who will end up being turkeys often do not know what they are getting into. These pilots may have the ability, intelligence, and know-how to fly the plane well, but they ultimately lack the “fighting spirit” that they will need in combat. ”

(Buffalo Law Review,Winter, 2001, 49 Buffalo L. Rev. 51,Women at War: An Evolutionary Perspective By Kingsley R. Browne)

But the hiring manager does have an advantage over an Air Force Wing Commander, the civilian Ace has a track record of Kills.

The best indication of future performance is past performance. Our armed forces are hampered by looking only to recent combat or aerial engagements — and there aren’t that many of those dogfights. The hiring manager has different metrics of combat measures for top business talent. Eat what you kill. Who had produced the best numbers?

In this human resource practice and strategy, there are down-sides as Anita Campbell, my editrix at Small Business Trends citing the Trizoko Biz Journal mentions. She and others make the valid point that Super Star and Aces are nearly impossible to manage. And, indeed, can only be managed by Super Star managers.

But if these crazy iconoclasts can be harnessed, a big ‘if’ to be sure, big numbers are sure to follow. For example, when I had a modest software company, I learned the hard way that a one genius coder was worth a half dozen coders. And not because he (and he was usually a ‘he’) was faster, but that his work was nearly bug-free. Which saved me from hiring three coders just to patch.


With my sales teams, Pareto’s 80/20 Principle always played out. But the top guy, usually a deviant was always a standard deviation above the norm. My #1 sales guy was sometimes double the sales of #2, the rest of the sales team on the long tail. That #1 guy drove me nuts. But I loved his numbers.

And government bureaucrats? Goodness. I once had an agency head ‘lose’ a $100 million department. It was necessary to find it for obvious political reasons, but we only became aware of the lost unit because I was working the Y2K rollover and really needed to find all the laptops. We finally found it. Hidden away, quietly working away. And there were lots of good excuses why it was floating alone off on its own org chart, in its own universe. How they got paid is outside the scope of this post. I was assured that it was not illegal.

So Anita and Trizoko Biz are right, Super Stars are a pain.

But I wonder how many $100 million business units are lost. And could be found with a few dozen more IQ points.


Was this helpful? Do comment.

Consider a free eMail subscription for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Your Business Blogger’s columns appear in Small Business Trends on Tuesdays and Small Business Trends Radio on Fridays. Please tune in.

The Army's Marketing Campaign for Placing Women in Combat

August 10, 2006 | By | No Comments


The Great Seal The World’s Only Super Power wields its power through the arrows of the Armed Services in one hand and in the other hand is the olive branch of…marketing.

The olive branch is traditionally known for peace, but also for known for prosperity. Commerce is usually difficult in times of war. The olive branch these days seems to represent peace as the absence of warfighting, but might also be seen in the marketing in warfighting.

If there is anything we Americans know how to do — is fight wars and sell stuff.

The Army now has a combined arms team of lethal power. Nothing on earth can resist the might of our military co-located with its American Marketing Machine. That is being turned loose on the masses of US lasses to put women in combat.

The marketing message is delivered with smart bomb precision and subtlety. It began with omissions, as when the Air Force Academy took down its huge sign, Bring Me Men. And now is actively selling with clever word changes.

Which is marketing defined. As Mark Twain said about the right word being as powerful as the difference between lightning and a lightning bug.

Words count. Army Regulation 600-13, Army Policy for the Assignment of Female Soldiers, Dated March 1992,

…allows women to serve…except those battalion size or smaller units which are assigned a primary mission to engage in direct ground combat or which collocate routinely with units assigned a direct ground combat mission.

It is the intent of Congress, the President and Army Regulation that women are not permitted in ground combat.

But note how the feminists in the armed forces are changing wording to change policy. For example,

The Infantry Carrier Vehicle (ICV) Rifle Squad variant and Infantry Carrier Vehicle (ICV) Weapons Squad variant each deliver 9-person infantry squads to a location from which they will conduct a close assault.

Close assault is ground combat, from which women are excluded. The Alert Reader will notice that the Army calls this fighting machine a 9-person vehicle. Where it should be a 9-MAN infantry squad.

The Army substitutes “person” for “man.” Which is the feminist agenda. Male substitution wherever possible.

The military goes a-marketing.



Was this helpful? Do comment.

Consider a free eMail subscription for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:

See the Army’s website.

More on the Seal at the jump.

Read More

The Feminist's Dilemma

August 7, 2006 | By | No Comments

What’s a Feminist to do?

All of modern marketing makes clear that the modern girl doesn’t need a man…


Don’t need a man

if you got a can

of Pepsi, Please

All of academia tells the young lasses to burn their bras.


Professor Diana York, Women’s Studies


From higher education to edgy advertising the Feminists become empowered. And they can then become combat veterans:


Lynndie London, the empowered Feminist at Abu Ghraib jail.


As this Feminist points out, Men? Who needs ’em? I got all I can handle.


Thank you (foot)notes:

Feminists Law Professors have more. Fun.

Be sure to bookmark Ipso Facto comic blog.

Center for Military Readiness on Janet Parshall's America

July 31, 2006 | By | No Comments


Janet Parshall’s America Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness will be interviewed on Janet Parshall’s America. Today live around 4pm EST. Check local listings.

Elaine will be explaining why the death toll among military women has been so high. And will discuss the seven major consequences that the Defense Department and Congress are inviting by failing to ask questions on how women are co-located with combat units.

Tune in the Salem Radio network for an eye opening debate.


Was this helpful? Do comment.

Consider a free eMail subscription for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Full Disclosure: Your Business Blogger serves as the Vice President for the Center for Military Readiness.

Marketing Women in Combat

July 28, 2006 | By | No Comments

Federal Law, governing our armed forces, prohibits women in land combat.

But how would one know, from the ads we are bombarded with.


So, I don’t know, what do you think? Would you go with the pearls, or would they be too much with this . . .?

Or maybe the boyfriend is wearing the jewelry. At home. On the couch.

Holding his manhood cheap.

(From Martha and Charmaine. . .)


More on Henry V at the jump.

Read More

21 Jul



Katie Couric Doesn't Want Single Mothers in War Zones

July 21, 2006 | By | 4 Comments


Lori Piestewa,

single mother of two,

killed Katie Couric recently refused to go to Iraq. She gets this right,

Katie Couric, who takes over the CBS Evening News in September told Access Hollywood that at this point, she would not venture into the Middle East hot spot.

“I think the situation there is so dangerous, and as a single parent with two children, that’s something I won’t be doing,” Katie said.

Couric lurches into the truth: War zones are not safe for anyone. Especially for moms and the kids left behind.

Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness reminds us that,

To date 60 women have been killed in Afghanistan and Iraq since 9/11. By contrast, only 16 women killed in all the years of Vietnam, most of them nurses. In the First Persian Gulf War, 33,000 women were deployed, but only 6 perished due to scud missile explosions or accidents.

Women should not be killed in combat.

No single mother with children should go to war. Not Katie. Not Lori.


Katie Couric


Was this helpful? Do comment.

Consider a free eMail subscription for this site.

Thank you (foot)notes:

Kathryn Lopez at NRO points us to Access Hollywood, blockquote above.

Full Disclosure: Your Business Blogger also serves as the Vice President of the Center for Military Readiness.

See Saving Private Lori.

Get Women Out of Combat.

Mudville Gazette has Open Post.