© Flickr.com/Andrew J Ferguson/cc-by-nc-sa 3.0
According to The Washington Post, US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta who is stepping down soon has
decided to lift the ban for servicewomen to take part in hostilities. This year, women will be allowed to serve in the infantry, artillery, tank troops and special detachments. Boris Volkhonsky from the Russian Institute of Strategic Research gives more details. Nevertheless, army commanders retain the right not to allow women to take part in certain operations. In particular, service in such special detachments as the Navy Seals or Delta will so far remain unavailable to women (at least until 2016). Lifting the ban on women’s service in the combat troops of the US armed forces partially took place last year when the Pentagon announced quite a few activities available to women. Still, the most fervent activists were not satisfied with it. They were eager to play even more active roles. In November last year four servicewomen sued the Pentagon insisting on the ban for women to be involved in hostilities to be recognized as unconstitutional. They were supported by The American Civil Liberties Union. The arguments in favour of a full lift of the ban are, for example, that in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where there is no definite frontline women actually take part in hostilities, so the existing rules should be adapted to life realities. In addition, as one of the plaintiffs pointed out, the ban on taking certain positions was an obstacle in her career and as a result meant sexual – sorry, I mean gender discrimination. However, we are not as much dealing with judicial subtleties here as with another grimace of contemporary western society where such high and noble things as equality, the absence of discrimination, etc., are completely distorted and turned into a farce. The struggle for the equality of women has brought absolutely abnormal results. In their ambition to outdo men in everything women sometimes violate all laws that seem to have been established by nature itself. Having gained the right to kill their own unborn babies, US women demand further expansion of their right to kill. Let’s remember the scandal about tortures and prisoner abuse in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison. Women were among the cruellest torturers there. At present, women make about 14% in the US 1.4mln-strong armed forces. According to calculations, the lifted ban will open about 230,000 new vacancies. Objections to this decision can hardly be heard among loud approvals. The objections are that the permission for women to serve in small groups in which people are in permanent close contact will give rise to certain psychological, as well as physiological problems. However, after US President Barack Obama allowed open homosexuals to do military service objections about women seem negligible. The founder of the US Center for Military Readiness Elaine Donnelly says that “thirty years of studies, reports and actual experience have shown that in direct ground combat units – the infantry – women do not have an equal opportunity to survive or to help fellow soldiers to survive. The physical aspects of it are only part of the reason.” But this does not confuse women whoinsist on ‘equality’ and US law-makers who support them. Women’s eagerness to hold a rifle and shoot – no matter at whom – overrides all objections. In the 19th century great Russian poet Nikolay Nekrasov wrote in praise of Russian women that they were capable of stopping a horse at full tilt and entering a burning house. Still, the poet believed that women’s main virtue was that they held a baby in their arms and kept a child by the hand. Sadly, today’s feminists seem to have forgotten about women’s primary mission in their trigger-happy mood. Source: Voice of Russia
decided to lift the ban for servicewomen to take part in hostilities. This year, women will be allowed to serve in the infantry, artillery, tank troops and special detachments. Boris Volkhonsky from the Russian Institute of Strategic Research gives more details. Nevertheless, army commanders retain the right not to allow women to take part in certain operations. In particular, service in such special detachments as the Navy Seals or Delta will so far remain unavailable to women (at least until 2016). Lifting the ban on women’s service in the combat troops of the US armed forces partially took place last year when the Pentagon announced quite a few activities available to women. Still, the most fervent activists were not satisfied with it. They were eager to play even more active roles. In November last year four servicewomen sued the Pentagon insisting on the ban for women to be involved in hostilities to be recognized as unconstitutional. They were supported by The American Civil Liberties Union. The arguments in favour of a full lift of the ban are, for example, that in countries like Iraq and Afghanistan where there is no definite frontline women actually take part in hostilities, so the existing rules should be adapted to life realities. In addition, as one of the plaintiffs pointed out, the ban on taking certain positions was an obstacle in her career and as a result meant sexual – sorry, I mean gender discrimination. However, we are not as much dealing with judicial subtleties here as with another grimace of contemporary western society where such high and noble things as equality, the absence of discrimination, etc., are completely distorted and turned into a farce. The struggle for the equality of women has brought absolutely abnormal results. In their ambition to outdo men in everything women sometimes violate all laws that seem to have been established by nature itself. Having gained the right to kill their own unborn babies, US women demand further expansion of their right to kill. Let’s remember the scandal about tortures and prisoner abuse in the notorious Abu Ghraib prison. Women were among the cruellest torturers there. At present, women make about 14% in the US 1.4mln-strong armed forces. According to calculations, the lifted ban will open about 230,000 new vacancies. Objections to this decision can hardly be heard among loud approvals. The objections are that the permission for women to serve in small groups in which people are in permanent close contact will give rise to certain psychological, as well as physiological problems. However, after US President Barack Obama allowed open homosexuals to do military service objections about women seem negligible. The founder of the US Center for Military Readiness Elaine Donnelly says that “thirty years of studies, reports and actual experience have shown that in direct ground combat units – the infantry – women do not have an equal opportunity to survive or to help fellow soldiers to survive. The physical aspects of it are only part of the reason.” But this does not confuse women whoinsist on ‘equality’ and US law-makers who support them. Women’s eagerness to hold a rifle and shoot – no matter at whom – overrides all objections. In the 19th century great Russian poet Nikolay Nekrasov wrote in praise of Russian women that they were capable of stopping a horse at full tilt and entering a burning house. Still, the poet believed that women’s main virtue was that they held a baby in their arms and kept a child by the hand. Sadly, today’s feminists seem to have forgotten about women’s primary mission in their trigger-happy mood. Source: Voice of Russia
