Incident #1
LII:
http://www.slate.com/articles/health...t_over_it.html
Sure it should be open to women, but the standards are already low enough. Don't lower them just so extra women will die. This is how female combat infantry reduces readiness: NOT because they're female, but because of what brass does to make certain there ARE female combat troops.
SLE:
You determined the standards were low enough?
LII:
Read a report yesterday on the subject. According to it these female marines aren't required to do a single pull-up, etc. This report reads like a North Korean state media "GREAT SUCCESS" broadcast.
SLE:
That's because as of now (until jan 1) female Marines have a "flexed arm hang" in lieu of pull-ups to assess their upper body strength ... Hardly constitutes a relaxation of standards, considering its what the Corps has been doing for many years
LII:
While there's no way in hell my asthmatic, junior-sized frame would cut it in the military, I'd say the requirements are still low within the scope of history. A 6 mile run and 12 miles carrying 85 lbs are, dare I say, effeminate compared to the Roman Legion's minimum training requirements. Try a daily 32 mile run in full armor, round shield, two gladii, and sometimes a spear of varying length. A different, harder stock than we.
SLE:
Physical tests are products of physical requirements... Not many engagements today require 32 mile runs with shields
LII:
Indeed not many do, but unconventional events are the definition of war. A soldier expediently trained only for the conventional is a dead soldier, don't you agree? Perhaps especially so when the battle isn't one of our choosing...
SLE:
Yeah, so confirm for me that you think we should all be running about in loin cloths and spears for 30 some odd miles?
LII:
(no response)

Incident #2
LII:
http://www.chron.com/news/crime/arti...lt-5296278.php
Female Army captain claims she was "forced" to perform oral sex. Trained to kill a man...but can't bite one?
SLE:
He was a general.... Abused his rank and the power that comes with it ... You won't understand it, don't try
LII:
(no response)