The Taliban Are Not The Enemy, American Women Are

[Tang0]

The truth uncovered. What strikes fear in the irhabists?

Armed American women who travel 20,000 miles (circumference is only 25,000 so those ornery gals be travelling the LOOOONG way around I guess) to give battle to these militants.

It's clearly on their minds-

Taliban Fight American Women For Their Freedom-NYT

Here's Abu Muqawama's response.

Here's what PBS says about our Lionesses-

Independant Lens-Lioness: PBS

and the accompanying NYT article-

Female Soldiers In The Line Of Fire-NYT

American women: we send them to fight over there so we don't have to fight them over here.

God bless our women soldiers.

To get back on something remotely on topic. I watched the trailer for that film, and cringed when I saw how out of shape some of those women were. I cringed again when I saw the clip of a female soldier using a m68 aimpoint without taking the cap off...

The fact that a first world army would deploy females into combat without proper training and with ridiculously low physical standards is disappointing to say the least. I know that it is an artifact of bureaucratic policy, but it still does not make it any less imbecilic.

What precisely is the PA's policy on females? Just how close are they allowed to get to combat?

 

[roadrunner]

"...think Babur's point about Karpinski, was that it was a systematic violation, in other words someone commanding 15 jails who ordered the perverse forms of torture."

Uh huh. Systematic. And now?

Oh, and your prison system today?

A kinder, gentler machine gun hand?

Systematic my azz.

"One captain found not guilty of rape is not a case of systematic abuse."

Of course and my apologies. He's been duly cleared by your military tribunals. You think that's IT? So you really feel comfortable with your army's human rights reputation among it's own, do you?

Cool.

"oh whatever, S-2."

Whatever indeed, roadrunner. Here's some lovely reading from your very recent past-

Soiled Hands: The Pakistani Army's Repression of the Punjab Farmers Movement-HRW July 2004

...and I've got oodles more.

You livin' in a glass house because we'll find out soon enough if you're tossing bricks?

When conversing with you on here (and don't get paranoid, as i think others, even Pakistanis on here are the same), i feel like I'm talking to a kid, such is the desire to compete and defend the defenceless.

You claim your heroine, Karpinski, was not responsible for the routine, systematic and downright perverse abuse in Abu Ghraib or anywhere else. Fine, convince me. Because all I see are the following articles, some of them even American ones.

Brigadier General Karpinski found herself in the eye of the storm as the senior US military official in charge of prisons and detention centres across Iraq, including Abu Ghraib.

She led the unit that ran the prison and whose soldiers have been charged with criminal offences.

General Karpinski was suspended in late January as a military investigation into procedures at the prison was carried out.

BBC NEWS | World | Middle East | Iraq prison abuse: Key figures

 

[S-2]

"The fact that a first world army would deploy females into combat without proper training and with ridiculously low physical standards is disappointing to say the least."

Your point of reference? It reads as though you've troop training time? Rest assured our guys are just as badly trained but we somehow succeed despite ourselves.

Says more about the rest of the world than us.

Just as soon as we hit 1,000,000,000 we'll put em' back in the kitchen.

 

[sob]

Such aberrations are there in all the armies world over. Specially if you are in 24/7 pressure situation then things can go horribly wrong and sprial out of your control.

What is important is that these aberrations just remain that and do not become an accepted practice.

But coming back to the Topic of the thread, the American Female soldiers have been at the fore front of the battles and have preformed at par with their male counterparts. In South Asia the induction of Female soldiers on active combat duty will be a long delayed process in part due to our conservative nature of our society.

 

[roadrunner]

And just in case you want to deny it was systematic abuse or some other forms of denial you might like to come up with, there's plenty of evidence that it was.

Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, said the report shows that abuse of terror detainees and combat prisoners was systematic.
Senate Report Links Abuse Of Prisoners At Abu Ghraib To CIA Harsh Interrogation Techniques - cbs3.com

 

[roadrunner]

Such aberrations are there in all the armies world over. Specially if you are in 24/7 pressure situation then things can go horribly wrong and sprial out of your control.

What is important is that these aberrations just remain that and do not become an accepted practice.

But coming back to the Topic of the thread, the American Female soldiers have been at the fore front of the battles and have preformed at par with their male counterparts. In South Asia the induction of Female soldiers on active combat duty will be a long delayed process in part due to our conservative nature of our society.

They weren't aberrations, but you're clearly not bright enough to understand this.

 

[S-2]

Nice try, puppy.

"Uh huh. Systematic. And now?"

I didn't need Levin.

OTOH, your reading comprehension sucks.

And those comprehensive changes for the better so notable in Pakistan's H.R. record?

 

[Tang0]

"The fact that a first world army would deploy females into combat without proper training and with ridiculously low physical standards is disappointing to say the least."

Your point of reference? It reads as though you've troop training time? Rest assured our guys are just as badly trained but we somehow succeed despite ourselves.

Says more about the rest of the world than us.

Just as soon as we hit 1,000,000,000 we'll put em' back in the kitchen.

My reference point is standard light infantry PT and weapons training. This includes the US army, USMC, royal marines, Bundeswehr, etc . Something tells me some of those women are not doing 10 pull ups, 50 push-ups, running 3 miles in under 23 minutes, or scoring 200/250 -Sharpshooter- whatever on their rifle qualification...

I have no problem with women in combat, I'm just surprised that the US army would put them there without investing the time to properly train them.

Well, after my various dealing with the US government... maybe I am not so surprised...

 

[S-2]

"My reference point is standard light infantry PT and weapons training. This includes the US army, USMC, royal marines, Bundeswehr, etc . Something tells me some of those women are not doing 10 pull ups, 50 push-ups, running 3 miles in under 23 minutes, or scoring 200/250 -Sharpshooter- whatever on their rifle qualification... "

Then you reference wrong.

Every one of these women have passed their PT test and qualified marksmen. We don't ask more of our troops. None are enlisted in the combat arms, much less light infantry, one-third of which hate trying to hold a zero with an M-68 sight on an M-4...

...and short of you being 35 or younger and fit as hell, you aren't going to punch 10 pull-ups, 50 push-ups, running 3 miles in under 23 minutes either as a mean average for your age.

You can sh!t on these ladies or the U.S. if you wish but it won't make a hill of beans difference. They'll fight, most of them, if called upon and do the best job they can as tracked vehicle mechanics, M.P.s, admin clerks, truck drivers and God knows everything else...except combat arms.

But then, who ever said that there's a front line anymore.

I find your expectations very unusual but then "perfect" is the enemy of "good enough". They're good enough.

Female M.P. Wins Silver Star For Bravery In Iraq-NYT

"Well, after my various dealing with the US government... maybe I am not so surprised..."

Yup. Still the richest. Still the strongest. And that STILL says everything I need to know about the rest of you. So slag away as if it'll make any difference anytime soon.

Thanks.

 

[All-Green]

Individual cases of abuse and torture shall always be there, after all it is amongst every nation that criminals, killers and rapists live...does the Army make one into an angel that given an opportunity they will abstain from all forms of base and perverse actions?

Certainly not

...We cannot base a judgment on individual actions.

Indeed in an armed force if the abuse is widespread and sanctioned via a traceable chain of command then a very severe action needs to be taken and the cause and entire mindset behind the events should be examined and an appropriate strategy devised to make sure this does not happen again.

Pakistan Army does not have criminal streak...Bangladesh was a tragic mistake by the government...the consequences were quite obvious but government did not pay as much attention as it should have to devise a proper line of action.


We must remember that soldiers are humans too and i think most of them hate war more than us because they know the consequences and human tragedy that accompanies any armed conflict...still when they are given orders...they obey...

One interesting incident i was told happened in 71 war at the western front...my father was leading a sweeping patrol in a thick vegetation area adjacent to his battery locations which was perilously close to forward elements of an Indian formation...suddenly a young and lost Indian Army soldier came into view and addressed the bearded NCO accompanying my father (mistaking him for a Sikh due to the beard)...

"Sardar Ji, mein rah bhul gayan aan...tusi kairhi unit wich hagay ho?"
Translated,
Sardar Ji (honorific to address a sikh) i have forgotten the path ... which unit do you belong to?

Now despite being enemies...the entire platoon laughed and they sent him back saying... sonny that's the way to Pakistan so turn back now and go to your regiment which is the other way....
It is not that soldiers become monsters in war...most are decent folk and usually do not derive any pleasure from killing...

If such orders are given which have genuine intent of terrible pain and suffering to be inflicted upon the enemy combatants, prisoners etc...then there is definitely something seriously wrong and usually punished harshly unless the entire command has become rotten.

However in most professional armies the individual incidents do not reflect the entire mindset...unless the racial and ethnic hatred is promoted to the extent that it reflects in decision making of the command and the command deliberately turns blind and deaf to such atrocities.

An army is a big machine and when it enters into an urban area and makes war then even if it is most professional...the situation in itself makes some incidents of human suffering inevitable...that is why war is and shall always remain a tragic thing...

Regarding Abu Gharib...it was a most pathetic and shameless act and Brigadier Janis Karpinski alleged that secretary of defense Donald Rumsfeld did authorize it...however the committee did not conclude this and the good general Sanchez (accused of ordering to treat prisoners like dogs) was declared innocent as well...i think Janis is trying to cover her atrocities but the fact remains that at least a brigadier general was involved in the act...and maybe even higher than that...that a general was involved in such activities makes it a big deal...that is natural and expected.
The problem was also of inexperienced troops and contractors used in this task...they catch an innocent and if they could not get any result in the interrogation they resorted to such inhuman steps rather than conclude safely that the case is not a tough nut but rather someone who really does not have any information...however this does not say why a brigadier did not have enough of command credentials and perception to bring this to light and resolve it before things got out of hand...

I think there was a significant fact finding exercise but i would like to know what has changed since then...did not actually follow later developments.

Anyhow those are my views...

 

[Patriot]

Lol S-2 posts as if he is General in US Army where as he was probably kicked off from Army or just left army because he could not do hard work .Dude Tang0 served in Army as well.You are not the only expert here, Armchair General.

 

[All-Green]

To get back on something remotely on topic. I watched the trailer for that film, and cringed when I saw how out of shape some of those women were. I cringed again when I saw the clip of a female soldier using a m68 aimpoint without taking the cap off...

The fact that a first world army would deploy females into combat without proper training and with ridiculously low physical standards is disappointing to say the least. I know that it is an artifact of bureaucratic policy, but it still does not make it any less imbecilic.

What precisely is the PA's policy on females? Just how close are they allowed to get to combat?

Maybe they were used for searching and interrogating women and so were not really supposed to be as combat ready and effective as the regular platoons assigned more difficult and demanding tasks...

Some of them may very well be quite qualified and physically fit no doubt but if the task at hand was not assault oriented but just search and interrogate after the regular platoons made their sweep...then it makes sense to induct below par but willing females as well...even if the combat prowess became marginal as a result.

 

[S-2]

"Dude Tang0 served in Army as well.You are not the only expert here, Armchair General."

Not my army or he wouldn't use light infantry, the fittest athletes in this world with a license to kill, as a benchmark for these women...

Not one enlisted combat arms. Plenty still find themselves in the middle of fight and they hold their own. They don't have a choice.

You know what I like best? They VOLUNTEER to go 6,000 miles away to serve our nation. You should be so lucky.

Armchair that.

"he was probably kicked off from Army or just left army because he could not do hard work..."

Yup. I fcukin' pale compared to those women and humbly bow before them as true lioness warriors. All honor to them.

When you give Pakistan twelve years of service where you're ready to do your thing every day, let's talk. Until then...

 

[S-2]

You cannot imagine, despite our reputation as blood-thirsty crusading rapists, the horror in our troops at this and Bagram. Can't say the same for Guantanamo but I know too many troop leaders then who couldn't condemn this loudly enough inside circles.

There were systemic issues all the way up to cabinet or White House levels. Not specifically authorizing what we all saw, but absolutely laying the conditons from moral climate to an unwillingness to push more troops in-country and lift the stress off these commanders and, oh BTW, relieve commanders for fitness where necessary.

Some nat'l guard units DID deploy undertrained for their missions, underled by their commanders, and understrength. Welcome to war for not personally exercising their command authority in light of their responsibilities.

Abu Ghraib set us back one full year in Iraq-AT LEAST. Not a big fan of Sanchez and think he was over his head, but a lot of guys were barely treading water then. Chicken or egg is hard to tell but there was a leadership failure throughout the chain.

The higher that rises, the greater the moral implications.

Your comments were well-measured and accurate. Few "get it". Your dad did.

So too, it seems, you.

 

[Tang0]

"My reference point is standard light infantry PT and weapons training. This includes the US army, USMC, royal marines, Bundeswehr, etc . Something tells me some of those women are not doing 10 pull ups, 50 push-ups, running 3 miles in under 23 minutes, or scoring 200/250 -Sharpshooter- whatever on their rifle qualification... "

Then you reference wrong.

Every one of these women have passed their PT test and qualified marksmen. We don't ask more of our troops. None are enlisted in the combat arms, much less light infantry, one-third of which hate trying to hold a zero with an M-68 sight on an M-4...

...and short of you being 35 or younger and fit as hell, you aren't going to punch 10 pull-ups, 50 push-ups, running 3 miles in under 23 minutes either as a mean average for your age.

You can sh!t on these ladies or the U.S. if you wish but it won't make a hill of beans difference. They'll fight, most of them, if called upon and do the best job they can as tracked vehicle mechanics, M.P.s, admin clerks, truck drivers and God knows everything else...except combat arms.

But then, who ever said that there's a front line anymore.

I find your expectations very unusual but then "perfect" is the enemy of "good enough". They're good enough.

Female M.P. Wins Silver Star For Bravery In Iraq-NYT

"Well, after my various dealing with the US government... maybe I am not so surprised..."

Yup. Still the richest. Still the strongest. And that STILL says everything I need to know about the rest of you. So slag away as if it'll make any difference anytime soon.

Thanks.

I think you are missing my point here. I am not "Shitting" on these ladies. I am sure they are good at whatever there specialization was. Their lack of physical fitness or proficiency on the one-way range says next to nothing about their bravery or willingness to close with and kill the enemy. However, they were attached to units doing offensive combat operations, going house to house. So, if you are attached to a "Light Infantry" unit, it would probably be wise to actually be proficient at the things light infantry does.

The policy of the US DOD is that women are not allowed to participate in "Combat operations" or "Combat Arms". Saying those things is all well and good, but it is stupid to say those things and then precede to throw women in with units which are guaranteed to see lots of combat, and require basic skills those women were not trained for.

That gets people killed.

Now, historically those unprepared for combat find a way to get out of the firing lanes, shoot back some, and generally keep themselves out of trouble, but what happens when you need to reach an objective quickly? What about when you need to climb a wall or cliff? What if the one unprepared for combat is the only person in position with a line of sight to take the shot that will save lives in his/her unit?

These things don't come up very often if you are in a logistics convoy, or protecting an ammo dump, but they sure as hell do come up when you are busting down doors looking for insurgents.


"Not my army or he wouldn't use light infantry, the fittest athletes in this world with a license to kill, as a benchmark for these women.."

You are correct, I have never been enlisted or commissioned in the US Army. But I could lie through my teeth about it, and you would probably never know, this is the Internet after all. I prefer my ideas to stand on their own merit or lack thereof. Now stop getting all defensive and post something without all of the ire please.

My argument is really with DOD policy, not with the PT and weapons standards of Track Mechanics, signals officers, admin clerks, or any of a million other MOS's....

Also, 10 pull ups and 23 minute three mile times in my opinion don't make you an athlete. They just mean you have time to hit the gym 3-4 times a week. At least in the 18-28 range, in your 30's and 40's, or for women, it takes a bit more dedication...