Armed Polite Society
Main Forums => Politics => Topic started by: roo_ster on February 11, 2016, 11:32:50 AM
-
Read them on Martin van Creveld's home page.
MVC is one hell of an historian, with plenty of books under his belt. Some of which are wonderfully good and insightful. Why is he not more well-known? Mostly because he does not flatter those in power who repeatedly screw the pooch, year in and year out.
I have read his recent stuff on the cheap via Kindle and much of his older stuff not yet available on Kindle via Abebooks.
Of the two most remarkable books I have read by him, one was on logistics, the other on the impossible quest of equality (of any sort at any time).
Anyways, here are bits from those two articles. One by MVC, one by Bill Lind
The Indispensible Sex
Martin Van Creveld
Last week a female Israeli soldier, Hadar (meaning, roughly, “Splendor,” or “Glory,”) Cohen, was killed in the course of duty. Two months into the Israel Defense Force, just two days after she had completed her basic training and taken the military oath of allegiance, she found herself standing guard at Old Jerusalem’s Damascus Gate. With her were another female soldier and some male comrades. Three terrorists (some would call them Palestinian freedom fighters) armed with knives, submachine guns which they concealed under their coats emerged. One terrorist stabbed and was able to wound the other female soldier before Hadar gunned him down, probably saving her comrade’s life. Thereupon a second terrorist turned on her and stabbed her to death before he and the third terrorist present were “wasted”—this is standard language—by her fellow soldiers. She was nineteen years old.
...she volunteered to do a man’s job; i.e was trained to become what both the IDF and the media call a lohemet, meaning either “fighter” or “warrior.”
But do not allow yourself to be misled. The term does not mean she went through anything like a full infantryman’s course. No Israeli woman does, and of those who tried to do so on a more or less experimental basis many have been injured, some of them very badly. All it means is that she was taught how to use her weapon, apparently a shortened version of the M-16 rifle (the real thing would have been too long for her to operate efficiently), and put into a bulletproof vest. So equipped, she was made to stand guard at what is currently one of the most dangerous spots in Israel; dangerous in the sense that, over the last few weeks, it has been the scene of several more or less similar attacks.
There is a lot more. MVC's argument is from practicality/indispensability.
The SECDEF Lied
Bill Lind
In announcing that all positions in the U.S. armed forces would be opened to women, Secretary of Defense Ashton B. Carter lied. According to the December 4 New York Times, he said,
They’ll [women] be able to serve as Army Rangers and Green Berets, Navy SEALS, Marine Corps infantry, Air Force parajumpers, and everything else that was previously open only to men.
That statement is false. Women will not be able to do those things. Their bodies are not designed to do many of the tasks those positions entail. So long as realistic standards are maintained for those specialties, women will not be able even to qualify for them much less perform adequately in them. Men and women are different, physically and mentally, and their traditional social roles reflect their inherent differences.
Had the Truth Fairy landed on the SECDEF’s tongue as he was about to make his announcement, he would have said,
We are opening all positions in the armed forces to women. Women will not be able to do many of the duties entailed especially in the combat arms. We–the Obama administration–don’t care about that. Our ideology of cultural Marxism demands we pretend men and women are interchangeable. We will do whatever is necessary to maintain that illusion. In this case, if women cannot meet the standards, we will change the standards. If not enough women make it into the combat arms, we will establish quotas.
If, in combat, women cannot perform the mission, that’s not our problem. If it means lost engagements and unnecessary American casualties, what is that to us? Our ideology comes first. Get with the party’s program–or else.
Here again we see the slide of state armed forces into history’s wastebasket. Playthings of a political establishment that knows nothing of war, they exist for every purpose except fighting.
More at the linky.
Bill Lind is also no slouch. Read up on his 4th Gen / four generations of modern war for a different take on our current crisis.
-
Good info. Will have to check them out! Thanks!
-
Thanks Roo. I'll be reading.
-
That statement is false. Women will not be able to do those things. Their bodies are not designed to do many of the tasks those positions entail. So long as realistic standards are maintained for those specialties, women will not be able even to qualify for them much less perform adequately in them. Men and women are different, physically and mentally, and their traditional social roles reflect their inherent differences.
Kendra Pacelli (http://www.baen.com/freehold.html) is fictional.
-
Kendra Pacelli (http://www.baen.com/freehold.html) is fictional.
Williamson is a realist, if a bit of an ass, and you will of course remember that everyone, but especially women, is stimmed up to *here* in those novels if they are in a combat assignment.
-
Can I just point out one *little* flaw in the OP?
The M16/AR15 is not a big rifle. The reason she had a carbine version cannot be because the regular size was too big for her.
I mean, seriously, that's just stupid.
-
Can I just point out one *little* flaw in the OP?
The M16/AR15 is not a big rifle. The reason she had a carbine version cannot be because the regular size was too big for her.
I mean, seriously, that's just stupid.
I didn't read that as her being incapable, but it being unsuitable for the task as a guard. (Too long to operate efficiently.)
It is poor wording on his part, whichever is his intended meaning.
-
Can I just point out one *little* flaw in the OP?
The M16/AR15 is not a big rifle. The reason she had a carbine version cannot be because the regular size was too big for her.
I mean, seriously, that's just stupid.
There was a poster on THR by the name of J Shirley. He said he had trouble firing the M16 when wearing body armor, due to his short stature. He preferred the adjustable stock on the M-4. Perhaps that's what's at play.
-
Can I just point out one *little* flaw in the OP?
The M16/AR15 is not a big rifle. The reason she had a carbine version cannot be because the regular size was too big for her.
I mean, seriously, that's just stupid.
A2 buttstocks are actually pretty long- they are about the right length for a 50th percentile 1st world male who is around 5'9-5'10".
As far as weight?
My son (13) is about 5'3and 130lbs- which makes him just slightly smaller than the 50th percetile woman in the developed world (5'4" 135-140lb), but he is much strongeras the weight distribution is less fat and a lot more muscle. He complains that a relatively stripped down (VFG, red dot sight) carbine is 'heavy'....
Also anecdotally, I've taken a lot of women shooting, and they've all commented on how heavy a carbine was...
-
There was a poster on THR by the name of J Shirley. He said he had trouble firing the M16 when wearing body armor, due to his short stature. He preferred the adjustable stock on the M-4. Perhaps that's what's at play.
There are also a lot of medium to short men who shoot competitively who use an A1 buttstock because its shorter.
-
A1 and a2 buttstocks too big for my wife. M4gery to bbl heavy. Will build her a "super lightweight" witha pencil bbl 6pos stock and lightweight handguards in the 6lb range.
The first article caused me to think of the admomition not to throw pearls before swine.
-
Can I just point out one *little* flaw in the OP?
The M16/AR15 is not a big rifle. The reason she had a carbine version cannot be because the regular size was too big for her.
I mean, seriously, that's just stupid.
The M16 is a meter long, it's definitely not short.
-
There was a poster on THR by the name of J Shirley. He said he had trouble firing the M16 when wearing body armor, due to his short stature. He preferred the adjustable stock on the M-4. Perhaps that's what's at play.
I can attest to that. The A2 stock sucks for a guy like me with stubby arms and a flak jacket. Had a hell of a time adjusting the first time they made us qualify wearing one. I run A1 length on my rifle builds now (or adjustable). My favorite is a Stag that started has a heavy barrel rifle with an A2 stock. Sent the upper into ADCO to reprofile to a light weight and stuck the A1 stock on it. Handles great now. The balance is perfect.
-
I'm 5'11' with long arms, and even I have issues with an M16A2 and body armor. Unless you are prone you end up having to hunch your head and neck forward awkwardly to get lined up behind the rear sight. Yet another reason the US Army has put at least an Aimpoint on damn near everything.
-
Can I just point out one *little* flaw in the OP?
The M16/AR15 is not a big rifle. The reason she had a carbine version cannot be because the regular size was too big for her.
I mean, seriously, that's just stupid.
Not a flaw. Many soldiers, many women included, cannot properly fire an M16 while wearing body armor.
-
...
I'm not sure if I hate my gender, the opposite one or am just completely underwhelmed by the weird perception in the gun world that plastic rifles in 5.56 could possibly be considered heavy... ???
I consider my old Dissipator with a solid stock to be a flipping wiffle bat.
-
...
I'm not sure if I hate my gender, the opposite one or am just completely underwhelmed by the weird perception in the gun world that plastic rifles in 5.56 could possibly be considered heavy... ???
I consider my old Dissipator with a solid stock to be a flipping wiffle bat.
It may have to do with the length of time it is to be carried. I can't speak to the young Israeli gal's experience, but I found M16A2's to get heavy after a few miles at low ready.
-
...
I'm not sure if I hate my gender, the opposite one or am just completely underwhelmed by the weird perception in the gun world that plastic rifles in 5.56 could possibly be considered heavy... ???
It's a perception fostered by a generation that didn't train with an M1 Garand or an M14.
Some people think an M16 recoils, too ...
-
It may have to do with the length of time it is to be carried. I can't speak to the young Israeli gal's experience, but I found M16A2's to get heavy after a few miles at low ready.
Fistful, anything can feel heavy if you hold it a certain way for long enough.
That does not mean the M16 is a heavy rifle.
Hell, during the show apocalypse last month, I had to hike with two new pillows down my driveway (it's a long driveway) and the pillows were heavy by the time I got to the house.
-
Fistful, anything can feel heavy if you hold it a certain way for long enough.
That does not mean the M16 is a heavy rifle.
I didn't say it's a heavy rifle. If I remember correctly, the A2 is about 8-1/2 pounds, which makes it about on par with a scoped bolt-rifle. I'm just saying that you might not notice how much heavier it is than something else, if you're not carrying it for a while. I don't know what your experience is. Maybe you've never carried one farther than from the car to the shooting bench. I don't know.
-
Its not the weight that makes an m4 carbine necessary, it's the length of the stock (with body armor)
-
I didn't say it's a heavy rifle. If I remember correctly, the A2 is about 8-1/2 pounds, which makes it about on par with a scoped bolt-rifle. I'm just saying that you might not notice how much heavier it is than something else, if you're not carrying it for a while. I don't know what your experience is. Maybe you've never carried one farther than from the car to the shooting bench. I don't know.
Or I've just spent most of my time shooting heavier rifles. ;/
-
Or I've just spent most of my time shooting heavier rifles. ;/
Or never actually carried one in the same context as the rest of us are talking about. But hey, girl power! ;/
Fitz called it with regards to running an M16 while wearing armor. It's just awkward if you don't have gorilla arms.
-
Or never actually carried one in the same context as the rest of us are talking about. But hey, girl power! ;/
Fitz called it with regards to running an M16 while wearing armor. It's just awkward if you don't have gorilla arms.
That would be me. 6'1", but I need 37" sleeves in my dress shirts. The A1 stock worked for me, with and without armor.
As for weight, when I was at West Point in the 80s, we used M-14 rifles for parades, but also for road marches and such, but used M-16s for marksmanship and tactical training. The 14s made the 16s seem really light. They were A1s.
-
Or I've just spent most of my time shooting heavier rifles. ;/
I was talking about carrying the rifle.
-
As for weight, when I was at West Point in the 80s, we used M-14 rifles for parades, but also for road marches and such, but used M-16s for marksmanship and tactical training. The 14s made the 16s seem really light. They were A1s.
Considering how obtuse on the subject fistful is being, I can't help but think that the military would be improved by reviving such practices for all training...
-
Iirc israel still has lots of old car15s in stock. Those are some super light carbines and would be about perfect for issue to smaller gals.
I would be very surprised if any gal could manage an a2 and body armor. I did manage it for a bit but could not get nose on charging handle.
-
Considering how obtuse on the subject fistful is being...
???
If it helps you, I was a SAW-gunner for a year or so. It's not heavy. For a belt-fed. What branch were you in?
-
???
If it helps you, I was a SAW-gunner for a year or so. It's not heavy. For a belt-fed. What branch were you in?
I notice that you did not argue the same point I made with the two men who did serve.
-
Re: carrying...
Depends on the configuration...
My A2 DCM rifle (very heavy WOA barrel, buttstock weighted) gets pulled around on a cart. :rofl:
Carbine- weight is really negligible to me, then again I don't think a M1 or a hunting rifle on the heavy end of the scale are all that heavy either to carry around all day.
A2 stock- barely works with armor for me, but I'm 6'4". Works great with normal clothes or a light jacket for me though.
-
I notice that you did not argue the same point I made with the two men who did serve.
Perhaps it's because they served, and are just speaking from their experience, as am I. I notice that most seem to agree with me, and you're not calling them "obtuse."
Like I said, I don't what your experiences have been. Maybe you and your girlfriends do a lot of still-hunting with 12-pound varmint rifles, or compete in 3-gun. I don't know. I've just been pointing out what I think are relevant facts that non-veterans may not have considered.
Sorry if it was not helpful to you.
-
I don't give a *expletive deleted*ck what you are carrying, once you throw on body armor and a full combat load of ammo and other accessories any damn rifle is going to get heavy, just because you are worn the *expletive deleted*ck out from carrying all that BS. :old:
-
Williamson is a realist, if a bit of an ass, and you will of course remember that everyone, but especially women, is stimmed up to *here* in those novels if they are in a combat assignment.
Freehold is the only thing of his I have read. His characters have high tech advantages, nanotech and implants, not available to us in the real world. (But, part way into the guerrilla portion of the war the protagonist's runs out, and her feminine biology starts to reassert itself (to her dismay).)
-
Perhaps it's because they served, and are just speaking from their experience, as am I. I notice that most seem to agree with me, and you're not calling them "obtuse."
Like I said, I don't what your experiences have been. Maybe you and your girlfriends do a lot of still-hunting with 12-pound varmint rifles, or compete in 3-gun. I don't know. I've just been pointing out what I think are relevant facts that non-veterans may not have considered.
Sorry if it was not helpful to you.
Fistful, I did point out relevant facts. You ignored them. Based on my experience CARRYING STUFF AROUND. You do not need to serve to understand what it is like to carry an unwieldy object for significant periods of time.
And here comes, Wmnorr, also pointing out that any rifle is going to get heavy after awhile.
You tried to make a point that, specifically, the M16 is heavy after a 12 mile march. Well, no *expletive deleted*it Sherlock. That fact does not make the M16 a heavy rifle, by any stretch of the imagination.
They did not "agree" with you. They pointed out that the M16s were light and they came to that conclusion by having to carry around the previous military standard rifle.
I also think the basic design is light weight, based on comparison with handling MUCH HEAVIER RIFLES.
Supposedly, you claim to have also handled much heavier rifles. So, yes, you are being obtuse, either that or your full of *expletive deleted*it.
Face it, if you are in the military, you are going to be expected to carry around a rifle. Of all the flipping options out there, you got lucky, in terms of weight. And you can take your service and shove it were the sun don't shine, because it doesn't qualify as an excuse to be a jerk.
-
I wasn't in any way a jerk. Maybe you took some things as snark, but I was being quite sincere. As I said from the beginning, I DON'T KNOW WHAT EXPERIENCE YOU HAVE IN CARRYING RIFLES. You may have plenty. I'm not judging you. I don't know what women are capable of in that regard. I was in the infantry, and I didn't see a lot of female soldiers.
I don't recall you posting anything from your own experience, other than shooting rifles (not carrying them), and carrying pillows. Again, not being a jerk. Just having what I thought was a cordial conversation. I don't know where the hostility is coming from.
-
BSL, you are way out of line.
-
Being proficient with a rifle is a far cry from being ready to carry one into combat. Cool your jets and chillax
-
And here comes, Wmnorr, also pointing out that any rifle is going to get heavy after awhile.
Hell, a 7" Blackhawk gets pretty heavy after a few hours of hunting in rough terrain. Doesn't mean that even a small person with a fair amount of conditioning can't carry it or something considerably heavier when the need is significant. Some pretty small guys lugged Garands and Enfields all over Europe.
-
Being proficient with a rifle is a far cry from being ready to carry one into combat. Cool your jets and chillax
Plus one.
-
Hell, a 7" Blackhawk gets pretty heavy after a few hours of hunting in rough terrain. Doesn't mean that even a small person with a fair amount of conditioning can't carry it or something considerably heavier when the need is significant. Some pretty small guys lugged Garands and Enfields all over Europe.
Thank you.
My point, the orginal flaw I pointed out, is exactly this.
The rifle issued in the OP probably had nothing to do with sex and everything to do with the fact that it is the more appropriate firearm for the given job. The continued myth that woman need some special consideration when it comes to the lightest of firearms because of size is annoying, especially when the reality is those same rifles serve to accommodate male physical needs just as much (if not more, considering that more men are going to be using them)
-
Thank you.
My point, the orginal flaw I pointed out, is exactly this.
The rifle issued in the OP probably had nothing to do with sex and everything to do with the fact that it is the more appropriate firearm for the given job. The continued myth that woman need some special consideration when it comes to the lightest of firearms because of size is annoying, especially when the reality is those same rifles serve to accommodate male physical needs just as much (if not more, considering that more men are going to be using them)
I don't really like that implication, either. What bothers me, going back and reading it, is that he calls the M16 "the real thing," as if what she was carrying (presumably an M4) put her at some disadvantage in that sort of a close-range confrontation. That's pretty stupid.