Armed forces?

Am I the only person who thinks the Australian armed forces look increasingly like milksops in khaki?

My evidence:

  • The chief, Major General David Morrison, bedazzled by Angelina, carrying on as if the armed forces are some sort of gender equality workshop.  Excuse me, I thought the role of the armed forces was to defend us and to kill people, if necessary.
  • Despoja breathlessly endorsing the chief and banging on about our role in peace keeping missions.  Evidently we have the armed forces because of peace.
  • Retired Major General Cantwell being used as an ‘expert’ on the geo-politics of the Middle East.  This was the guy who wrote a book with David Marr – say no more.  And his point of view: going into Iraq was a mistake and we must stay home now. Going to gender equality workshops will fill in the time, I guess.

My guess is that men on men bullying and harrassment has always been more of an issue in the armed forces than men on women.

And what are the consequences of all this messaging for recruitment – only political correct, namby-pamby types need apply?  Wow and wow.

Many years ago, one of my friends was called up (in the late 1960s); he always had a choice about going to Vietnam.  But after a few months of marching up and down a paddock in Queensland, he went because that is what being in the armed forces really meant.  He ended up doing very well after that, with his university studies highly subsidied.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

214 Responses to Armed forces?

  1. Baldrick

    The chief, Major General Hurley, bedazzled by Angelina …

    Judith, don’t you mean Lieutenant General David Morrison?

  2. Roger

    This was the guy who wrote a book with David Marr – say no more.
    And Judith commits the ad hominem fallacy right there.
    I’ve not much time for Marr either, but Cantwell’s views on the Iraq invasion stand or fall on their merits, Judith, and since he was Strategic Director of Operations for the multi-national forces for a time, I’m interested in them. And wasn’t the London conference General Morrison – not General Hurley, btw – attended directed to ending rape during war? Is that not a noble goal which our head of military should be committed too? Then why belittle him for doing so? Deal with his arguments (which I am not convinced by, as it happens), don’t caricature them for heaven’s sake.

  3. john of dandenong

    Judith – you forgot to mention the mardi gras and the military.

  4. Judith Sloan

    Yes, Morrison, changed. Is he head of army or the whole thing?

  5. Roger

    Army. Hurley is chief of “the whole thing”.

  6. Cato the Elder

    We seem to be going through one of those stages where the bureaucrats are in control.

    To quote the late Admiral Sir Jackie Fisher:

    The essence of war is violence. Moderation in war is imbecility

    The Greens, of course, will never admit this.

  7. Dr.Sir Fred Lenin

    Next will be the 14 th Gay Rapid responce regiment and the Lesbian Motorcucle coy. Led by Lt.Col Wong?

  8. C.L.

    Morrison is an embarrassment to Australia and a disgrace to the uniform he wears.

    And his advocacy of front-line war service as a way of protecting women from violence is so utterly weird that not even an LSD addict would have come up with it.

    We used to have a word for men who let women fight: coward.

    As for the ADF, it is no longer tasked to fight battles or wars.

    Excepting, of course, wars against “climate change,” “homophobia” and “sexism.”

  9. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    he always had a choice about going to Vietnam.

    Cue the numerical one…..

  10. Roger

    Deal with his arguments (which I am not convinced by, as it happens)
    Morrison believes having women at all levels of the army, including in combat roles, will serve to address the incidence of rape during war. I think that’s a non sequitur. The obvious response to rape in war is better training, discipline, order and morale. Having women in combat militates against all those things.

  11. Cold-Hands

    he always had a choice about going to Vietnam.

    Cue the numerical one…..

    He must have been off sick that day…

  12. .

    He is a staff officer of a three star rank (Lt. Gen, Air Marshal or Vice Admiral) and thus head of a service arm.

    The CDF is by convention now always a four star equivalent staff officer (General, Admiral, Air Chief Marshal).

    I don’t think those in the military who got university paid for due to overseas service were subsidised, particularly in a war where conscription or the draft was used.

    But the gist is correct. I am for women in the military, but in such a way that very, very few would ever serve. The physical standards must be identical for each position.

    What Morrison is doing has nothing at all to do with his job.

    As for Iraq – libertarians warned you not go in unless you were prepared to go in much harder than what Bush did and planned all the way to the bitter end.

    Now ISIS may control two states and al Qaida gets back Afghanistan. The case for war has never been stronger.

    Any conservative now rejecting war and supporting things like the PATRIOT ACT and the DHS or here in Australia, greater police powers ought to have a long hard look at themselves.

  13. C.L.

    I’ve pointed out before that ADF recruitment ads now resemble tampon commercials.

    Ladies: run, jump and swim – plus wear stylish white uniforms!

    See if you can spot the blokes.

  14. David Archibald

    General David Hurley has a Twitter feed and a “Facebook like” on his homepage at defence.gov.au These things used to be more prominent on his page and then he must have realised that they are completely inappropriate but couldn’t face up to getting rid of them entirely. Those things are all you need to know about the man to realise that he should be fired and replaced by someone with a military mien. How the troops must suffer under this narcissist.

  15. Gab

    The physical standards must be identical for each position.

    No chance. Even the physical entry requirements for women have been lowered. What other concessions are made?

  16. Eddystone

    See if you can spot the blokes.

    Or the Anglo-Saxon males who actually make up the overwhelming majority of the combat units.

  17. .

    Well see Gab then I don’t think they should serve. It is obvious this is being done for AA reasons.

  18. Fred

    The Chief of Army has the power to reallocate any soldier to any job in the army.

    David Morrison could make infantry units 50% female tomorrow if he wanted.

    Alas, that might upset the 99% of women in the army who join to sit behind desks.

  19. Wozzup

    Having talked to a few serving officers I know I would have to say I agree. They are being turned into touchy-feely milk sops and / or demanding self entitled types by the politically correct brigade that has so come to control our politics, press and public service. Yes sexual and other forms of abuse of females is totally unacceptable. But there is a fine line between stamping this out and stamping out the tough masculine culture that an armed force needs. And I think it is reasonable to ask do we really want women in the front line. Particularly when we remember that to do this usually means lowering the high physical standards that are required in the interest off “equal opportunity”. And did I not last week see the head of Defence make a public statement that the lack of gender equality in armed forces is a disgrace. This smacks of putting the horse before the cart and if that is what he actually said then he is a disgrace who is putting the wrong issues first. Surely the bigger question is what makes a defence force world class and above all else effective. My bet is that the answer will not be that their leaders have all attended gender equality workshops and can issue orders in non gender specific terms. Armed forces are a traditional male preserve. I see nothing wrong with it staying that way, albeit with women fulfilling those roles (including very senior ones) that they are equipped to undertake. The point is that most women in our culture do not want to compromise their femininity to fulfil front line roles. All power to those who do but arguing that there should be full gender balance (which implies quotas and all that crap) in just plain bullshit.

    http://www.abc.net.au/news/2014-06-14/australia-army-chief-delivers-speech-to-summit-on-wartime-rape/5523942

  20. Gab

    Quotas, Dot and Morrison is being willingly led around by the nose by Elizabeth Broderick.

  21. Token

    Is that not a noble goal which our head of military should be committed too? Then why belittle him for doing so?

    Which modern western armed force is for rape, really?

    It has long been illegal for Australian soldiers to commit rape (I don’t know all the facts, but suspect it always has been illegal since teh founding of our defense forces).

    One of the reasons the rules around combatents being in uniform is to allow nation states to regulate this (though it is hard when super-powers like the Soviet Union used rape as an instrument of terror).

    Basically, the general diminished the institution he represents for no good reason.

  22. Token

    The obvious response to rape in war is better training, discipline, order and morale. Having women in combat militates against all those things.

    Right, having women in senior ranks will help when dealing with leaders of 3rd world nations who use rape as an instrument of terror. Just send the memo out to ISIS, I’m sure they’ll respond with all due respect.

    Your logic is built upon a false premise. The countries which include women in their military are against rape being used as a tool of warfare.

  23. .

    Quotas are ridiculous.

    How can you have the creme de la creme with quotas?

  24. will the New Zealand Army also downplays in its recruitment advertising that joining the army involves a job where you might get shot at.

    their advertisements profiles natural disasters relief work

  25. Harry Buttle

    Imagine for a moment the outcry if a Doctor decided to conduct experiments that could kill hundreds or more, without the informed consent of the patients, nor with their permission.
    That is what the Defence Department is effectively doing with its social engineering programs – first standards need to be lowered to allow women into these roles, then witch hunts need to be conducted to allow them to function in those roles, and someday they will be, god help us, given the opportunity to fail in those roles, and fail they shall, because the enemy will not care about gender equity or a welcoming workplace environment – the question is how many troops will die an unnecessary death because of social engineering policy.

  26. Bugme

    I am sure the fighters in Iraq, Syria etc. and the like will be rolling on the ground laughing at the heads off at the Australia armed forces commander comments. Unbelievable………..On another note what are his thoughts on the ongoing sexual and physical abuse of aboriginal women in our own backyard?????

  27. Piett

    Folks, you’re trying to trying shut the stable doors long after the horse has bolted and vanished into the distance.

    These days Americans, Europeans, Russians, and basically everyone with even a half-decent defence force, allow women to serve in most roles. And the Israelis of course, who know a thing or two about modern warfare.

    Who completely bars women? Saudi Arabia and other Arab armies, presumably. You want to emulate them?

  28. Baldrick

    Australian delegation head Natasha Stott Despoja said Lt Gen Morrison was a “bigger star” at the conference than Jolie who is a UN special envoy.

    Says it all really.

  29. .

    Piett

    I think Israel do a fine job. They have frontline women soldiers.

  30. Piett

    We used to have a word for men who let women fight: coward.

    Um, I don’t think men get to decide any more what they will ‘let’ women do. Can you imagine Margaret Thatcher’s response to being told what occupations she would not be permitted to pursue, on account of being a woman?

    I agree with what dot said about maintaining physical standards. But anyone who meets those standards cannot be excluded.

  31. jupes

    Is that not a noble goal which our head of military should be committed too?

    Australian soldiers never have used rape as a weapon of war. Therefore the only way Australian soldiers can stop rape in war is to achieve victory against enemies who do rape.

    Women in combat will make victory so much harder to achieve. Advocating that women in combat will cause a decrease of rape in war zones is weapon’s-grade cognitive dissonance.

  32. evcricket

    Another well argued and well researched piece by Judith Sloan – expert on everything.

  33. Adrian

    no, israel does not in reality have front line woman soliders. they have women reserve units, not front line.

  34. Harry Buttle

    The Israeli women in combat myth is more than a tad overused. Israel puts women in the Caracal Bde, on a quiet front, IIRC to date they have a rather unimpressive combat record and are deployed to a quiet area (such as there is in Israel), in reality they seem to be more of a PR/recruiting stunt than a combat force.

  35. .

    The Caracal Battallion are not front line?

    No. They are front line, full time and infantry.

  36. jupes

    We used to have a word for men who let women fight: coward.

    More cognitive dissonance:

    The ADF are proud participants in White Ribbon Day. The charity to stop violence against women.

    Of course the way to achieve this is to send women into combat.

  37. .

    The Caracal Battalion has seen more combat than most Australians in the ADF ever will.

  38. Andrew

    Oh fuck off, “ad hom fallacy” – we’re bombarded with unsupported ad hom 24/7 on every channel from the Left. In fact, on the other thread we’ve had the grubby Stalinist racist pushing ad homs against a Gillard accuser – oblivious to the sheer idiocy of pointing out “Ye shall know them by the company they keep” when Gillard was a long-term partner (in every sense) of two career criminals and the ALP front bench keeps the company of a SLF identified by a rape victim as her rapist.

    If someone wants to align themselves with ubergrub Marr then I’m happy for Judith to indulge in 14 words of ad hom. In fact, we should be ading those leftist hommes with a big stick and shaming them every chance we get – as Bolt and the AUS are after Marr’s latest attempt to cover up crimes on Their Coverup Channel.

    Now if that was ALL the article had, you’d be entitled to make the point. As it stands, there is no point of order. The Honourable poster will resume his seat, Judith has the call.

  39. Harry Buttle

    Piett, re “women who can physically do it should be allowed to” no they shouldn’t. A female amongst a group of young men changes the dynamic radically and to the detriment of the mission. The Israelis found that female casualties lower troop morale a lot more than male ones and that frequently males will abandon their tasks and risk their own lives (and more importantly, the mission) to protect women in danger. Throw in the cost of separated gender facilities alone for the 1% or so of women physically capable of doing the job and they bring little to the battle that outweighs the disadvantages. If you need females to perform search/liaison attach them at need.

  40. Roger

    Women in combat will make victory so much harder to achieve. Advocating that women in combat will cause a decrease of rape in war zones is weapon’s-grade cognitive dissonance

    No argument there, jupes, as I explained in my following comment.

    Your logic is built upon a false premise. The countries which include women in their military are against rape being used as a tool of warfare.

    You seem to have completely misconstrued my point, Token, which was against the point the General made in his speech that having women in combat would decrease the incidence of rape on the front line. Of course civilised countries do not use rape as a tool of warfare, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen as a consequence of poor discipline, morale, order and training.

  41. Vicki

    Whilst I would go head to toe with any man in any argument, and believe that women can compete on an equal footing in vast areas of industry, I will never concede that women are suited to front line combat.
    I do see a role for women in the army – in intelligence, logistics and other areas. But not in combat.

    The role of the armed forces is protection of the civilian population and the killing of enemy forces when necessary. While discipline is central to the warrior cult of the soldier, so is comradeship, and the juxtaposition of women into this situation is disruptive and totally inappropriate.

    For this reason, the role of women in the defence forces should be limited.

    Unfortunately, affirmative action has overwhelmed common sense in the ADF.

  42. cynical1

    At the moment, rape is a distant second as a problem.

    Still, it’s only blokes getting beheaded.

    The Iranians will send in a transport division.

    Wait till we send our “Trans” division…

  43. ar

    Not just the armed forces, the police too. How often I see 5’2″ blonde pony-tailed uniformed coppers bouncing in to the pub on patrol. I almost feel like creating a disturbance just so they’d taze me. Just to see what it’d be like… …

  44. Andrew

    Imagine for a moment the outcry if a Doctor decided to conduct experiments that could kill hundreds or more, without the informed consent of the patients, nor with their permission.

    Well if the Doctor is a PhD in Envirology and the experiment is “Let’s see how the life expectancy of poor people in Chile goes without reliable and cheap hydro power and water in possibly the world’s most favourable environment for hydro” (fjords, so a physically small dam needed for a given catchment plus high potential energy from the depth; very small flooding area, unusable for any other purpose; high and very reliable snowfall; unsuited to any other conventional or unconventional generation due to terrain, weather) then they would probably be cheered and feted as global heroes. They may even win a Nobel Peace Prize.

  45. .

    The Israelis found that female casualties lower troop morale a lot more than male ones and that frequently males will abandon their tasks and risk their own lives (and more importantly, the mission) to protect women in danger.

    So what? You obey orders despite morale.

  46. Piett

    no, israel does not in reality have front line woman soliders. they have women reserve units, not front line.

    OK. If there was another big dust-up, with Arab armies attacking from all directions,* and a Palestinian uprising as well, would Israeli reserve units see action, or would they somehow be insulated from combat?

    [*I realise Syria isn't going to be attacking anyone for a while to come. But sooner or later, either Assad or his opponents will win, and Syria will again be a potential threat.]

  47. Harry Buttle

    The Caracas Bn has killed one terrorist on Sept 21 2012, that is their combat record.

    The female who reported the terrorist initially was found hiding under a bush and reprimanded for it.

    Let’s not pretend that this unit has a record that stands up to that of any Bn of the Royal Australian Regiment.

  48. jupes

    No. They are front line, full time and infantry.

    Correct. Their mission is to patrol the Sinai border.

    However, unlike the ADF, the IDF didn’t advocate for women in combat, quite the opposite in fact. The Caracel Battalion was formed after the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that women have a right to serve in combat units. Putting all infantry women into this unit allows units whose mission is to cross borders to fight to do so without the distraction of women.

  49. Harry Buttle

    Caracas = Caracal, autospell killing me.

  50. Roger

    Oh fuck off, “ad hom fallacy” – we’re bombarded with unsupported ad hom 24/7 on every channel from the Left.

    A fallacy is a fallacy, no matter who commits it.
    Such lazy thinking doesn’t serve the conservative cause well, Andrew.

  51. Eddystone

    Fuck this theoretical bullshit about women serving in combat, high physical standards or not.

    It won’t work the way the latte sippers think it should, because they don’t have a clue about what it would really be like.

    People with have close relatives who are soldiers, especially soldiers at the pointy end of things, don’t want their boys being endangered so some politically correct, resume polishing bullshit artist can get pats on the back from tax eating parasites like Stott Despoja.

  52. Harry Buttle

    Re obey your orders despite poor morale, yep, right up to the point that morale collapses and the unit cohesion fails, then they surrender or run. Soldiers are not robots, and the Moral (morale) is to the material as 3 is to 1 – never ignore, let alone deliberately inflict morale problems.

  53. Jack Jessen

    I took the speech as being against rape as a weapon of war & that the inclusion of women in combat roles was a means of mitigating that. I’ll leave your denigration of our very well acquitted war fighters for another time.

  54. Dr.Sir Fred Lenin

    I think ISIS will be terrified if Austalia sends the 21 st Emilys List Battalion to Iraq and Syria,I suggest a joint command of Generals kirner and gilliard,and Colonel wong as Cheif of Staff.Dont know about muslim fascists ,but they terrorise our politicians! Womder if the islamofascists would let them NAG them,the way they do here?

  55. Dr.Sir Fred Lenin

    As Lance Corporal Jones used to say,”you gotta keep the mens morals up Sir” .

  56. gabrianga

    Australian delegation head Natasha Stott Despoja

    Says it all.

    Who nominated her to speak on our behalf?

  57. Gab

    Dr Sir Fred Lenin, who doesn’t fool me for a second into believing his command of English grammar is as he depicts here, wins the internet for the day.

  58. notafan

    Sir Fred did you once work in the Australian Embassy in China? Your story about Rudd getting the lunches wrong seemed to suggest that.
    David Morrison and the the war in the Middle East, you think if we go in women in the front line?
    Thousands of years of human history and now we get this crap.
    Can we have a new one of those, please Mr Abbott?

  59. Infidel Tiger

    What is the highest rank in the ADF these days? Chief Diversity Officer or Flower Arranger?

  60. Gab

    He who holds the lipstick commands the forces.

  61. Des Deskperson

    Whatever the rights or wrongs of women in combat in the ADF, was the initiative any more than a typically Gillardesque cack -handed over-reaction to allegations of sexual abuse at ADFA?

  62. lotocoti

    Folks, you’re trying to trying shut the stable doors long after the horse has bolted and vanished into the distance.

    I watched it all begin with the winter ’81 Supplementary List (RAN).
    Suddenly you had Midshipmanettes who couldn’t cock an L1A1.
    For whom the ‘front support position’ became hands and knees, not hands and toes.
    There was no PT after lunch*, some PT evolutions and participation in certain team sports were officially proscribed.
    Seamanship skills and duties could be deemed too hard or too perilous.
    Thus began the avalanche.
    *For JEs on the General List (joined after year ten to matriculate) part of your first 2 years was
    The Shake-Up, being PTed ’til you regurgitated lunch. (How else do you inure teenagers to suffering?)

  63. Not just the armed forces, the police too. How often I see 5’2″ blonde pony-tailed uniformed coppers bouncing in to the pub on patrol. I almost feel like creating a disturbance just so they’d taze me. Just to see what it’d be like… …

    Many years ago an angry Maori man was shot dead by a female copper because she wasn’t strong enough to pull him off her partner who was being drowned. Obviously a small price to pay for political correctness, except for the dead man, of course.

  64. Infidel Tiger

    They can’t fight or fuck any more, but if you want a beautifully penned thank you note after being invited to brunch at Elton John’s, the ADF is your go to service.

  65. Token

    You seem to have completely misconstrued my point, Token, which was against the point the General made in his speech that having women in combat would decrease the incidence of rape on the front line.

    I admit I was talking across purposes here. I agree the general’s logic is flawed, whether or not there are women in the combat unit, criminals who will break the law will act regardless of the gender make up of the unit.

    Of course I am working to nullify the comment further.

    Of course civilised countries do not use rape as a tool of warfare, but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen as a consequence of poor discipline, morale, order and training.

    Agreed, those are the reasons for the crime to be committed within a framework in which it is illegal.

    The actions of such criminals are enabling the wymmynses movement to geld the armed forces.

  66. Token

    What is the highest rank in the ADF these days? Chief Diversity Officer or Flower Arranger?

    It is the Inquisitor General who uses the Chief Diversity Officer to move the budget from maintenance of equipment into inquisitions to prove the Gillardian defined “lack of diversity”.

  67. Menai Pete

    Women in the military?

    Jacqui Lambie

    Say no more!

  68. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Not just the armed forces, the police too.

    Did see the flip side of that – some loudmouth in a pub here, tried to hit one of the 5 foot 2″ brigade and was dumped on his ar$e, to a round of applause from the rest of the mob.

  69. Another well argued and well researched piece by Judith Sloan – expert on everything.

    I’d forgotten about evcricket.

    ….

    And now I’ve forgotten about him again.

  70. notafan

    What are the odds the progressives, not getting enough girls to join up, introduce female only conscription?

  71. What are the odds the progressives, not getting enough girls to join up, introduce female only conscription?

    Bwahahahah…. hahahah…… chortle… .chortle… chortle… :)

  72. Ezekiel

    Before you look at comments below re gels in the Israeli Defence Force, remember that:

    a. little underpopulated Israel is SURROUNDED by millions of *&^%$#@! haters pledging to FIGHT for Israel to be 100% DESTROYED; and,

    b. Israel found that when arabs saw Israeli women in front line units, the arabs FOUGHT VERY HARD to gang rape the Jewish women.

  73. .

    The Caracas Regiment! These babes are to co-host the George Fungus tour of Cuba and Venzeula! San Salvador is a dirty, dirty place. The tourees will have a tour of the mind. George will defintiely have a tour de la peau…

  74. C.L.

    I think Israel do a fine job. They have frontline women soldiers.

    Bullshit.

    Women have always served in Australia’s defence forces.

    In World War II they served with great distinction.

    Morrison’s advocacy of women serving in forward areas is a dog act.

  75. John Mc

    Cantwell was an odd one. Outdone in weirdness in recent times only by former CDF Admiral Barrie. There must be something funny in the air at those dizzying heights, both of them could have you wondering which parallel universe they crossed in from at times.

  76. Eddystone

    Is this Morrison with some female front line soldiers?

  77. Mater

    If you want decent, ethical and compassionate men in the military, the answer is not to force them to treat a woman, the way they would a man, during combat. Most serving men couldn’t, and wouldn’t, and that would compromise a fundamental and necessary dynamic. Post combat mental health issues are already problematic without the inclusion of the plausible scenarios which might arise from this policy.
    It is a harsh environment that any sane people should want to avoid…men or women.
    Anyone pushing for inclusion in this arena should be careful what they wish for.

  78. cynical1

    As Lance Corporal Jones used to say,”you gotta keep the mens morals up Sir” .

    As well as : “They don’t like it up ‘em”…

  79. Max

    Yes sexual and other forms of abuse of females is totally unacceptable. But there is a fine line between stamping this out and stamping out the tough masculine culture that an armed force needs.

    Females are a-lot safer around tough masculine blokes.
    Look a Mathew Newton, somehow this little ponce only feels the need to be violent when there are no bigger stronger men around.
    Look at all the sly little pricks in the ALP with long records of mistreating women.

  80. Tekweni

    I have had the dubious privilege of being an infantryman and patrolling some nasty places. It is difficult enough carrying all your gear including mortar rounds and ammo belts on top without having to help someone who cannot physically do the same. When you are in the bush you don’t have any modesty either. Going off on your own is not on. Having the responsibility of someone in your squad who can be raped if captured is not something you need either. Combat is not a place for distractions.

  81. MacBeth

    My late wife served with distinction for four years in WW2, but I doubt she would have been physically up to combat. Currently I have a close association with serving Army officers, male and female, They are all highly skilled in the technology of modern warfare – the question of females in front line service is a difficult one, but I think the RAAF is more likely to deploy women in action – as aircrew. In the past, female officers have been responsible for the commissioning of some new aircraft and the training of crews.

  82. Rabz

    Who in their right minds would risk their life this country nowadays, anyway?

    You’d have to be barking bloody mad or have a deathwish.

  83. Ubique

    I heard ABC’s AM program and retired Major General Cantwell breathlessly agreeing this morning that it was a huge mistake to liberate Iraq and turf out Sadaam in the first place. It seems that Cantwell believes everything was hunky-dory before George Bush stepped in. Cantwell doesn’t seem to know that Iraq invaded Iran, killing a million people; invaded Kuwait; was busy exterminating the Kurds with chemical weapons; and wiping out the Marsh Arabs just for starters. Apparently in Cantwell’s world the chemical weapons Sadaam used against the Kurds weren’t WMD. No wonder the ABC is keen to promote Cantwell as an authority.

    Cantwell served as a turret-head. He might have a glacis-plate for a forehead but there’s obviously no brains behind it.

  84. MT Isa Miner

    Harry Buttle

    #1348658, posted on June 16, 2014 at 11:18 am

    Piett, re “women who can physically do it should be allowed to” no they shouldn’t. A female amongst a group of young men changes the dynamic radically and to the detriment of the mission. The Israelis found that female casualties lower troop morale a lot more than male ones and that frequently males will abandon their tasks and risk their own lives (and more importantly, the mission) to protect women in danger. Throw in the cost of separated gender facilities alone for the 1% or so of women physically capable of doing the job and they bring little to the battle that outweighs the disadvantages. If you need females to perform search/liaison attach them at need.

    Harry is right. we are handicapping our men. Just to suckup to the femmocrats.
    It’s all fun and games until we need men to fight to the death and then the shit hits the fan.

    Why the hell do people think that if they really really want it so, they can overturn the last 50,000 years of evolution. Who do they think they are?

  85. The nice people on the farm next to my grandparents were both returned servicemen from WWII.
    He was a former bomber pilot. Nobody thought much about her, except she was a lovely old dear. Turned out she was a Rat of Tobruk.
    All was overshadowed by his (pretty fair dinkum) long running feud with the farm on the other side, who’d been a fighter pilot inWWII. They rehydrated (in the 1960′s mind you) some fighter jock/bomber crew animosity, and kept at it hammer & tongs. Gave the rest of the district much to talk about.

  86. Max

    Who in their right minds would risk their life this country nowadays, anyway?

    You’d have to be barking bloody mad or have a deathwish.

    I often wonder why young Australians join the bush-fire brigades… I mean why risk your life to defend property that you, yourself have been locked out of ever owning.

  87. .

    Good question.

    It is because it creates a third party risk to the actual property you own.

  88. Tim

    Segregated front line units for women. They can fight and die if they want, but in seperated units, with their own reduced fitness standards or whatever. Then it is just a logistics issue.
    But if any women out there is willing and able to pass the unadjusted selection criteria for the special forces, then they get integrated. At that level it isn’t about gender, it is about individual ability.

  89. Old School Conservative

    The great Nancy Wake shows us what women can do in times of conflict. I understand some of her work was in combat after D-Day.
    The current TV advertising for Army jobs shows a high percentage of women in all roles. Obviously part of a long term strategy to increase female participation ( I nearly wrote engagement!) in the armed forces.
    If women can enter combat roles with lower physical requirements than males, then so can Dads Army types too. That will solve the “working after 65″ debate.
    I feel safer with stronger people at the combat end of any conflict, and all others in support roles.

  90. John Comnenus

    As I pointed out on the weekend (and which helped to out numbers as a supporter of misogyny in other cultures) the only way to stop rape in war is to win the battle and to use victory to force change on those cultures that still think rape is acceptable. This is the very purpose of war – political and cultural change through the blunt instrument of overwhelming military force. This is exactly what Clausewitz famously called ‘politics by other means.’

    Unfortunately, neither LTGEN Morrison, Foreign Secretary William Hague nor Angeline Jolie explain how they will force change on those cultures that think rape is acceptable. In fact, as I understand it, LTGEN Morrison, Hague and Jolie actively advocate in favour of multiculturalism and consequently cultural accommodation of those cultures who believe rape is ok.

    These two attitudes are diametrically opposed. One cannot champion womens’ rights whilst culturally accommodating the very cultures that makes women sexual chattle belonging to their men. The two views are simply incompatible to be held concurrently. Morrison and the poseur Left need to make a choice – is it womens’ rights or multiculturalism?

  91. jupes

    Turned out she was a Rat of Tobruk.

    She was a nurse. Here is the history of nurses in Tobruk:

    63 Australian nurses were then sent to Tobruk. They were accommodated in the Albergo Hotel, originally designed for eight guests. The hospital was a long way from the hotel and had been bombed many times during the War. Remnants of shrapnel and bullets remained in the walls.
    Fresh water had to be transported from Alexandria. The nurses were close to the battlefield. As the numbers of sick and injured steadily increased, nursing shifts increased.
    When German forces launched a counter-offensive across the North African desert to reinforce their Italian allies, the Australian 9th AIF division was besieged at Tobruk. Australian High Command became concerned for the welfare of the nurses, fearing that they would be caught in an attack.
    The nurses were ordered to evacuate. The nurses were reluctant to leave, aware that they would be needed by the soldiers besieged in the city. Nevertheless, they were moved back to Gaza.

    Valuable, heroic service no doubt. However not combat service which your comment may lead people to believe.

  92. oldsalt

    Returning to my earlier point about rape in Peacekeeping and the specific example of the mass rape of kids by UN troops in Oecussi, it’s going to take more than just better training platitudes to prevent.

    The Jordanians in Timor just didn’t think it was wrong and didn’t care, PKF had immunity from prosecution, Heads of Mission had agendas other than the welfare of the Timorese ie the UN must not, ever, do anything to upset Jordan, public knowledge of the truth would give the opposition a propaganda victory, careers might be compromised etc

    So long as the structure of UN PKF Missions allows this stuff to happen and doesn’t punish it, it will. And guess what? The women in positions of authority don’t say boo about it either.

  93. Valuable, heroic service no doubt. However not combat service which your comment may lead people to believe.

    Thanks Jupes. Silly of me.
    I should have realised that in this day & age not all would realise a lady who’d been sieged in at Tobruk was not in a foxhole on the perimeter.
    Wasn’t aware she’d been a nurse. (Then again “nurse” wasn’t as exciting to us kids as was “driving trucks” or “carrying bullets” and other starry-eyed adventure stuff.)

  94. Max

    And guess what? The women in positions of authority don’t say boo about it either.

    This is why I think we have already lost to Islam. Our women have already gone into “submission”

  95. rickw

    Piett, re “women who can physically do it should be allowed to” no they shouldn’t.

    There was an article circulating about an Israeli women in the armed forces where she recounted her combat experience. This was held up as a “women can do it” example. She was a tanker and the crew were in the tank for 7+ days in the one position. She needed to attend to some feminine hygiene issues so they rotated the turret so the rest of the crew couldn’t see her.

    This of course is an epic FAIL, the gun was pointed somewhere other than where the tactical situation dictated.

    I have worked with plenty of ex military personnel from a range of military forces. Unfortunately my experience of ex Australian military personnel is that they are over represented in the dysfunctional wanker stakes, to me this says a great deal about the state of our armed forces, particularly when you consider that the US military personnel are much more likely to have combat experience and are hence much more likely to have a genuine reason to be screwed up.

    I have only ever had ex Australian miltary personnel go off on “stress leave”. My experience excludes Australian Vietnam Vets, who are by contrast as hard as nails.

  96. Jock

    War and combat are extreme actions. Soldiers are trained to kill rather than be killed. What I find appalling about the recent maunderings about women in the forces is not the rules on equality or sexism or bullying. What is incredible is that the generals and policymakers think that by supporting Miss Jolie and her crusade to stop rape in war that it will stop. The reality is that since before WW2 it has always been a crime against humanity. But this didnt stop various nations soldiers raping, pillaging and murdering civilian populations all the way through to the Balkan wars in the 1990s . Notice how few of the perpetrators have been brought to book.

    In Iraq the radical ISIS cretins are beheading and slaughtering prisoners. Yet Anglelina Jolie worries about rape? Why doesnt she fly over there with Brad and have a quiet word with ISIS. (Yes I didnt think so.) Plus she doesnt want US troops back in the ME, so any raping and beheading that takes place can be mourned, but not stopped. The moral turpitude of these people is beneath contempt.

  97. Harry Buttle

    Tim, re segregated units for women, sure they can fight or die on their own, but literally being the obvious weakest link on the battlefield means that they cannot be entrusted with any critical (ie front line) task, because they are guaranteed to be hit first to cause a breakthrough, re them just being a logistics issue, logistics is the key to winning and every truckload/help or air delivery of kit you move for them, to try to bring them up to an acceptable level of capability, is a load that has to be taken from an effective unit.

    So in reality, an all female unit won’t fight or die on its own, any unit is meant to be part of a larger, cohesive force, unless you treat them as expendable ambush bait, losing them creates problems for the rest of the force.

  98. So long as the structure of UN PKF Missions allows this stuff to happen and doesn’t punish it, it will. And guess what? The women in positions of authority don’t say boo about it either.

    Good work Old Salt.

    NCO acquaintance in the army tells & retells tale from Timor of his senior officer dining with a Pakistani senior officer. Afterward: “Welcome back sir, how’d it go?” “Went well Sgt, we discussed the various challenges & problems common to military commanders the world over, then the Pakistani officer asked me about one of his problems, and how did I stop my soldiers sleeping with each other? – I’m not sure he believed me when I said that is not a problem the Australian Army faces.”

    That may change now that we have groovy new commanders of the ADF and the Army.

  99. notafan

    Miss Jolie and her crusade to stop rape in war that it will stop

    just like hashtagging got Boko Haram to ‘release our girls’ How those girls doin’ by the way Mizz Obama?

  100. John Comnenus

    notafan,

    does General Morrison, Hague and Jolie extend their concerns to protection of goats who are raped in combat? What about Chai boys?

  101. notafan

    We clearly just need to go to a fully female army, then these morale and other problems will stop being an issue and it will help counterbalance the 50,000 years of mysog-agony.

  102. #stoprapeinwar

    There I’ve fixed the problem. Now may we go back to having a macho-he-man type military?

  103. Bill Shut

    Could work. Until one of the lady soldiers is kidnapped. Not sure the Islamic enemy will make do with a simple execution.
    Tony, you employed Natasha SD. Now sack her. She’s an idiot.

  104. Fisky

    I have a solution to this, in which we take a leaf out of Mao’s book. I propose the front-line of the ADF be composed ENTIRELY of human rights commissioners, feminists and extremists of every stripe. Once we have killed them all off in battle, the issue will itself die along with those who promoted it.

  105. notafan

    #stoprapeinwar</blockquote
    Simple and effective ;why didn’t Morrison come up with that?
    Otherwise they could try Stop Rape in War day, if they have any days left not taken up by some noble cause, how about International Women’s Stop Rape in War Day?

  106. Perhaps the ADF could be helped out in this by another ever-more-feminised outfit.

    The AFL could have a “stop rape in war round”. Before each match a circle of peacenik types could lay naked on the ground (like sticks in a boy scout campfire).

  107. Harry Buttle

    I’m sorry notafan, but I’m offended that you have deliberately ignored the rape of the transgendered and cisgendered communities in war.

  108. notafan

    I’m sorry notafan, but I’m offended that you have deliberately ignored the rape of the transgendered and cisgendered communities in war.
    my apologies HB :)
    How about International Womens and LGBPTTQQIIAA Stop Rape in War Day

    jic
    LGBPTTQQIIAA+: any combination of letters attempting to represent all the identities in the queer community, this near-exhaustive one (but not exhaustive) represents Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Pansexual, Transgender, Transsexual, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, Intergender, Asexual, Ally

  109. Rabz

    helped to out the spudpeeler as a supporter of misogyny in other cultures

    Gee – so apart from being a low cowardly dog, a hypocrite and a racist, the staggeringly stupid, syphilis addled knobgobbler is also a woman hater.

    I’m shocked.

  110. Max

    Everyone needs to read Notafans link above

    Jordanians and goats

  111. .

    Fisky
    #1348906, posted on June 16, 2014 at 3:10 pm
    I have a solution to this, in which we take a leaf out of Mao’s book. I propose the front-line of the ADF be composed ENTIRELY of human rights commissioners, feminists and extremists of every stripe. Once we have killed them all off in battle, the issue will itself die along with those who promoted it.

    I suggest we gang press the ANU’s ‘Rapunzel Room’ for this purpose.

  112. notafan

    John C
    apparently Chai boys are okay because, eventually, everybody gets their turn…
    They want to claim the moral high ground when they are actually intergenerational degenerates.

  113. Nai

    Excuse me, I thought the role of the armed forces was to defend us and to kill people, if necessary.

    When that’s your opinion of what the military is meant to do Judith, it shows how out of touch and useless you really are. The majority of work done by the ADF is reconstruction and peace keeping missions (and, God forbid the logic stretches, these things can result in a more peaceful global community that does defend us).

    And for the people who think a person’s junk is the most important part of their ability, let me be clear: Judith Sloane is useless and a woman. She happens to be both. Her womanhood does not result in her being useless.

  114. Eddystone

    But if any women out there is willing and able to pass the unadjusted selection criteria for the special forces, then they get integrated. At that level it isn’t about gender, it is about individual ability.

    What utter bollocks.

    Nice for the armchair theorists though.

  115. Matthew

    Going into Iraq was a mistake. That isn’t even controversial.

  116. Hawkeye P.

    “Gee – so apart from being a low cowardly dog, a hypocrite and a racist, the staggeringly stupid, syphilis addled knobgobbler is also a woman hater.”

    You can add ‘aged munchkin’ to your list.

    I heard him being interviewed once for a book he wrote.

    He sounds like a geriatric on helium.

  117. John Comnenus

    notafan –
    not true, everyone does not get a go. In one ‘tragic’ instance of love gone wrong Pashtun style, two Taliban commanders were arguing over who ‘owned’ the ChaiBoy. That led to a knife fight where one Taliban guy killed the other.

    It goes without saying that homosexuality is totally forbidden in Pashtun and Islamic culture. But Chaiboys don’t count as homosexuality because they haven’t hit puberty. So, following the tortured logic of the Pashtun culture, pederasty with boys is OK and definitely not gay. Equally same sex relationships with consenting men is totally forbidden because it is gay.

    Interesting culture.

  118. ex OberLeutnant Diogenes

    When did the white ribbon (see photo on ABC website) become part of the uniform ?

    Maybe the Army Standard & Queens Colours should also be converted to white.

    As a reservist I had the privilege of serving with/under cadre staff who were at Long Tan, Coral and Kapyong (as well as other tours of Vietnam). I read copies of my Bn’s WW1 & 2 war diaries In my opinion todays “ordinary” PBI (as opposed to “Special Forces”) could not do the same thing.

  119. notafan

    John I meant, every generation apparently goes through the experience of being at the receiving end, so to speak. I am not sure about the ban on homosexuality. It seems like if you are married you can do what you like with what or whomever you like.
    Though being overtly gay and single is clearly a no no.

  120. John Comnenus

    Notafan,

    Just being a smart arse with a ‘funny’ anecdote. As I understand it not every boy becomes a Chai Boy and only powerful men get to have one. I also think families volunteer their boys to become Chai Boys to curry favour with their betters.

  121. notafan

    Sorry John

    When I read the article you linked that was the gist of the explanation at the end, as I understood it. I have read about the dancing boys before and I was under the impression they were shared within the group.

  122. John Comnenus

    I think we can all agree that keeping Chai Boys is a disgusting cultural practice that everyone should oppose. Except for numbers of course, according to him this practice can only change when Pashtun men say so.

  123. notafan

    Loving a man would therefore be unacceptable and a major sin within this cultural interpretation of Islam, but using another man for sexual gratification would be regarded as a foible – undesirable but far preferable to sex with an ineligible woman … which would likely result in issues of revenge and honor killings,” the Army’s report added.

    state department report

  124. Max

    Should have just Nuked them.

  125. Whether we like it or not, women are going to be forced into the ranks. Then, come the next war and the body bags start coming home, someone will wake up to the fact that the Womens Libbers have used these girls as a means to an end. Because you can bet the bull dykes won’t be in the front lines.

  126. danno

    Am I the only person who thinks the Australian armed forces look increasingly like milksops in khaki?

    No, I work with the military boys and girls and they are mollycoddled beyond belief.

    Years ago all the standards were lowered because we had such recruitment and retention issues.

    So now the boys and girls all change jobs every 2 years or thereabouts, so they have different things to entertain their little brains, and little they are these days. Skills are lost, there is no “edge” any longer.

    When they started to leave the camps in Afghanistan after years of fortressing, with mainly Brit exchange and contract soldiers doing our work, they started to die .. horrors! (Special Forces not included of course, I’m referring to the non “professional” military, basically, non Special Forces i.e. the rest)

    I’ve read reports where they demand contractors be included on missions and mission planning, signed off by senior defence officials, basically admitting, they can’t do their jobs.

    Too much fiddling with the military budgets and allowing military people to brochure shop, has led to this, DMO are all but paralysed by the constant demands of the military on favoured shiny objects that don’t fit into overall objectives, so they defend themselves with mountains of bureaucracy.

    DSTO is so useless to the warfighter that Defence stood up and pays for RPDE, basically doing the job DSTO was meant to do. DSTO is now a retirement home for self obsessed academics.

    Our military is a complete mess and we would need a shootin’ war to sort it out, it’s become a kindergarten, sadly, with spoiled brats and squeaky wheel politics.

  127. bobmenzies

    Lotocoti – reading your note brought back memories – I was a JE in 60s – saw what you witnessed in early 80s – very different military today and not all for the better – can’t understand Cantwell’s views and Morrison seems over the top. I think Judith Sloan makes some good points.

  128. DB

    Many years ago, one of my friends was called up (in the late 1960s); he always had a choice about going to Vietnam

    That’s spot on Judith. National serviceman still had to volunteer for active service overseas — a fact lost on Leftists. My father and most of his nasho intake volunteered, served in South Vietnam and have done well. One guy didn’t volunteer and just spent the second year of his national service cooking, sweeping and cleaning at a base in Australia, rather than on active service in South Vietnam. He did very well post-Army too and attributed his success, in part, to the discipline installed in him during his service.

  129. David

    Kapyong (as well as other tours of Vietnam).

    I assume Oberleutnant that what you wrote is just an error of grammar. The battle of the Kapyong Valley was in Korea not Vietnam.

  130. John Comnenus

    Danno,

    Don’t know who you have been talking to, but I didn’t see any contractors in theatre involved in operational planning. Although too much was sent back for sign off from Joint Task Force 633 in the UAE.

  131. Andrew

    A fallacy is a fallacy, no matter who commits it.
    Such lazy thinking doesn’t serve the conservative cause well, Andrew.

    Go on, please lecture us all about how Judith Sloan’s laziness is proving a disservice to the conservative cause. You know, one of the 0.3% of the total meeja man-hours that represents it.

  132. Twodogs

    As a 20 year serviceman finishing as a Warrant Officer and serving in Vietnam over 40 years ago I am absolutely amazed that what appears to be a Peacenic and lovey dovey like Lieutenant General David Morrison could be considered for the position of Chief of Army… Our political direction is effecting the very secuity of our nation…

  133. JeffT

    Liked Fred Lenin’s “responce group”
    What happened to the WAAFs , WRENS etc?
    That worked well and everybody got to have a go.

  134. Tim

    But if any women out there is willing and able to pass the unadjusted selection criteria for the special forces, then they get integrated. At that level it isn’t about gender, it is about individual ability.

    What utter bollocks.
    Nice for the armchair theorists though.

    Which bit is “bollocks”? That the Special Forces are chosen purely on merit? Maybe you think they have a quota system to make sure they are representative of the Australian population as a whole?

    The point that if a woman could actually qualify for special forces on merit then she would be able to serve there is not so evidently “bollocks” that you can reasonably dismiss it without an argument of some sort.

  135. Eddystone

    Tim, the “bollocks”, as was quite clear from what I wrote, is that gender is unimportant in that context.

    As it happens, I do have some inside info on our Special Forces, and female quotas are already negatively impacting on them, even though there are no female operators, nor likely to be.

  136. Tim

    Well, I put it to you that if a woman is physically and mentally able to cope with the Special Forces recruitment hurdles, then she will be able to serve in that role. I think it is unlikely that many (any) will make it, but if they do, then they can do it.

    Women on average are less physically capable than men. But men on average, or even far above average, are not able to qualify for the SF. Only individuals of exceptional physical ability, and mental toughness, can make it. And if that represents 1% of Australian soldiers, and 0.0001% of female soldiers, then that is what it is. There are no grounds to exclude on sex, race, or sexual preference, if they can qualify. And no grounds to whinge if they can’t.

  137. Glass Half Empty

    Here’s some perspective on female warriors: Dahomey Amazons.
    http://www.badassoftheweek.com/dahomey.html

  138. Eddystone

    Tim, what you say sounds fair enough in theory, but ignores the dynamics of the team, which would not be improved by having women in hazardous operational environments.

    In the real world of course, there would be affirmative action in favour of women, to get them into these types of roles, purely for political/ideological reasons.

    Like I said, it’s one for the armchair theorists.

    The people most opposed to women in combat roles will be the wives and mothers of the male soldiers. They don’t want their boy’s safety compromised for the sake of political correctness.

  139. John Comnenus

    And the sisterhood will cry sexism if a woman gets killed because she is ordered to be first into a building in the assault team. Then again if women aren’t leading the assault team it will also be sexist. After which Army will issue a policy on the considerations commanders must work through before committing to an assault. This is a policy that will destroy small unit cohesion and decisive leadership when it is needed most – when someone might get killed because of a commanders immediate actions under fire and when the mission should be paramount. Our Corporals and Lieutenants don’t need these additional complications when facing such decisions.

  140. Harry Buttle

    Tim, you are talking bullocks on steroids. Women in a small unit setting utterly destroy unit cohesion, and they have physical (structural) differences that mean they are injured more often than men carrying heavy loads and special forces carry seriously heavy loads.
    How do I know you are talking Bullocks. 6.5 years as a paratrooper, followed by 5 years in logistics (units that had female soldiers), so unlike the people saying just how well integrated units would go, I have experienced infantry units (Specifically 3RAR) and I have endured mixed units and been involved the farce that they call “infantry minor tactics training” I’ve seen WOs make arses of themselves screwing Privates, I’ve called out Sgts for groping Cpls, I’ve been dragged up to the 3rd (female) floor of a mixed barracks building to drag away a misbehaving boyfriend (and offered him a 3 story free fall course if he continued resisting), frankly mixed units are morale and disciplinary disasters, all so we can tick a box marked gender equality, even when we have to fake it.

  141. Tim

    If women are let into the Special Forces, there will be a degree of disturbance at the time of integration. That happens. But they will get over it.

    There is no moral justification for discriminating in an elite, merit based unit. You are far more likely to have the feminist left tear down the SF by trying to maintain a discriminatory position than you are by (theoretically) letting in women on merit. And you can bet that any woman who did make it in on merit would be tough as old boot leather and not any member of the sisterhood. Not treated differently and not wanting to be treated differently.

    And I think women only front-line units would be out there in combat with something to prove. It is likely you would not want to run up against them, and likely that they would not actually be the weak point. Logistics issues of being able to carry less may impact on deployment, but that would be managed at a higher level. I don’t think there is much of the non-SF Australian army that hikes 50 km into the mountains to assault enemy positions and then hikes out again.

    The problems with female front-line troops are more in theory than in fact – or perhaps more realistically, the male troops currently suffer from the same problems, so there is no distinction to be made.

  142. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Tim, have you ever served in the A.D.F.? “They will get over it?” Jesus Christ and Stonewall Jackson.

  143. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    They’ll get over it.

    They’ll get over it by keeping their mouths shut, completing their current enlistments – and opting for discharge. They then listen to a speech what a loss their skills and ability are to the military. (The trick is not to snort in derision halfway through said speech.)

  144. Harry Buttle

    Tim, as a matter of interest, what personal experience do you have of either infantry forces or mixed military forces?

    Also your argument that any disruption would be fleeting is utterly baseless, the mixed logistic units I served in had been mixed for well over a decade and were still utter disasters, why do you think that SF units would fare any better?

    I am talking real world, personal experience, you are guessing.

    Re the “hiking 50 kms”, pretty standard stuff for an infantry Bn (called route marching), and certainly in our case we’d do rather more than 50kms and do it for days on end.

    Re women carrying less, that just means the men have to carry more, the mission dictates the gear you need not the size/capabilities of the soldier.

    When you say that the problems with front line female troops is more in theory than in fact, to someone who has explained to you that he has experienced them and that they are decidedly factual, I can only assume that you are immune to reality.

  145. Eddystone

    Never mind the facts Harry, the theory is sound!

  146. Tim

    Right.
    I have no personal military experience. My brother is a Paratrooper, but he’d agree with you on this. But that doesn’t make you right.

    You honestly believe 1 (or 3) ball-crushing women in a SF unit would derail it? If that was really the case (and it is not), they would probably be in big trouble if they ever found themselves in a real situation, like being shot at. I am sure some male soldiers would struggle to cope, but, they serve, they don’t direct policy.

    And you’ll note, (if you can read with some basic level of comprehension, without seeing “Women” and frothing at the mouth) that I’m not in favour of mixed combat units in general. That would be the segregation thing I talked about. But if a woman (and I personally think bull dyke here, but that may just be prejudice), or a gay male, or whatever, can actually make the unadulterated cut, then they can make it. They will be at least as good as the men currently there, and the men will just need to get over it.

    The feminist left is tearing at the armed forces. But you won’t win by actively discriminating. You will lose, and then the country will lose. Victory will come from keeping it actually merit based.

  147. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    I have no personal military experience

    Nice try. Failed. Retest in three months.

    NEXT

  148. Tim

    Just out of interest, how many of the recent deployments of Australian troops have involved 50 km route marches into enemy territory and then back out again? Not counting SF missions? It is one thing as training, it is another in actual combat. Everything I know about it, including from this thread, has been suggesting that the regular forces have been sticking close to base and relying on vehicles to carry their gear in actual combat.

    There is a logistical (and morale) problem when you mix less capable women with more capable men, carrying different loads, able to hike different distances, and throw them out together. Not so much when you separate them out by gender, or capability.

  149. Fisky

    Just wondering if anyone has figured out what particular problem the solution of putting women in front-line combat is supposed to address. I haven’t actually seen the Left explain that yet (no, the Left, putting women on the front line to avoid being raped or killed is properly the object of hysterical laughter, not a “reason”).

  150. C.L.

    … putting women on the front line to avoid being raped or killed is properly the object of hysterical laughter …

    That’s what Morrison has told a gathering in London.

    The nimrod needs his head read.

    I’m quite serious.

  151. Perpetual Motion

    You are a child, Tim. Listen to your brother.

  152. C.L.

    Everything I know about it, including from this thread, has been suggesting that the regular forces have been sticking close to base and relying on vehicles to carry their gear in actual combat.

    So what are you saying?

    The ADF should invest in thousands of zippy hatchbacks?

    For the chicks?

  153. Paul

    “The ADF should invest in thousands of zippy hatchbacks?”

    Led into battle by Barina girl. Should be worth waqtching.

  154. Gab

    The ADF should invest in thousands of zippy hatchbacks? For the chicks?

    Far out! Please. Nobody mention this to Morrison.

  155. JC

    Just wondering if anyone has figured out what particular problem the solution of putting women in front-line combat is supposed to address.

    I’m thinking.. get a few Pamela Anderson types at their prime, wearing skimpy camouflage colored bikinis could help one”s side morale while confusing the enemy causing them to lose focus. I reckon it’s a great strategic thinking.

  156. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    get a few Pamela Anderson types at their prime, wearing skimpy camouflaged colored bikinis

    Can I re – enlist? Can I? Aged nearly sixty, half deaf in both ears, half blind in one eye? Stuffed knees and a bad back? Why should the young blokes have all the fun?

    There may be a bit of a problem with the medical, though – even if the medical officer could stop laughing for long enough to carry out the examination…

  157. Peter

    I am reminded that the two most commonly quoted examples of nations mobilising women for frontline combat roles in significant numbers were the Soviet Union, and Israel.

    Both nations were fighting for their existence at the time(s) and against enemies known for genocidal tendencies. If they lost, their women would have suffered immensely anyway. It is illustrative that both militaries quietly dropped the idea of anything more that token participation of women in frontline ground combat roles.
    If you examine the “battle honours” of the Israeli Caracals, you will find that they consist of guarding a peaceful border, and police actions against their own citizens.

  158. wreckage

    Try sticking men and women in a dormitory and shared shower block and see how long it takes to “adjust” and get over the “disruption”. I can’t see how anyone, ever, could misunderstand the nature of the problem WRT combat or field units.

    Yes. Sure. If you stick a bunch of fit young men and women in tents together they will just magically get over any lapses in concentration or discipline, because the sex drives of healthy 20-somethings are really a trivial sideline that they are sure to ignore once the novelty wears off.

    Darwin phoned. He was laughing so hard I couldn’t actually catch what he was saying.

  159. Colin Jones

    Some proof for you. Here’s the headlines from pages two and three of today’s Navy News:
    1. Navy walks the talk (about reconciliation)
    2. Symbolising the reconciliation journey
    3. Navy a leader in campaign (about the white ribbon stuff)
    4. Supporting a diverse fleet of sailors (about a committee with reps for women, LGBTI, Aborigine, Islamic)
    and finally,
    5. Change at helm of fleet command (about a new admiral in command)

    http://navynews.realviewdigital.com/#folio=2

  160. nilk

    I have no personal military experience. My brother is a Paratrooper, but he’d agree with you on this. But that doesn’t make you right.

    Wow, Tim. You’re brother is the one with the experience, but he’s still wrong?

    I want some of what you’re smoking.

  161. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Fifty kilometers into enemy territory

    Things probably have changed since I got my discharge, but the standard physical fitness test used to be 15 kilometers in two hours. You do the math.

  162. Fisky

    Darwin phoned. He was laughing so hard I couldn’t actually catch what he was saying.

    I mean, the Left are just effortlessly serving up the comedy now. It’s 2014, and they have successfully unlearned everything that humanity had previously discovered about biology, genetics, psychology, HR, and foreign relations. It’s a masterclass of stupid.

    I’m considering a slight change to the Fisk Doctrine where there’s a provision for a one-month amnesty in the middle of the 10-year ban on Leftism, for some light entertainment. We can organise a travelling Left-wing comedy festival over the four weeks, consisting of nothing more than groups of Left-wingers discussing their ideas in public theatres. Because if they are funny now, they’ll be absolutely hysterical in 5 years’ time.

  163. Fisky

    And if that represents 1% of Australian soldiers, and 0.0001% of female soldiers, then that is what it is. There are no grounds to exclude on sex, race, or sexual preference, if they can qualify. And no grounds to whinge if they can’t.

    It’s about this point that you realise that the purpose of allowing women into serious combat roles isn’t to increase the recruiting pool or improve the strength of the army, but as a bait and switch to lower the recruitment standards. There is nothing more to it than that.

  164. C.L.

    We need to re-emphasis this because it’s so utterly astonishing that it should never be consigned to the left’s Grand Canyon-like forgettory.

    To wit: the chief of the Australian Army – who has never served in anything even resembling a war – has told an international gathering (that included celebrated military thinker Angelina Jolie) that the best way to protect women from violence is to put them on the front lines in combat. Now, I put it to you that this man needs professional counseling.

    This is not funny.

  165. JC

    I’m considering a slight change to the Fisk Doctrine where there’s a provision for a one-month amnesty in the middle of the 10-year ban on Leftism, for some light entertainment. We can organise a travelling Left-wing comedy festival over the four weeks, consisting of nothing more than groups of Left-wingers discussing their ideas in public theatres. Because if they are funny now, they’ll be absolutely hysterical in 5 years’ time.

    Which is why I’m frequently suggesting we allow Homer E Paxton, Metromick my carbon slave, Fatboy, Stepford, Tim Lambert, Sanchez and a few other imbeciles to do regular cameos at the Cat.

  166. Nanuestalker

    Which is why I’m frequently suggesting we allow Homer E Paxton, Metromick my carbon slave, Fatboy, Stepford, Tim Lambert, Sanchez and a few other imbeciles to do regular cameos at the Cat.

    I bet that you did your best trades after hitting those guys over the head!

  167. Fisky

    Now, I put it to you that this man needs professional counseling.

    For years, the Left had been at a stable plateau of stupid, claiming that taxes can cool the planet, push factors override pull factors, Islam is a tolerant religion of peace, pink batts are effective Keynesian stimulus, human evolution stopped 100,000 years ago etc, etc. But Morrison’s proposal is undoubtedly the most entertaining inversion of reality yet, succeeding in the negation at least two hard sciences and three social sciences in one sentence.

    Well done, that man.

  168. Clam Chowdah

    Women already serve in the SRS. That is an elite unit with strict entry requirements. Of course the work does not involve humping packs and carrying around a GPMG and hundreds of rounds.

    I realise the very nature of that unit differs hugely from the SBS or SAS or marines. But nonetheless it is an elite unit with physical and mental requirements and possible deployment to conflict zones or areas of high (often criminal) risk, with the potential to engage in armed combat.

    So what am I saying? Only that there are very, very, very limited combat-related roles that a woman is useful for. A woman would not be right for the SAS’s core mission, in my opinion.

  169. John Comnenus

    Just for those wondering, yes, combat in Afghanistan did involve lots of long arduous patrols. And yes women often accompanied the infantry on some patrols in specialist attached roles. Yes they were armed and yes they would have been expected to fight if necessary. But they were not expected to be involved in direct combat.

    Yes the soldiers carried all their own gear. But NO the women were not expected to carry a full combat load.

    Anyone who has ever carried 500 rounds, 5 grenades, 8 litres of water, body armour, helmet, radios, a heap of spare batteries, 5 days rations, night vision gear, and personal gear knows that you are carrying up to 50kg, all day, every day for weeks at a time. An infantry platoon has to be able to carry all of its own gear. No one wants to carry someone who can’t share the physical hauling burden. That just means the guys have to carry more gear.

    Do your own maths. Body armour and helmets about 10kg, weapons up to 10 kg, water 8 kg, ammo 10 kg, the rest up to another 10 kg. women were generally armed with pistols or Steyrs which don’t weigh as much as automatic weapons, light rocket launchers, bloody batteries and radios. Anyone who doesn’t think infantry soldiering doesn’t require unbelievable stamina and physical strength doesn’t know what they are talking about. And when the infantry get into combat – you have to run, jump and crawl carrying all that gear.

  170. danno

    John Comnenus, if you were in theatre with our forces then you must have heard all the Brit accents? Yes?

    We have hundreds of former Brit soldiers on 5 YEAR CONTRACTS, then they get to renew or leave, and they get Australian citizenship to boot. They provide the professional command levels of Australian forces in theatre. They are extremely good soldiers, we’re lucky to be able to get them.

    They are some of the CONTRACTORS I refer to, because they are on CONTRACTS .. what did you expect them to look like?

    What on earth .. did you think they had thick accents like that, moved to Australia, then joined up?

    Seriously, do you know how long you have to be a citizen under normal circumstances before you are eligible for a high grade clearance .. TS is 10 years

    This is exactly why we rely on CONTRACTORS, our people don’t even know what’s going on, thanks John, you prove my point about professionalism in our military.

  171. C.L.

    Yes the soldiers carried all their own gear. But NO the women were not expected to carry a full combat load.

    For the love of God, you ninnies, it has nothing to do with carrying shit.

    It has to do with honour. It has to do with civilisation. It has to do with the quiddity of what being a man is. That’s what advocates of women ‘soldiers’ are trying to wreck.

  172. John Comnenus

    Danno,
    Yes there are a number of lateral transferrees, mainly Poms, but also some Americans, Canadians and even a German as well as Kiwis. But the unit I served in Afghanistan with had only one Pommy Major. All the other officers were Australian (although one was probably a Kiwi). The CO, XO, S3, all the OC were Australian. The Padre was born in Prague and the civil affairs officer was a pom. The Brigadier in Kabul was Australian, the General in UAE was Australian although General Evans at JOC in Bungendore was a Pom who had transferred to the Australian Army as a Lieutenant about 25 years prior. According to the Defence Security Manual foreign nationals can be given an exemption and be granted NV & PV (old TS) clearance with a two star approval.

    The Poms who come over are on a contract but are normal members of the Army. Thy do not dominate the higher ranks, most came out and were not promoted above Major.

    But I will tell you what Danno, when I was in Afghanistan the Regional Command South director of Ops (the guy running the heaviest fighting ops in Afghanistan) was Australian. The chief of civil military operations in RC South was an Australian. The deputy commander of Intelligence for the whole of ISAF was Australian. The former deputy chief of Special Operations was an Australian. The guy running the Police training centre was Australian. The chief police adviser to the Afghan police was Australian. And many many more. Australians have a very good reputation as competent officers and leaders. We are one of a small number of reliable Tier one forces. So you are just plain wrong about our Army. What upsets me about the Army is that the current leadership seems hell bent on destroying that competence and reputation.

  173. John Comnenus

    Cal,
    I agree see my comment at 9:53 PM on how that will be achieved.

  174. Clam Chowdah

    Well said, John. Besides there are a number of Aussies and Kiwis (and Fijians) in the UK green machine (now and in the past), so it’s meaningless for people to quack on about poms in the Oz forces.

    CL, yes, I agree.

  175. So what? You obey orders despite morale.

    Don’t be silly; reduced morale actually decreases fighting capability.

    For the love of God, you ninnies, it has nothing to do with carrying shit.

    It has to do with honour. It has to do with civilisation. It has to do with the quiddity of what being a man is. That’s what advocates of women ‘soldiers’ are trying to wreck.

    Bingo!

  176. mareeS

    Judith, you mentioned a friend from the late 1960s who was called up, and who said he had a choice whether to go or not. My husband was conscripted in 1966, and has always said that the army only kept people who were willing to go. He stayed in by choice, but several of his surfing and rugby mates got medical exemptions from friendly doctors for things like ear infections or “foot problems” that allowed them to play senior grade rugby.

    The interesting thing now is that many of the pikers regret their choice every ANZAC Day, since they can’t be part of it in the way that my husband and his service mates are, with medals and remembrance of dead mates.

  177. jupes

    Just wondering if anyone has figured out what particular problem the solution of putting women in front-line combat is supposed to address.

    Well believe it or not, the problem is the lack of women in leadership positions and it is driven by Morrison’s bestie, the Sex Discrimination Commissioner. Getting women to the top of all professions and business is her mission in life.

    Leadership positions in the Army go to combat soldiers. Therefore women need to be able serve as combat soldiers to get the top jobs.

    According to their theory, having women in leadership positions will also end sexual harrassment. And of course the more women the less sexual harrassment. That is what they believe.

  178. I don’t think those in the military who got university paid for due to overseas service were subsidised, particularly in a war where conscription or the draft was used.

    Well I was.

    FWIW, when I was discharged after going back teaching for a year, I received what was called a rehabilitation scholarship. It entitled me to one year’s full time university on the equivalent of the then basic wage. During the uni breaks I took on a variety of factory jobs to help me live in the style to which I was accustomed.

    It gave me a flying start to my study, and I spent the next ten years teaching during the day and attending U of Q at night, accumulating two degrees and a post graduate qualification in special education.

    As to the issue of volunteering for Vietnam. Despite the range of anecdotes posted here by friends and rellies, I was never given the opportunity to opt out of operational service. The only opting out I witnessed was that of a digger who had come across from another battalion, and wasn’t happy with our tactics when we hit a bunker system and took one KIA and two WIA.

    He threw his rifle on the ground, and refused point blank to move. He was choppered out and we never saw him again. The irony was that this bloke had volunteered for national service.

  179. In consideration of the issue of women in combat – a few observations -
    In Phuoc Tuy we encountered women occasionally in local force VC units, most often couriers or porters.
    They were treated no differently from male enemy, with one notable exception, Australian forces in Vietnam respected VC, unlike the Americans, and any digger showing a tendency to abuse a prisoner was given short shrift.

    If you go back to the country now and speak with ex-VC (as I have done) they will tell you that Australians were “honorable” soldiers.

    When the chips are down, and people are fighting in their own backyard (as the Vietnamese were) age, ability and gender take a back seat.

    Perhaps we should look at that here, with specific female only units created for service on the mainland, although with the Coalitions’ tendency to define territorial Oz into oblivion to keep those nasty reffos out, there may not be much left to defend.

    When you think about it, since WW2, all the operational service that Australians have performed has been at the beck and call of others, so we have really been functioning as mercenaries. This is a bigger threat to morale and cohesion that mixing gender in the ranks.

    Perhaps the inclusion of more females will lift the average IQ of the ADF, as conscription did between 1965 and 1971. This was widely acknowledged amongst senior commanders.

  180. Peter

    For the love of God, you ninnies, it has nothing to do with carrying shit.

    It has to do with honour. It has to do with civilisation. It has to do with the quiddity of what being a man is. That’s what advocates of women ‘soldiers’ are trying to wreck.

    To the contrary, both issues are relevant. Why handicap ourselves by using only the one argument.?

    Both civilisation AND equal rights are at increased risk when we insist on putting less-effective soldiers into situations where their deficiencies put themselves and those fighting with them at greater risk of death or defeat…….

  181. Notafan

    Being able to carry a heavier load is part of being a man.
    Feminists are everyone in civilised society’s enemy, in insisting that women can be men they are are also saying that what women contribute to society is of less value.
    They line up with the islamists, quite nicely.

  182. john constantine

    the positive discrimination aimed at lifting the percentage of women into fire fighting units, both volunteer and full government paid positions may be an interesting template for frontline combat units.

    although training courses and back office functions run high female percentages, cursory observations of news footages show very 1950′s style makeup of frontline firecrews.

    for all the vocal political agitation for a politically correct expression of diversity, the actual flow of diversity does not move towards unpaid back of truck positions.

    the argument is no longer “anybody, male or female, that can do the job properly can do the job”. that is mysogynist.

    the argument now is that the job has to change, to reflect sensitivities, and viewpoints that enable diversity to occupy the task space.

    getting the task done is no longer the main aim, christine nixon told us this, when she walked out of the command and control room and went out for a meal with her friends while the state of victoria was on fire, and she was meant to be running emergency services.

    changing attitudes forever is the aim, fires will go out eventually, and if a more diverse crew make-up means less effective outcomes, that is a neccessary cost of social engineering.

  183. jupes

    … getting the task done is no longer the main aim … changing attitudes forever is the aim …

    Well summed up john.

    Our society is no longer being run by serious people.

  184. Mater

    Just out of interest, how many of the recent deployments of Australian troops have involved 50 km route marches into enemy territory and then back out again? Not counting SF missions?

    Tim,
    Your missing the point here and showing your ignorance. Flexibility is important. Whether or not the option has been used recently, the option still exists. Having a broad range of capabilities, practiced and available, gives Commanders options. The more the options, the better the plan, the less the losses.
    Ask your brother when we last operationally deployed a Battalion by Parachute? When was the last time we deployed Main Battle Tanks? Should these capabilities be disgarded due to lack of use or should they be retained…just in case.

  185. .

    Perpetual Motion
    #1349628, posted on June 16, 2014 at 10:52 pm
    You are a child, Tim. Listen to your brother.

    The fucking gall of some people. I would say everything I say on this blog in person.

  186. Harry Buttle

    OK, Tim, re how many times recently have Aust units in combat marched 50kms to an objective, utterly irrelevant route marching is a tool that toughens troops mentally and physically and it is also available for use in combat at need, it has the advantage of making an enemy unsure of your ability to move with or without logistical support.

    However, you might want to look at the British experience in the Falklands, troops who could set off cross country, with heavy loads for long distances in crap conditions made all the difference.

    It amazes me that, from a purely theoretical background, you are happy to ignore the experience of a number of people who have actually been in the situation and continue to believe your view is valid.

  187. Harry Buttle

    Numbers, as usual you are not telling the truth, I understand that you are incapable of doing so, having, along with countless others caught and exposed your lies a number of times.
    Firstly, you have no idea how effective VC female troops were – you didn’t serve with them, so you have no idea what accommodations their units had to make to keep them in the field, nor how effective those units might have been without them, so stop pretending that you have any idea how useful they were.

    Re senior officers acknowledging (widely) that conscription raised the forces IQ – firstly a reference would be nice, secondly at which points did the defence force conduct the IQ tests that would validate such an opinion (ie you are bullshitting again aren’t you numbers).

    Re when you are fighting in your own backyard age ability and gender take a backseat, oddly enough for you, not a lie, just an example of how utterly stupid you are – when you are fighting in your own backyard, that is when effectiveness (ability) takes precedence over everything and gender policy, lowered standards and all the other nonsense that lowers ability get tossed in an effort to raise unit effectiveness.

    Re “lowering morale fighting as mercenaries”, basic idiocy on your part numbers and to be expected – we traditionally fight at the side of our allies, it is a reasonable expectation on their part as a condition of them turning up if we are attacked. I get that you are not bright enough to understand it, but professional Soldiers do (perhaps you didn’t in fact raise the group IQ after all numbers?).

  188. Tim

    I was always a fan of the Starship Troopers term of service to earn citizenship idea.

    However, it has never been implemented, so even as a civilian I am allowed to present an opinion.
    Clearly those who have served in the military will have a strong claim to knowing what they are talking about. But it is just possible that someone standing on the outside looking in will see things that those within the system do not.

    Yes, of course it is all about a code of honour. Over the years the military have built a culture based on honour and tradition. Esprit de corps, or as people would say nowdays, corporate culture. It has evolved through trials of fire and it works, and it is also resistant to change – that is a feature, not a bug.

    But of course it has always been changing, and will keep changing. The trick is to introduce change that, in the long run, doesn’t reduce efficiency. There will always be short term friction over something new, and some that can’t cope with change. But the military is a long term institution – it isn’t just about the current troops, it is also about past and future troops. The Australian Army of 2014 bears very little resemblance to that of 1914, or 1942, and not so much to 1968 either. We talk about the maintenance of tradition stretching back hundreds of years, but there is actually very little left that has survived the trip. It changes and will keep changing.

    As we saw last night, there have been instances of elite female soldiers. They too are capable of building a culture of honour and so forth. And probably we know something of the Spartan special forces who were exclusively homosexual and paired up. Given time and the right materials you can create your culture out of anything, to do anything. The problem here is the feminist left beating on the doors.

    I don’t think that women in combat is a good idea, personally. But it is going to happen. You think next time the Labor/Green kleptocracy get into power they won’t force this down everyone’s throat? And the majority of women will rally round to support it, including many of those currently or formerly in the military. I think the die in a ditch position needs to be based on merit. You can keep elite military forces merit based, if theoretically women can qualify. And honestly, if the 20s-ish aged special forces soldiers can’t stop themselves jumping the females, then Morrison may have a point. I don’t think he does, but apparently some of you do.

    So, let me recap – if women want to serve in a front-line capability they should be segregated, and let build their own culture of honour, in a way that doesn’t detract from the main, male army. And can be used according to their capabilities. But if they are actually good enough, (not reduced standards good enough) to be SF, then let them in. The SF culture will adapt to the change, provided it is, indeed, merit based.

  189. Notafan

    I’m pretty sure most women will not support women being front line troops. Unless it’s someone else’s daughter.

  190. Mater

    Tim,
    I acknowledge your points. However, put aside the physical aspects of SF work for a moment. A key role of Special Forces is to liaise with, train and fight with foreign forces…including forces from the Middle East. Males struggle to gain credibilty if they don’t have a beard, let alone women. How are the Greens/ALP going change this culture? This may be beyond even their totalitarian control!
    Non-covert missions were conducted deep into Afghanistan to open up dialogue with village heads and gather intelligence. A mission which is clearly unsuited for women. Perhaps their non-suitabilty for the role stems less from our military culture, and more from the culture of others.
    If the response, to this dilemma, is to direct the men to undertake these taskings, compromises are already being made.

  191. Peter

    Marching to the objective?

    A friend related that on his last deployment to Afghanistan as an infantryman (not SF) , they received intelligence that a high-value target would be at such-and-such a location. It was during a period of wet weather which meant that vehicular mobility was limited and the Talibs knew this. The Diggers decided that the most effective way to achieve surprise was to March in, across country, rather than using noisy helicopters and risk being detected by the Stalin spotter network.
    The approach required a 20km march across rough terrain at night and without lights. My friend was carrying more than his own body-weight in personal kit, water, rations weapon and ammunition. They spent much of the time with so much mud clinging to their boots that – in his own words – it was like wearing “hooker-heels”.

    They got their man.

    On the subject of change…. Change is inevitable, but many changes are not beneficial, even when we have learnt to deal with them.

    On the question of qualification, I note that even when a female can meet strength and endurance standards during training, she is far more likely to suffer from stress and impact-related injuries. (Four times more likely according to one study). It costs the same to train and equip a female as it does a male, even more if separate facilities must be constructed) but the return on that investment will, on average, be less and the cost of rehabilitation, greater.
    Also, including females who can only just clear the basic performance hurdles – when the average male has excess capacity by the end of training – is loading the bottom end of the performance curve amongst soldiers and hence reduces the overall average physical capacity of the unit.

    There are no free lunches.

    Finally, it is not just a case of teaching male soldiers to not “jump” their female counterparts, but holding the females equally responsible for not keeping their legs crossed.

  192. Harry Buttle

    Tim, as noted repeatedly, you are, at best guessing. Several of us have been there, done that and got the t-shirt. We, as a rule, disagree with you based on real world experience.

    The fact that you consider corporate culture to be the same as military esprit de corps tells us most of what we need to know, simply put the guys from Microsoft are not going to be checking each others parachutes in a red lit, puke filled, tac flying Hercules, before sprinting out, sim doors, carrying their own weight in gear at 750 Ft in pitch darkness, any time soon.

    My point, is the people who call it corporate culture, don’t get it. And never will.

    Given time and materials you can change millions of years of evolution, but it will take, most likely millions of years, and you only have to lose one big war and your plan is out the window.

    The army is not about equality, social justice, democracy or individual freedom, it exists to protect those things and forcing it to practice those rights in itself endangers societies right to do so.

  193. Numbers, as usual you are not telling the truth, I understand that you are incapable of doing so, having, along with countless others caught and exposed your lies a number of times.

    Ok – find a “lie”.
    You repeat this ad nauseam, but it is in itself a lie.
    Put your money where your mouth is.

    Firstly, you have no idea how effective VC female troops were – you didn’t serve with them, so you have no idea what accommodations their units had to make to keep them in the field, nor how effective those units might have been without them, so stop pretending that you have any idea how useful they were.

    I made no comment about their effectiveness. I simply said they were porters and couriers. My comment was about how we treated them. Go back and read it – #1349796, posted on June 17, 2014 at 7:06 am.

    As usual, you’re verballing – another form of lying.

    Re senior officers acknowledging (widely) that conscription raised the forces IQ – firstly a reference would be nice,

    Glad to oblige -

    “The advantages (of National Servicemen) were obvious to many commanders who believed their units benefited significantly from the qualities and enthusiasm most national servicemen brought to their new role of soldiering”.

    Fighting to the Finish – The Australian Army and the Vietnam War – 1968 – 1975 – Ashley Ekins with Ian McNeill – Allen & Unwin – 2012 – 689

    “The conscripts had experience, maturity and frequently education, rarely experienced in other recruits”

    Brigadier Colin Khan DSO. AM. Commander 5 RAR – writing to David Horne 26th October 1989.

    “The nashos were brighter, on average, than the voluntary recruits, and lent colour, irreverence and a touch of glamour to the Australian army”.

    Vietnam – The Australian War – Paul Ham, Harper Collins, Australia, 2007, p 171

    when you are fighting in your own backyard, that is when effectiveness (ability) takes precedence over everything and gender policy, lowered standards and all the other nonsense that lowers ability get tossed in an effort to raise unit effectiveness.

    That was exactly my point. Thanks for reinforcing it.

    Re “lowering morale fighting as mercenaries”, basic idiocy on your part numbers and to be expected – we traditionally fight at the side of our allies, it is a reasonable expectation on their part as a condition of them turning up if we are attacked. I get that you are not bright enough to understand it, but professional Soldiers do (perhaps you didn’t in fact raise the group IQ after all numbers?).

    We were under no obligation (ANZUS or anything else) to fight with the Yanks in Vietnam or the Yanks and Brits in Afghanistan or Iraq.

    They have only ever allied with us out of self interest.
    They would abandon us at the drop of a hat (as Churchill attempted to do in WW2, until Curtin called his bluff) if it suited them.

  194. Harry Buttle

    Numbers, I and others have repeatedly pointed out your lies, and I, having gotten sick of dredging up repeated examples to prove that you are a liar, have on several occasions since stated that you and anyone who is foolish enough to believe anything you say, can just go back and check the various blog archives to see that you lie without thinking.

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    Re IQ of Nachos, 1st ref does not mention IQ (another lie on your part), 2nd ref does not mention IQ (another lie on your part, 3rd ref, again doesn’t mention IQ, another,,, well, are you seeing the pattern yet numbers – you lie, then you lie about supporting documentation) and BTW, I’m not seeing any reference to any pre and post conscription IQ studies done, so even if a few officers believed such nonsense, it wouldn’t suggest that it was true. But then truth isn’t your thing, is it numbers.

    Re alliances, of course they ally with us out of self interest you blithering idiot, we ally with them for the same reason and much of our motivation for fighting beside those allies is to make us valuable enough that they will stand by us at need. Professionals are smart enough to understand this.

    Re the nonsense about Churchill abandoning Aust in WW2, I understand that you are a liar and an idiot numbers, but perhaps you might want to at least address your utter ignorance of the subject before you post. Churchill promised Australia an Armoured Div in the case of substantial Japanese invasion of Aust – by Mid April 1942, we, the USA and the UK knew from magic (communications intercepts) that Japan had no intention of invading Australia. As an aside Japan also had neither the troops nor the logistic capability to invade Australia, but that is beside the point – we were reading their strategic planning communications and knew they were not interested.

  195. Numbers, I and others have repeatedly pointed out your lies, and I, having gotten sick of dredging up repeated examples to prove that you are a liar, have on several occasions since stated that you and anyone who is foolish enough to believe anything you say, can just go back and check the various blog archives to see that you lie without thinking.

    You repeat that over and over again. Josef Goebbels did the same.
    Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true.
    If I lie, as you say, you should have no trouble posting an example.
    You never do.

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    This is what I posted -

    In consideration of the issue of women in combat – a few observations -
    In Phuoc Tuy we encountered women occasionally in local force VC units, most often couriers or porters.
    They were treated no differently from male enemy, with one notable exception, Australian forces in Vietnam respected VC, unlike the Americans, and any digger showing a tendency to abuse a prisoner was given short shrift.

    This is what you said I posted -

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    It’s sad that I have to point out the bleeding obvious.
    I did not post what you said I posted. Where did I make a judgement about their effectiveness?
    You are an abject liar. Everyone reading this exchange can see that. You are the only one who cannot.

    Re IQ of Nachos, 1st ref does not mention IQ (another lie on your part), 2nd ref does not mention IQ (another lie on your part, 3rd ref, again doesn’t mention IQ, another,,, well, are you seeing the pattern yet numbers – you lie, then you lie about supporting documentation)

    I’m beginning to think you have a problem with reading comprehension.
    “Brightness” usually refers to IQ, not whether or not the soldier had a shiny appearance.
    Perhaps Paul Ham has a different meaning for the term than everyone else. I doubt it.
    The other people quoted ( an ex battalion commander and a respected war chronicler) make their meanings absolutely clear. Anyone reading their statements would have no problem with understanding what they mean. The fact that you do, makes me suspect you’re on the Autism spectrum. People with autism are generally capable only of literal interpretation.

    You use a simple and defective technique -
    1. You call someone you disagree with a liar.
    2. You claim that someone has made statements that he has not (verballing) to justify your lie.
    3. You prevaricate when cornered.

    It reminds me of an NCO we had at rookies who was as thick as a brick. He was so thick that he had no idea most of the time that we were laughing at him.

    Professionals are smart enough to understand this.

    I’m assuming you’re referring to professional politicians rather than soldiers. After all, it’s the pollies who make decisions about going to war.
    They did well in the washup, didn’t they? After Vietnam Mc Mahon was kicked out in 1972, and the Republicans (who dragged us into Iraq) had their presidential candidate thrown out with the garbage in 2008.

    More obscene symmetry.

  196. Numbers, I and others have repeatedly pointed out your lies, and I, having gotten sick of dredging up repeated examples to prove that you are a liar, have on several occasions since stated that you and anyone who is foolish enough to believe anything you say, can just go back and check the various blog archives to see that you lie without thinking.

    You repeat that over and over again. Josef Goebbels did the same.
    Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true.
    If I lie, as you say, you should have no trouble posting an example.
    You never do.

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    This is what I posted -

    In consideration of the issue of women in combat – a few observations -
    In Phuoc Tuy we encountered women occasionally in local force VC units, most often couriers or porters.
    They were treated no differently from male enemy, with one notable exception, Australian forces in Vietnam respected VC, unlike the Americans, and any digger showing a tendency to abuse a prisoner was given short shrift.

    This is what you said I posted -

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    It’s sad that I have to point out the bleeding obvious.
    I did not post what you said I posted. Where did I make a judgement about their effectiveness?
    You are an abject liar. Everyone reading this exchange can see that. You are the only one who cannot.

    Re IQ of Nachos, 1st ref does not mention IQ (another lie on your part), 2nd ref does not mention IQ (another lie on your part, 3rd ref, again doesn’t mention IQ, another,,, well, are you seeing the pattern yet numbers – you lie, then you lie about supporting documentation)

    I’m beginning to think you have a problem with reading comprehension.
    “Brightness” usually refers to IQ, not whether or not the soldier had a shiny appearance.
    Perhaps Paul Ham has a different meaning for the term than everyone else. I doubt it.
    The other people quoted ( an ex battalion commander and a respected war chronicler) make their meanings absolutely clear. Anyone reading their statements would have no problem with understanding what they mean. The fact that you do, makes me suspect you’re on the Autism spectrum. People with autism are generally capable only of literal interpretation.

    You use a simple and defective technique -
    1. You call someone you disagree with a liar.
    2. You claim that someone has made statements that he has not (verballing) to justify your lie.
    3. You prevaricate when cornered.

    It reminds me of an NCO we had at rookies who was as thick as a brick. He was so thick that he had no idea most of the time that we were laughing at him.

    Professionals are smart enough to understand this.

    I’m assuming you’re referring to professional politicians rather than soldiers. After all, it’s the pollies who make decisions about going to war.
    They did well in the washup, didn’t they? After Vietnam Mc Mahon was kicked out in 1972, and the Republicans (who dragged us into Iraq) had their presidential candidate thrown out with the garbage in 2008.

    More obscene symmetry.

  197. Numbers, I and others have repeatedly pointed out your lies, and I, having gotten sick of dredging up repeated examples to prove that you are a liar, have on several occasions since stated that you and anyone who is foolish enough to believe anything you say, can just go back and check the various blog archives to see that you lie without thinking.

    You repeat that over and over again. Josef Goebbels did the same.
    Repeating a lie doesn’t make it true.
    If I lie, as you say, you should have no trouble posting an example.
    You never do.

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    This is what I posted -

    In consideration of the issue of women in combat – a few observations -
    In Phuoc Tuy we encountered women occasionally in local force VC units, most often couriers or porters.
    They were treated no differently from male enemy, with one notable exception, Australian forces in Vietnam respected VC, unlike the Americans, and any digger showing a tendency to abuse a prisoner was given short shrift.

    This is what you said I posted -

    Re female VC, again, you, in a thread about female effectiveness in the military, suggest that they were effective when you have no idea if they were or not.

    It’s sad that I have to point out the bleeding obvious.
    I did not post what you said I posted. Where did I make a judgement about their effectiveness?
    You are an abject liar. Everyone reading this exchange can see that. You are the only one who cannot.

  198. Sinclair Davidson

    1735099 – references to the German information minister go into auto-moderation. That’s why you’ve been caught up.

  199. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    an ex battalion commander and a respected war chronicler…….Anyone reading their statements would have no problem with understanding what they mean.

    “The great myth about conscription is that national servicemen were forced to serve in Viet Nam.”
    Paul Ham, p178

    “”The National serviceman” Brigadier Colin Khan, DSO recalls “had to specifically volunteer for overseas service by signing a deceleration during Corps training…all national servicemen who served in Vietnam volunteered to do so.” Paul Ham, p178

    Are we talking about the same ex battalion commander and the same respected war chronicler? I don’t have any problem understanding their statements.

  200. “”The National serviceman” Brigadier Colin Khan, DSO recalls “had to specifically volunteer for overseas service by signing a deceleration (sic) during Corps training…all national servicemen who served in Vietnam volunteered to do so.” Paul Ham, p178

    Not this little white duck.
    And I have my file from CARO.
    No such declaration (which I think you meant) is included.
    I’m not saying Khan is wrong.
    But I have no recollection of signing such a declaration, and I reckon that’s something I’d remember.
    Perhaps not all units dealt with this in the same way.

  201. Mk50 of Brisbane, Henchman to the VRWC

    Worst outbreak of:

    VietnamVietnamVietnam
    MeMeMeMeMeMeMeMe
    VietnamVietnamVietnam
    MeMeMeMeMeMeMeMe
    VietnamVietnamVietnam
    MeMeMeMeMeMeMeMe

    I’ve seen in ages from stalin’s butt-boy & etc

    Nothing new, though, just the usual boring lies and BS from this racist clown.

    Tim:

    Clearly those who have served in the military will have a strong claim to knowing what they are talking about.

    Erm. Yes. We do.

    Esprit de corps, or as people would say nowdays, corporate culture.

    Oh Lord. No. ‘corporate culture’ really bears no relation, it is a purely civilian things and yes, this includes police forces – police are civilians. Military culture is an entirely different beast, hard to build, easy for the arrogant, pig-ignorant morons we call ‘social scientists’ to damage.

    Women in front line roles – they’ve been there in a way since the Germans started indiscriminate bombing of cities from the air in 1915. Be that as it may, their role there must be circumscribed by their physical differences; generally smaller, weaker and with far less upperbody strength, generally more endurance in low-energy expenditure activity regimes, generally better close-vicinity situational awareness (yes yes, there are outliers but rare indeed is the woman who can haul her own bodymass up 20 feet).

    Aircrew? Base techs? Many naval roles? Sure. Safety overwatch on a RAS? No worries.

    Infantry? Tankies? Gun bunnies? Sea ratings involving most upperdeck work? No way. They simply lack the physical strength.

    And don’t get me started on certain of the cultural implications. The HMAS Success predatory lesbian ring being the worst I ever heard of – funny how all those rapes never made the press, eh?

  202. Zulu Kilo Two Alpha

    Perhaps not all the units dealt with it the same way

    The person who first told me the business about the declarations had been the officer (Education Corps?) in one of the battalions (Nearly thirty years ago – can’t remember his name or the battalion) who had the job of organizing the Nasho’s to sign the declaration. He said there was a lot of peer pressure (“Oi. We’re all putting our names down. Why aren’t you? Oh, well, if you’re all going, so am I.”)

    Good mate of mine here (badly wounded, Operation Massey Harris, T.P.I. pension) said about the declaration “I brought a ticket in the lottery. The prize was either a posting to Viet Nam, Singapore or Malaya. I drew Viet Nam.”

  203. The person who first told me the business about the declarations

    Interesting.
    I would assume that if these declarations existed, they would have been filed somewhere.
    They’re not on my record, and none of the blokes I served with have been able to locate copies.
    Their memories vary.
    Some, like me, have no recollection.
    Some remember being paraded and asked to step forward if they didn’t want to serve in SVN.
    I have not met anyone who remembers signing a specific document, although most of us can remember signing a whole range of documents, including compulsory wills.
    I researched the issue thoroughly when writing my book.
    Ham, Elkins and others reports are based on interviews, not documents.
    I would have thought that if declarations existed they would be available through CARO.

  204. 1735099

    Stalin’s butt-boy…..

    Mk50s welcome to country…….

  205. Harry Buttle

    Numbers, as usual you are now just lying about the lies you’ve been caught in (again),

    As is now standard, I refuse to turn this into an opportunity to do 6 more laps around the ‘tard park with you. You made claims, I demonstrated that they were lies, you lied about those lies, again.

    And everyone here knows your MO, we’ve been here before – why on earth do you think you deserve more of anyones time than a cursory proof that you cannot tell the truth, then simply ignoring you?

  206. Numbers, as usual you are now just lying about the lies you’ve been caught in (again),

    If you are referring to the issue about whether conscripts were given the opportunity to opt out of service in Vietnam, here are a few questions.

    Were you in my unit in 1969 during our preparation for deployment?
    Do you have any documentary evidence that these “opt-out” parades ever happened?
    Do you base your allegation that I am lying on anything else than poorly remembered anecdote?
    Was there anything in in the National Service Act that specified that conscripts were entitled to opt out of overseas service?

    Unless you can answer “yes” to any of these basic questions, you have no basis for that allegation.

    I will continue to try to get to the bottom of this, by talking with surviving members of my unit, and researching AWM archives.
    If you are fair dinkum you would be doing the same, instead of doing Father Jack impressions on line.

  207. john constantine

    they say the political requirement for the armed forces is to fight and win the last war the political class truly cared about.

    so right now, the australian defence forces are being designed to fight the war for political correctness, social equality and justice.

    it seems through history the west has the armies designed to fight the wrong wars, with the wrong tools, wiped out on contact with the new enemy, and then has to rock back, put their economies on a war footing, mobilise the citizen soldiers, motivated by the slaughter of the sacrifice army, and fight the new war, either to the bitter end, or until political polls declare victory,retreat, and nobel prize.

    back in the old days, the dictators had their retreating, defeated armies reform for a victory parade through the capital.

    now they just pose for the media, displaying their nobel peace prize.

  208. Harry Buttle

    See numbers now you attempt to shift the goal posts – BTW, I not only don’t give a flying f* about your conscription, even though I wasn’t referring to your choices offered once conscripted, given your past, established record of lying, I don’t believe you when you say you had no chance to opt out.
    But to cover the point I was referring to, so people know you are a liar – you stated that senior officers had said that conscription raised the IQ of the force, when challenged in that lie, you provided 3 references where no senior officer referred to IQ as proof that they had, Giving us 4 quick lies in succession (anyone who cares enough to check, they are further up in these comments).
    Key points to take from this -
    1. Nothing numbers says is to be trusted.
    2. I don’t care that you were conscripted, so stop raising it at every opportunity.
    3. This is my final lap around this particular ‘tard park with you numbers.
    4. Anyone who has any doubts as to numbers reflexive lying just needs to check his posts in these comments, as noted above.

  209. (anyone who cares enough to check, they are further up in these comments).

    Absolutely – your literalist bullshit revealed for what it is.

    3. This is my final lap around this particular ‘tard park with you numbers.

    Makes about the seventh time you’ve posted that – on this and other sites….
    :-)

Comments are closed.