The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection$
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 TeasersiSteve Blog
NBC: Army Fitness Test Made More Rigorous, Most Army Women Can't Pass
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • B
Show CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
AgreeDisagreeThanksLOLTroll
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

From NBC News:

Army replaces decades-old fitness exam with more rigorous test

The pushups and situps of the 1980s will be replaced by deadlifts, a medicine-ball throw and other drills better suited to prepare soldiers for modern warfare.

Dec. 3, 2021, 12:43 PM PST
By Jean Lee

The U.S. Army is planning to replace its antiquated fitness exam with a more rigorous model designed to better prepare soldiers for the demands of modern warfare.

The new exam has been tested for two years and is planned to be officially rolled out in March 2022. It replaces the 40-year-old Army Physical Fitness Test, which tested soldiers on their ability to do two minutes of situps, two minutes of pushups and a 2-mile run.

The two-hour Army Combat Fitness Test 3.0 (ACFT) evaluates movements that better parallel the demands of on-the-ground combat, including rescuing injured personnel and loading equipment, according to Lt. Col. Gabriel Ramirez, an Army spokesman. …

It consists of six exercises: a medicine-ball throw, hand-release pushups, deadlifts, a 2-mile run, sprint-drag-carry exercises, and leg tucks or planks.

Going from 3 to 6 exercises sounds reasonable. The old test didn’t require any equipment, which was likely helpful in 1942 when adding huge numbers of soldiers, but the modern Pentagon can afford various kinds of exercise equipment.

The fundamental problem, however, is that the better you make the fitness test to test abilities needed on the battlefield, like carrying a wounded comrade or lifting deplete uranium ammunition, the worse that women soldiers will do.

… The latest version, ACFT 3.0, is the most recent data-informed modification. The most prominent change, compared to the 2.0 version, includes the plank as a substitute for the leg tuck to address the higher fail rates among women with the leg tuck. The plank and the leg tuck both evaluate core strength, army officials said, and would be considered the same in terms of scoring.

However, more than half of women are still failing the new exam, according to Army Forces Command data published on military.com. Women in the military have expressed concern that the Army would prioritize physical strength over leadership qualities

After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?

or technical skills necessary in a high-tech age and might unintentionally marginalize women in the Army and underuse people, in general, with useful skills outside of fitness, The Washington Post reported last year.

“I think most folks, most individuals, with proper training can pass the test,” Ramirez said.

Another possible change to address the higher fail rate among women would be the use of a performance-tier program that would take gender into account, Army officials said.

“There will continue to be discussion,” Ramirez said. “I think the big thing for us is that we need to get data to make informed decisions.”

 
Hide 186 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Steve Sailer:

    “After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?”

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    • LOL: Mike Tre
    • Replies: @Zpaladin
    @Zero Philosopher

    Actually, Napoleon was of average height for a man of his era. French inches were larger than British ones and British propaganda found it convenient to call him small.
    And if he was the greatest general of the last 500 years, perhaps his opinion of the importance of height in the military is relevant. He prized height and surrounded himself by tall officers. So, your example doesn’t do what you suppose it does.

    , @74v56ruthiyj
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was 5'4", not short for a Frenchman of his time. And he had great physical endurance, at least when he was younger. By the time of Waterloo, he had declined.

    Replies: @dearieme

    , @Anonymous
    @Zero Philosopher


    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.
     
    Napoleon was slightly above average height for men at the time and had served in the French artillery, a physically demanding role.

    Furthermore, he wasn't the "greatest general of the past 500 years", wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @Hapalong Cassidy

    , @Wilkey
    @Zero Philosopher


    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.
     
    People always focus on Napoleon’s stature, but if you were to judge from his death mask (he died at 52) the man had facial features that generally signify high testosterone and a certain vigor. He was certainly no pajama boy. He may not have carried many wounded men from the battlefield, but there’s little doubt that he could have.

    Shortness does not mean physically unfit. Have you ever seen a male gymnast?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    , @Joe Paluka
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was of normal height for men of that era. The stories of him being extra short were started by the British to demoralize the French and make the English feel superior.

    , @Observator
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was of average height for a man of his time. His alleged "shortness" was part of the British media campaign to discredit him. Also popular at the time in England was a chamber pot with "little Boney's" portrait in it. This was revived a century later with Hitler taking the place of honor in the pot, and for quite the same reason, British rage that a strong European leader had once again defeated their invading army.

    Replies: @Ben tillman, @Art Deco, @J.Ross

    , @WJ
    @Zero Philosopher

    Let me guess : You have never been in the military. If you have been in the military , it was not in the combat arms. However, you have seen a lot or garbage out of Hollywood.

    , @Peter Akuleyev
    @Zero Philosopher

    yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    How do you come to that metric? Eugene of Savoy accomplished quite a lot with far fewer resources. Or look at what Frederick the Great pulled off holding a very weak hand. Napoleon had the advantages of being able to use Europe's first "popular" army, the ability to select supporting officers by merit not birth and a fairly mediocre set of opponents.

    , @S. Anonyia
    @Zero Philosopher

    Most sources say Napoleon was 5’6. That’s on the low end of normal today, and was probably average or slightly above average for the time.

    I’d guess the average American man is around 5’9, but lies and claims to be 6 feet.

    , @Walker88
    @Zero Philosopher

    That may hold true foe a general who is middle-aged. But what about the guys in the line, who are expected to lead by example? One of the halmarks of leadership is not having to ask your men to do something that you are not willing and able to do youself. I think from time to time combat is still a primitive test of strength. I know Marines were still kicking doors down in Iraq and killing guys with their combat knives not all that long ago. Are we to assume the Russians and the Chinese will be good enough to keep their style of warfare to something a woman leading an infantry squad can easily cope with?

    Replies: @odin

    , @joe tentpeg
    @Zero Philosopher

    And yet...

    ...Waterloo...

    ...and the Moscow Retreat.

    , @Art Deco
    @Zero Philosopher

    yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    He died on an island in the south Atlantic where lives about 5,000 people. If he were all that he'd have had better headline performance.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    , @Getaclue
    @Zero Philosopher

    PioAny one who thinks having people in the Army who can't make it without cheating for them is clueless as to how negatively this effects the others--anyone who actually served knows this-- this is why Basic Training was used to locate them and get rid of them...

    I was at West Point when women came in -- lots of crying and guys carrying their packs on marches etc. (their PE Classes which were vicious for men were completely different, in many respects they were going to a different Academy created so they could make it....) while the NYSlimes lied they were better than the men (still lying)-- if any guy had CRIED or pulled any of that he would have been over -- maybe even beat up first...now West Point is all homosexualized due to Obama (male Cadets "marrying" each other at Graduation under Crossed Sabres LOL) and woke with CRT with actual out Communists attending--a joke like most of the rest of the USA military now....

    The amount of lies they have to tell to maintain the Woke Agenda is breathtaking.

    Replies: @Alden, @Old Prude

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @Zero Philosopher

    Zero, I have visited a number of Civil War museums, both North and South, the uniforms on display will quickly show you how small the men of that era were.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

    , @Captain Tripps
    @Zero Philosopher

    Dude, I can't take you seriously when you post a low information voter comment like this:


    Napoleon was short and physicallt (sic) unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.
     
    You have to research more and try harder. Your one post where you quote extensively from some chemistry paper was your best; the others not so much.
    , @Unladen Swallow
    @Zero Philosopher

    A man the size of an average woman, ( who would be short for a man ) would still have roughly forty pounds of additional lean muscle over what that woman had, at the same age.

  2. anonymous[585] • Disclaimer says:

    This is silly. Men are going to be outmatched on the ACFT 3.0, just look at the the top results of this relevant internet search:

    Biden: There Isn’t A ‘Single Thing A Man Can Do’ That A Woman Can’t Do Better

    https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/24/joe-biden-equal-pay-day-women/

    Judy Murray: Anything men can do, women can do better

    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/anything-men-can-do-we-can-do-better-like-running-the-world/

    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!

    https://www.drphil.com/shows/1624/

    Women are better than men at everything

    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/women-are-better-than-men-at-everything-thats-why-men-should-do-the-engineering

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @anonymous


    The Nature paper tells us that women are better, as measured by those school grades, than men at everything. This is, as with all these discussions, about population averages and is no guide whatsoever to the skills, interests, or talents of an individual. Nor is it a guide to what choices any one person should make either. Women are also better, or their advantage over men is greater, in non-STEM subjects than in STEM.

    If this is so, and we add our Ricardo on trade knowledge to it, what do we get?

    Men are less bad at STEM than they are at everything else. Women are better at everything, that’s absolute advantage, but they’re that greater better at non-STEM, the comparative advantage. Thus men should be doing the STEM, women the non-STEM, and we’ll swap the results and that’s how we’ll all become collectively better off.
     
    Oh yeah, good idea. Men do the STEM and women carry the burden of HR. Sorted!

    I remember all those times I had physics & math explained to me by girls in the specialization years of high school.

    Replies: @Feryl

    , @Wade Hampton
    @anonymous

    The immortal Keel and Hutton testify.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WO23WBji_Z0

    , @AnotherDad
    @anonymous


    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!
     
    That quickly became the position of minoritarian (2 wave+) feminism and now the official establishment position.

    For the whole "oppression" narrative to really fly--and get adherents all excited--there can't be much nuance, much less any suggestion that maybe the old order had something to do with the natural abilities/capabilities of men and women. (I look at the roles/domains my grandmother and grandfather had on the farm--kitchen, hen house, garden, root cellar vs. barns, livestock, fields, machinery--pretty much makes sense to me.)

    And ironically it rolls with little resistance because men are chivalrous toward women. We generally don't go around and say "hey you just suck". It's basically the same as the "you don't hit a girl" deal. What's the point of arguing or demonstrating male superiority across the vast domains of physical, intellectual and technical abilities and skills? "Whooee you beat a girl. BFD."

    Replies: @martin_2

    , @SteveRogers42
    @anonymous

    The USMC conducted a test of this theorem a few years ago:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cxzd7kKm91c

  3. Women will never be up to rigorous strength physicality vs men and you sure as hell don’t want them in leadership positions. How about KP duty?

    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    @usNthem

    Agreed with this and Ben Tillman's comment.

    However, Mke_from_SGV best states how it actually works.

    , @Tony massey
    @usNthem

    Of course i do agree with you.
    Imo the answer to physical fitness, moarso for women but all, is yoga. No membership needed. No equipment necessary. You can do it on the toilet. You don't need all your appendages. ANYONE can do no matter how fucked up they are...not withstanding certain injuries/paralysis y'all.
    I've dated 3 yoga instructors. Again and again over and over i was constantly surprised at the absolute strength those gals possessed. Rock solid core.
    That last one i dated...110 lbs. There's not a fat out of shape guy out there that could take her. She would show them what's really ☝. She would always say, it's the plank Tony it's the plank. I'm fairly sure she coulda posed in the plank and stared is straight ahead without blinking for longer than any rat could ever tread water, which is about 3 days i hear. Kat would've straight up embarrassed alot of men if they thought she was just a little woman. No sir.
    It's yoga. I'm telling you. I've always been fairly strong. I've never been a weight lifter(other than just core training) so I'm not competition but...so far as average is concerned that's what I'm saying... I'm much stronger than your average pasty but these serious yoga folks...I'm telling ya...they have unbelievable strength.
    My friend k is mid 50s and been doing yoga for the last 30 years 5-6 hours per week without fail. She's mid 50s woman chunky. Not fat. Ya know the sort. I'm telling ya I'm yelling it...kate would put to shame prolly a 1/3 of the fucking Army in a straight up physical fitness test and k...dude...that bitch is fucking strong. The only exercise she has ever done in her adult life is yoga.
    You don't Fuck with yoga people buddy

    Replies: @ATate

  4. might unintentionally marginalize women in the Army

    They should really do it intentionally, but unintentionally is better than not at all.

    Ladies, in combat, the margin is where you want to be.

    • Agree: Old Prude
    • Replies: @LP5
    @Almost Missouri


    Ladies, in combat, the margin is where you want to be.
     
    So, catfights in the typing pool?
    , @3g4me
    @Almost Missouri

    @4 Almost Missouri: None of the womyn in the US military are 'ladies.' And their failure in combat would not represent any great loss to society - they are already either non-White or useless wombs. I think all young women - daddy's princesses, blue-haired crazies, and woke college achievers - ought to be drafted and suffer the just consequences when AINO's military suffers its well-deserved defeat.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

  5. “ we need to get data to make informed decisions.”

    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?

    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Peterike


    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?
     
    Oh, that's bad data. We're talking about good data.
    , @Moses
    @Peterike


    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?
     
    What they always do. Ignore it.
  6. In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

    • Agree: ic1000, Alden
    • LOL: Right_On
    • Replies: @PaceLaw
    @JimDandy

    Absolutely spot on! More “women” who can do feats of masculine strength without much effort. This would be an absolutely superb recommendation, but for the fact that trans women are insane.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    , @Reg Cæsar
    @JimDandy


    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

     

    Tell that to Selective Service. They do not recognize "trans women". Possibly the last US agency that doesn't.

    "Lia" Thomas still has almost four years of having to notify SSS of any address change. Assuming "she" is registered at all-- but a guy needs that to get financial aid.

    By the way, I thought sports officials were against drugs.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    , @Ben tillman
    @JimDandy

    Now that was funny.

    , @Possumman
    @JimDandy

    They are cleaning up on Jeopardy!

  7. Will Thomas swam three years for Penn; this year, as Lia Thomas s/he’s breaking women’s swimming records. Surely Lia would do fine with the new testing (while this gender dysphoria rages).

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10266627/Fury-unfair-competition-trans-swimmer-smashing-womens-records.html

    • Replies: @AndrewR
    @Russ

    Odd coincidence. My cousin's son was named Liam and now he identifies as a woman named Lia. He is 21 (the same age as Will/Lia Thomas), and he has a brother named Thomas.

    , @Henry's Cat
    @Russ

    The Mail article gives the NCAA times for metres, whereas those races are in yards. Otherwise, Thomas would be at the Olympics.

    , @Alfa158
    @Russ

    The thing preventing the extinction of women’s sports is that the few men who decide that they are actually women come from the lower performance level of men’s sports. They seem to be guys who finished 53rd in their sport at the try-outs for the US Olympic team, except for Bruce Jenner who did it long after his career was over, so they haven’t yet simply driven real women out of competition.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

  8. Army Fitness Test Made More Rigorous, Most Army Women Can’t Pass

    That’s no fair!

  9. If women soldiers convert to Islam before joining the next Middle East invasion they should be safe from the enemy

  10. Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I’m concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.

    Anyhow, women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don’t require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    • Agree: Cking
    • Disagree: Mike Tre
    • Replies: @HammerJack
    @Zachary Smith


    Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.
     
    Now that we have cultural leaders like Stacey Abrams and Roxane Gay setting the tone, the new plan for the military is just to sit on our enemies until they capitulate.
    , @74v56ruthiyj
    @Zachary Smith

    Have you ever changed the tracks on a tank? Humped 105 or nowadays 120mm shells? Tankers need to be strong.

    Replies: @Blodgie

    , @International Jew
    @Zachary Smith


    women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank.
     
    What about hoisting wounded crew members out of the tank?
    What about loading rounds for the gun?

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Wielgus

    , @martin_2
    @Zachary Smith


    lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.
     
    This is naive. Its not fat that makes people fat, its refined carbohydrate. People lose weight on a high fat low carbohydrate diet.

    Replies: @S. Anonyia, @Stealth

    , @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @Zachary Smith

    American tanks have had significantly higher rates of fire off the main gun compared to their Russian/Chinese counterparts because we found a buff, dumb dude could reload 120mm smoothbore DU discarding sabot rounds a hell of a lot faster 2-3x faster) than the equivalent Russian clockwork auto loader set ups. Having a really strong man as the loader also precluded having to encircle the entire turret ring with ready rounds for the auto loader, and that's a nice plus because that unprotected ammo is the main reason you see T-72s throw their turrets explosively when hit, whereas Abrams ammo is protected behind isolated blow out compartments.

    Busting and changing track is back-breaking work that requires tremendous physical strength as well, and just loading dozens of heavy ass 120mm rounds boxes and boxes of .50 up from ground level and into the turret is no picnic.

    Tankers have significantly more use cases for pure strength than infantrymen, so a woman would be at even greater disadvantage in an armor unit than with the legs.

    Replies: @El Dato

    , @guest007
    @Zachary Smith

    One of the issues with the old physical fitness test is not the passing score but the unofficial requirement that infantry and the like max the text. The two mile run was easy for black soldiers to pass but hard for them to max. The changes to a six even test was suppose to help younger black soldiers. However, the inclusion of the two mile run still hurts them.

    The Army also a an issue with the old test when they change the scoring criteria to require women to do as many sit up as men and shorten the time to pass the two mile run.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    , @David Davenport
    @Zachary Smith

    the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.

    You don't know what you're talking about. Hope you choke a low fat, on a high carbohydrate diet.

    Anyhow, women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank.

    M1 Abrams tanks don't have autoloaders. A human inside the turret has to load the ammunition into the main gun.

    https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/tank-ammunition/

    , @raga10
    @Zachary Smith


    There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don’t require physical strength. Put the women there.
     
    I agree! Certainly the ability to throw medicine balls is crucial in modern warfare, but women can still be useful in other areas. Soviets for example put thousands of women into combat roles in WWII as snipers as well as pilots (they had several all-female air units, including fighter squadron). From what I've read they performed adequately; especially the snipers.
  11. The modern U.S. military is a largely a deracination factory and welfare agency.

  12. However, more than half of women are still failing the new exam, according to Army Forces Command data published on military.com. Women in the military have expressed concern that the Army would prioritize physical strength over leadership qualities.

    The “leadership qualities” gap is a hell of a lot bigger than the strength gap. Women have some strength, and no leadership ability whatsoever. But the assessment of leadership qualities is subjective, so the women prefer to be judged on that.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @ben tillman

    There are a handful (and I stress, a handful) who could be useful in some capacity. But to winnow out the ones who won't cause drama, won't get pregnant to dodge their duties, won't hide behind their gender to excuse lackluster performance or character, etc. would require high entrance requirements and high standards of accountability for those who make it. By all honest accounts over the last couple decades male personel end up working harder to compensate for deficient performance among the women, and plenty of women end up getting pregnant on purpose in order to basically go on a glorified vacation.

    Anyway, I personally have never been good at push-ups. I've been doing literal heavy lifting at my job for years*, building up good core strength, but still I struggle with push ups. So I guess to be better at push-ups, just do more push-ups (and if that's true than what practical strength do they really measure)? I'm fairly thin for a 21st century American but I guess losing 20 lbs or so would make the push ups a lot easier (and as a matter of fact the special forces often select for a wiry build due to the emphasis on grueling protracted fitness tests that would kill burly guys).

    *Ever notice that working stiffs generally don't look like fitness models? Pure practical strength required to do these jobs generally doesn't lead to an impressive physique unless one starves oneself (and those working outdoors in colder climates are probably better off with a decent layer of fat anyway). The model physique is largely reserved for Upper Class people who spend lots of time at the gym and avoid carbs, beer, and soda (those who actually do manual labor don't have enough energy left to spend hours at the gym).

    Replies: @Old Prude

  13. We know the drill, they will water down the test difficulty until the desired percentage of females pass. The Army is largely a jobs program anyway, not a war-winning organization, outside of specialized groups like Rangers etc .

    • Agree: AndrewR
    • Replies: @AnotherDad
    @Mike_from_SGV


    The Army is largely a jobs program anyway, not a war-winning organization, outside of specialized groups like Rangers etc .
     
    The security of the US requires only:
    -- the nuclear deterrent and related technology--including R+D--to keep it capable

    -- a navy that can do required anti-smuggling, anti-piracy and sea lane policing operations--and technology to keep it capable

    -- a few hundred thousand ground pounders hunting and killing border invaders until Trump's Wall is built ... and then once that's done the corresponding Wall at the northern border to keep out the hordes from their as Canada--sadly--turns itself into a globoslum

    Women add basically zero value on any of this.
  14. anonymous[167] • Disclaimer says:

    How much of combat is about infantry? Are other areas going to become much important like air defense? In 2020, Iran was able to fire missiles at US bases in Iraq and the bases looked defenseless. Sadly, it’s likely there will be an Iran War within 10 years so air defense is something that needs work and qualified people. For those with military experience, would an air defense unit filled with smart but physically weak people do better than the same unit with not as smart people who are physically strong?

    • Replies: @Cool Daddy Jimbo
    @anonymous

    "For those with military experience, would an air defense unit filled with smart but physically weak people do better than the same unit with not as smart people who are physically strong?"

    In a word, no. Everything about the military is physical. Air defense? You just push buttons, right? No. You dig foxholes. You fill thousands of sandbags. You load and unload equipment. You bury cables. You dig latrines. When the air raid siren goes off, you run, and dive into one of the foxholes. The physical work never ends.

    Replies: @SteveRogers42

    , @Sick 'n Tired
    @anonymous

    Long gone are the days of mass ground wars that require storming a beach like Normandy, or charging up a hill thru machine gun fire like Iwo Jima or in Vietnam. Today's wars are fought with satellites, drones, guided missiles, shelling from warships, carpet bombing, then the ground troops move in and establish control. In another 20 years the military will consist of human soldiers controlling armed Boston Dynamics robots like a video game on the other side of the world from some base in Nevada.

  15. Women in the military are primarily for logistics and administrative support. Women are not seriously considered for combat positions at all, in any respect (well, maybe as pilots). This fitness report is really much ado about nothing because the military will find a way to keep pushing large amounts of women into these non-combat related positions.

    Just think, if you were a seasoned combat soldier, would you want a woman next to you if you were going up to fight against Russia, China or Islamic terrorists? The answer is obvious . . .

    • Replies: @Tony massey
    @PaceLaw

    in the most recent conflicts their were no front lines and enemy positions were never exactly fixed.
    The enemy didn't even have uniforms lest they happen to be wearing the one you were or one among the coalition of the willing.
    Think 88 mike. Truck driver. They got hit coming and going. Often. KBR said fuck that shit and the military had to deliver its own fucking shit once real legitimate hostilities broke out of which it was very fluid as to which group specifically was hostile to your convoy and you may never see them on the field of battle(a highway) again.
    Other examples are rife.
    Less than 3% during the most recent conflicts even pulled a trigger and moar often than not it was not in pitched battle to win some piece of prized turf. Nope. Usually just drive-bys. Lots of hand waving in general usually followed up with a few potshots(maybe a roadside ka-boom tough break that)and then just the same fucking noise you ALWAYS hear.
    And if a real trigger puller is needing moar rounds so he can keep derping that trigger what fucking diff does it make to him what the gender of the soldier bringing it is? Believe me boyo those non combatants are getting lifted up to their makers just like those combatants.

  16. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Actually, Napoleon was of average height for a man of his era. French inches were larger than British ones and British propaganda found it convenient to call him small.
    And if he was the greatest general of the last 500 years, perhaps his opinion of the importance of height in the military is relevant. He prized height and surrounded himself by tall officers. So, your example doesn’t do what you suppose it does.

    • Agree: byrresheim, Getaclue
  17. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Napoleon was 5’4″, not short for a Frenchman of his time. And he had great physical endurance, at least when he was younger. By the time of Waterloo, he had declined.

    • Replies: @dearieme
    @74v56ruthiyj

    not short for a Frenchman of his time

    Yeah, but how short was it for an Italian of his time (which is what he was after all).

  18. @Peterike
    “ we need to get data to make informed decisions.”

    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Moses

    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?

    Oh, that’s bad data. We’re talking about good data.

  19. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.

    Now that we have cultural leaders like Stacey Abrams and Roxane Gay setting the tone, the new plan for the military is just to sit on our enemies until they capitulate.

  20. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    Have you ever changed the tracks on a tank? Humped 105 or nowadays 120mm shells? Tankers need to be strong.

    • Thanks: Seminumerical
    • Replies: @Blodgie
    @74v56ruthiyj

    No, I’ve never changed tracks on a tank or charged a machine gun nest on command or signed my life away to be controlled by a corrupt government.

    Because I’m not a clueless fool with a subconscious death wish and latent blood lust.

  21. @JimDandy
    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @Reg Cæsar, @Ben tillman, @Possumman

    Absolutely spot on! More “women” who can do feats of masculine strength without much effort. This would be an absolutely superb recommendation, but for the fact that trans women are insane.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    @PaceLaw

    It would enable our armed forces to increase the number of suicide missions.

    Replies: @PaceLaw

  22. @ben tillman

    However, more than half of women are still failing the new exam, according to Army Forces Command data published on military.com. Women in the military have expressed concern that the Army would prioritize physical strength over leadership qualities.
     
    The "leadership qualities" gap is a hell of a lot bigger than the strength gap. Women have some strength, and no leadership ability whatsoever. But the assessment of leadership qualities is subjective, so the women prefer to be judged on that.

    Replies: @Feryl

    There are a handful (and I stress, a handful) who could be useful in some capacity. But to winnow out the ones who won’t cause drama, won’t get pregnant to dodge their duties, won’t hide behind their gender to excuse lackluster performance or character, etc. would require high entrance requirements and high standards of accountability for those who make it. By all honest accounts over the last couple decades male personel end up working harder to compensate for deficient performance among the women, and plenty of women end up getting pregnant on purpose in order to basically go on a glorified vacation.

    Anyway, I personally have never been good at push-ups. I’ve been doing literal heavy lifting at my job for years*, building up good core strength, but still I struggle with push ups. So I guess to be better at push-ups, just do more push-ups (and if that’s true than what practical strength do they really measure)? I’m fairly thin for a 21st century American but I guess losing 20 lbs or so would make the push ups a lot easier (and as a matter of fact the special forces often select for a wiry build due to the emphasis on grueling protracted fitness tests that would kill burly guys).

    *Ever notice that working stiffs generally don’t look like fitness models? Pure practical strength required to do these jobs generally doesn’t lead to an impressive physique unless one starves oneself (and those working outdoors in colder climates are probably better off with a decent layer of fat anyway). The model physique is largely reserved for Upper Class people who spend lots of time at the gym and avoid carbs, beer, and soda (those who actually do manual labor don’t have enough energy left to spend hours at the gym).

    • Replies: @Old Prude
    @Feryl

    If the medicine ball throw is anything like the overhanded basket ball throw required to qualify for acceptance to West Point in the 80's, then its highly discriminatory against anyone with small hands.

    I think push-ups and sprints are fairly body-type neutral in regards to results. Pull ups definitely favor small folks.

    I don't know what was wrong with the old APFT. This change of tests strikes me as justification to keep staff officers busy, like changing the camo patterns every few years.

  23. Core strength is not correlated with the capacity to accomplish the U.S. Army’s core mission of crushing core Americans.

    Remember, it’s not just a job (Corps) – it’s beyond peradventure a genocide!

    Skirting the Issue of “Fetishists in Frocks,”
    Admiral Rachel “Ted” Levine

    CC:
    U.S. Army Corps of Social Engineers
    Barack “Corpse-Man” Obama
    iSteve Commenter Buffalo “Bill” Joe

    • LOL: Charles
    • Replies: @Charles
    @reactionry

    Speaking of the Corps or a corpse, years ago I really and truly heard a TV reporter refer to the French cosmetics company L'Oreal as "lor-reel".

  24. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank.

    What about hoisting wounded crew members out of the tank?
    What about loading rounds for the gun?

    • Replies: @kaganovitch
    @International Jew

    What about hoisting wounded crew members out of the tank?

    Well, for high status women in Politics like Patsy Schroeder and Margaret Chase Smith the matter of vital national importance here is whether General Jane Doe - who could have been me had I chosen to serve the public by joining the Military rather than Politics!- gets 1 star or two stars. Whether wounded tanker Stevie Grunt lives or dies,on the other hand, meh whatever. From the sociopathic viewpoint of certain politicians it makes good sense.

    , @Wielgus
    @International Jew

    Many modern tanks have automatic loaders, which is just as well considering how much the shells weigh.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

  25. @Russ
    Will Thomas swam three years for Penn; this year, as Lia Thomas s/he's breaking women's swimming records. Surely Lia would do fine with the new testing (while this gender dysphoria rages).

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10266627/Fury-unfair-competition-trans-swimmer-smashing-womens-records.html

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Henry's Cat, @Alfa158

    Odd coincidence. My cousin’s son was named Liam and now he identifies as a woman named Lia. He is 21 (the same age as Will/Lia Thomas), and he has a brother named Thomas.

  26. After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?

  27. @JimDandy
    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @Reg Cæsar, @Ben tillman, @Possumman

    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

    Tell that to Selective Service. They do not recognize “trans women”. Possibly the last US agency that doesn’t.

    “Lia” Thomas still has almost four years of having to notify SSS of any address change. Assuming “she” is registered at all– but a guy needs that to get financial aid.

    By the way, I thought sports officials were against drugs.

    • Replies: @JimDandy
    @Reg Cæsar

    It has never been more confusing to be a young female athlete than it is today. If an athletically-inclined girl came to me today asking for advice, I would strongly urge her to get into wrestling, become a trans boy, and move to a state that requires wrestlers to only wrestle people of the same biological sex. That way (s)he can take powerful testosterone supplements while wrestling adolescent girls who are not allowed to take any performance-enhancing substances of any kind. What's more, no matter what school is hosting a meet, (s)he will always have something of a home field advantage as anyone caught booing her/sher will be doxxed and destroyed. Anyway, that's just a little life-hack that can provide young female athletes with the winning edge!

  28. @Peterike
    “ we need to get data to make informed decisions.”

    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?

    Replies: @HammerJack, @Moses

    But data is both racist and sexist. What to do?

    What they always do. Ignore it.

  29. @usNthem
    Women will never be up to rigorous strength physicality vs men and you sure as hell don’t want them in leadership positions. How about KP duty?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Tony massey

    Agreed with this and Ben Tillman’s comment.

    However, Mke_from_SGV best states how it actually works.

  30. The ulterior motive behind this test is to create something that would shut down all informal opposition to women being promoted to high rank (it’s not even about “unit integration” per se). It is to the Army’s credit I suppose that they haven’t been able to square this (impossible) circle by e.g. making the test so easy that anyone could pass it.

    By the way, the Army already eliminated the old test in 2020 and the new one still is not officially in effect. So, they will actually have go about two years without any physical fitness test at all (there are still bodyfat % standards, at least).

    As far as I can tell, they will probably gender-norm the test while going out of their way to obfuscate the degree of difference, something that cannot be done with the completely transparent age-and-gender standards for the old test.

    “Leadership qualities” and “technical skills” are, of course, not exactly evenly distributed among the sexes (especially since one of the technical skills that the Army is most vocal about is software development) but they are far more subjective, and it’s thus much easier to hide the pro-female discrimination required to promote the desired number of women.

    • Replies: @guest007
    @ivvenalis

    There was always complaints that the body fat (tape test) was unfair to black women since the tables were designed using data collected from white female college students.

    , @Mr. Anon
    @ivvenalis


    By the way, the Army already eliminated the old test in 2020 and the new one still is not officially in effect. So, they will actually have go about two years without any physical fitness test at all (there are still bodyfat % standards, at least).
     
    Or perhaps, in the hiatus, they'll simply determine that no tests are required anyway. Just as many universities are now doing away with the SAT. Maybe recruits could submit an essay about physical fitness and they'll call it good enough.
    , @SteveRogers42
    @ivvenalis

    They still run the old APFT for the record and where the equipment is available, they run the new ACFT to establish baseline metrics.

  31. China is laughing at America.

    • Replies: @Peter Akuleyev
    @Mina Horowitz

    China isn't laughing, they are terrified they are in the same situation. China's younger generation is filled with spoiled only-children, the "little emperor syndrome", who are completely unfit for military service. Hence the sudden emphasis on trying to get boys to man up and stop idolizing femmy South Korean pop singers. Will it work? Maybe. Or maybe far too late.

    Meanwhile Serbia actually is laughing at us. Now there is a country with real men who enjoy drinking, hunting, fixing cars, lifting weights and gambling. Some enterprising Serb should really start a "Serbian Manliness Camp" - could probably get great business both from China and from worried Americans.

    Replies: @JMcG, @El Dato

  32. Anonymous[130] • Disclaimer says:
    @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Napoleon was slightly above average height for men at the time and had served in the French artillery, a physically demanding role.

    Furthermore, he wasn’t the “greatest general of the past 500 years”, wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.

    • Agree: LondonBob
    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Anonymous


    Furthermore, he wasn’t the “greatest general of the past 500 years”, wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmSQriq0zTc

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/defence-and-security-blog/2015/jun/09/waterloo-a-german-victory

    Waterloo: A German victory?

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Alden, @Old Prude

    , @Hapalong Cassidy
    @Anonymous

    Wellington beating Napoleon was sort of like Leon Spinks beating Muhammad Ali. If there was a contestant for better general of the last 500 years, the only one who comes close might be Georgy Zhukov during WW2.

    Replies: @LondonBob

  33. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    People always focus on Napoleon’s stature, but if you were to judge from his death mask (he died at 52) the man had facial features that generally signify high testosterone and a certain vigor. He was certainly no pajama boy. He may not have carried many wounded men from the battlefield, but there’s little doubt that he could have.

    Shortness does not mean physically unfit. Have you ever seen a male gymnast?

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Wilkey

    Napoleon was not short.

    https://www.history.com/news/napoleon-complex-short

    Was Napoleon Short? Origins of the 'Napoleon Complex'

  34. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.

    This is naive. Its not fat that makes people fat, its refined carbohydrate. People lose weight on a high fat low carbohydrate diet.

    • Agree: Ben tillman
    • Replies: @S. Anonyia
    @martin_2

    This is modern junk science. Notice that high fat low carb diets are more popular than ever, and yet people are fatter than ever.

    I’m not saying high carb is the solution...but weight loss is all about physical exercise (especially cardio, the idea you can get fit through weightlifting alone is delusional) and creating a calorie deficit. Calories in vs. calories out.

    High fat foods have lots of calories just like sugary high carb foods. You’d have to eat extremely small portions to lose weight on a high fat diet. Some people succeed with the portion control which is why keto type diets work for a small percentage of the population. Doesn’t work for most though.

    Replies: @Anon

    , @Stealth
    @martin_2

    Yes, eating large amounts of fat while consuming a surplus of calories indeed makes people fat. People lose weight on a law carbohydrate diet because they are either in ketosis or consuming vastly fewer calories than before.

  35. @anonymous
    This is silly. Men are going to be outmatched on the ACFT 3.0, just look at the the top results of this relevant internet search:

    Biden: There Isn’t A ‘Single Thing A Man Can Do’ That A Woman Can’t Do Better
     
    https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/24/joe-biden-equal-pay-day-women/

    Judy Murray: Anything men can do, women can do better
     
    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/anything-men-can-do-we-can-do-better-like-running-the-world/

    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!
     
    https://www.drphil.com/shows/1624/

    Women are better than men at everything
     
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/women-are-better-than-men-at-everything-thats-why-men-should-do-the-engineering

    Replies: @El Dato, @Wade Hampton, @AnotherDad, @SteveRogers42

    The Nature paper tells us that women are better, as measured by those school grades, than men at everything. This is, as with all these discussions, about population averages and is no guide whatsoever to the skills, interests, or talents of an individual. Nor is it a guide to what choices any one person should make either. Women are also better, or their advantage over men is greater, in non-STEM subjects than in STEM.

    If this is so, and we add our Ricardo on trade knowledge to it, what do we get?

    Men are less bad at STEM than they are at everything else. Women are better at everything, that’s absolute advantage, but they’re that greater better at non-STEM, the comparative advantage. Thus men should be doing the STEM, women the non-STEM, and we’ll swap the results and that’s how we’ll all become collectively better off.

    Oh yeah, good idea. Men do the STEM and women carry the burden of HR. Sorted!

    I remember all those times I had physics & math explained to me by girls in the specialization years of high school.

    • Replies: @Feryl
    @El Dato

    Male brains take 4-5 years longer to develop than female brains. That's a big reason for the grade gap. Assuming a guy goes to college when he's 18-22, that means he's a Senior when he's still got 4 years to mature, while the typical female 22 year old is 90-100% developed.

    Another reason for the grade gap is that males born since the mid-1960's have spent large amounts of their time playing video games, watching MTV, dawdling on the internet, etc. while girls are better mentally at juggling distractions and applying oneself. To the typical young dude, burying oneself in studies is just not appealing given the amount of stimulation one gets from post-1980 media. And most young guys are too immature to appreciate the harm they are doing to themselves by not focusing on studies. Imagine how much easier things were for young males when there was just one TV in the family room, no video games, no cable TV, no internet, etc.

    Post 1980 is also when the West became hyper individualistic and competitive, but females are more socially conformist so they soaked in this mentality and started studying harder, going to college at higher rates, etc. It's been males who are more likely to stubbornly refuse to get with this program. Back in the New Deal era of circa 1930-1979, the working and middle class did just fine at having families and maintaining "respectability". But since 1980 we've seen stuff like like the "slacker" and incel culture take off. Gen X and subsequent generations of young males have been plagued by an ever increasing sense of isolation from the high achievers within their generation, while the communal stability of the working and middle class has been shredded. The Breakfast Club, from way back in 1985, understood this. The kids feel lots of pressure from their parents and within their clique, while feeling alienated from the other cliques and the familial backgrounds they are associated with. The poor kid resents the rich kid, the nerd thinks everyone else is stupid, the jock thinks the nerds are weak, etc.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive

  36. @Wilkey
    @Zero Philosopher


    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.
     
    People always focus on Napoleon’s stature, but if you were to judge from his death mask (he died at 52) the man had facial features that generally signify high testosterone and a certain vigor. He was certainly no pajama boy. He may not have carried many wounded men from the battlefield, but there’s little doubt that he could have.

    Shortness does not mean physically unfit. Have you ever seen a male gymnast?

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Napoleon was not short.

    https://www.history.com/news/napoleon-complex-short

    Was Napoleon Short? Origins of the ‘Napoleon Complex’

  37. @Anonymous
    @Zero Philosopher


    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.
     
    Napoleon was slightly above average height for men at the time and had served in the French artillery, a physically demanding role.

    Furthermore, he wasn't the "greatest general of the past 500 years", wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @Hapalong Cassidy

    Furthermore, he wasn’t the “greatest general of the past 500 years”, wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/defence-and-security-blog/2015/jun/09/waterloo-a-german-victory

    Waterloo: A German victory?

    • Thanks: mc23
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Wellington defeated every one of Napoleon's Marshals, then he defeated Napoleon himself. Napoleon, nor his Marshals ever defeated Wellington in battle. Not losing, or avoiding battle, is often much more important than victory, as one catastrophic defeat can wipe out all victories. The Battle of Zama wiped out all Hannibal's victories, for example.

    , @Alden
    @Bardon Kaldian

    Waterloo was a German, actually Prussian victory under General Blucher???? Something like that. Every historian knows that. Except for the British chauvinists and ignorant Americans afflicted with what Mark Twain called Walter Scott disease.

    Much of the medieval early modern and right up to 1939 warfare in Europe was instigated by England. For the purposes of preventing the fractious warlords from overthrowing the current King , loot and ransom.

    , @Old Prude
    @Bardon Kaldian

    "German Victory?" Blucher deserves some credit for the win at Waterloo...

  38. Anonymous[130] • Disclaimer says:

    That reminds me of this tale: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5775737/First-woman-join-infantry-regiment-quits-two-weeks.html

    The recruit dropped out of an 18-week course this month after falling behind her male counterparts on endurance marches and failing other physical tests at a training base in Suffolk.

    It is understood that when the woman resigned, she admitted having underestimated the physical requirements of being an infantry recruit.

    … many commanders fear that women are incapable of withstanding the rigours of infantry training, in particular the requirement to carry heavy equipment and weapons over long distances.

    Note that British Army training involves an unusually large amount of long distance forced marches. Previous experience in war has convinced the army command that you cannot rely on vehicles to move troops reliably as they either end up at the bottom of the Atlantic (Falklands) or the duct tape holding them together dries out in the sun (Iraq) or they make easy IED targets (Afghanistan). There are few men that are capable of maintaining this level of fitness and, up to now, no women at all.

    Now, it should be noted that the lady in question was trying to join the RAF regiment, a force whose task is airfield defence and is always mentioned in scornful tones by British Army regiments.

    • Thanks: The Wild Geese Howard
    • Replies: @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it's extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    ... but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It's crazy. Do they have elephants' feet?

    Replies: @Mike Tre, @mikeInThe716, @Buffalo Joe, @reactionry, @Sick 'n Tired

    , @Jack D
    @Anonymous

    What's impressive about army marches is not just the distances involved but the amount of stuff that they have to carry. 100 lb. loads and more are not uncommon.

    Patton said that no soldier should be compelled to walk until he actually enters battle. From that point forward he should carry nothing but what he wears, his ammunition, his rations and his toilet articles. I think Patton is right - humans are not mules and the tendency is to overload modern troops and make them walk too far carrying too much stuff.

    https://legionathletics.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/10.1.1.214.8896.pdf

    In the future (I hope) infantry will be accompanied by robot pack mules who will carry all the heavy stuff.

    https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/13E9A/production/_87426518_131107-m-rp886-001.jpg

    The photo is "Big Dog" , circa 2004, who was shelved due to noise concerns but future robots could be made quieter.

    PS if I was walking thru a minefield, Big Dog would walk in front of me.

    Replies: @Joe Stalin

    , @YetAnotherAnon
    @Anonymous

    "The most famous yomp of recent times was during the 1982 Falklands War. After disembarking from ships at San Carlos on East Falkland, on 21 May 1982, Royal Marines and members of the Parachute Regiment yomped (and tabbed) with their equipment across the islands, covering 56 miles (90 km) in three days carrying 80-pound (36 kg) loads. They were supposed to be transported by helicopters, but after the Atlantic Conveyor, which carried the helicopters, was sunk by Argentinian Exocet missiles on 25 May, the soldiers had to march across the island."

    56 miles over rough country in 3 days is good going when you are carrying only your food and water for one day, and have a beer, a shower, a meal, clean socks and a cosy bed waiting each evening. Doing that carrying 80lbs, and sleeping in your clothes in the open each night, is pretty impressive, and when all those (literal - soldiers do sometimes die of exhaustion, though the Army try to avoid it) death marches over the Brecon Beacons or Dartmoor come into their own.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yomp

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_march

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  39. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Napoleon was of normal height for men of that era. The stories of him being extra short were started by the British to demoralize the French and make the English feel superior.

  40. @Russ
    Will Thomas swam three years for Penn; this year, as Lia Thomas s/he's breaking women's swimming records. Surely Lia would do fine with the new testing (while this gender dysphoria rages).

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10266627/Fury-unfair-competition-trans-swimmer-smashing-womens-records.html

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Henry's Cat, @Alfa158

    The Mail article gives the NCAA times for metres, whereas those races are in yards. Otherwise, Thomas would be at the Olympics.

  41. Here is webm:

    I would certainly fail a couple of those with my geek frame.

  42. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    American tanks have had significantly higher rates of fire off the main gun compared to their Russian/Chinese counterparts because we found a buff, dumb dude could reload 120mm smoothbore DU discarding sabot rounds a hell of a lot faster 2-3x faster) than the equivalent Russian clockwork auto loader set ups. Having a really strong man as the loader also precluded having to encircle the entire turret ring with ready rounds for the auto loader, and that’s a nice plus because that unprotected ammo is the main reason you see T-72s throw their turrets explosively when hit, whereas Abrams ammo is protected behind isolated blow out compartments.

    Busting and changing track is back-breaking work that requires tremendous physical strength as well, and just loading dozens of heavy ass 120mm rounds boxes and boxes of .50 up from ground level and into the turret is no picnic.

    Tankers have significantly more use cases for pure strength than infantrymen, so a woman would be at even greater disadvantage in an armor unit than with the legs.

    • Thanks: The Wild Geese Howard
    • Replies: @El Dato
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    That's interesting. In a normal world, one would would expect the Russians to adopt the "Ivan does it" approach and the Americans to adopt the "Autoloader(tm) does it" approach instead.

    I suppose the Russian side wanted to optimize something here ... overall height of tank maybe?

    Replies: @El Dato, @Alfa158, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

  43. Don’t fight for an empire that hates your guts and literally wants you dead or in a concentration camp.

  44. @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @Zachary Smith

    American tanks have had significantly higher rates of fire off the main gun compared to their Russian/Chinese counterparts because we found a buff, dumb dude could reload 120mm smoothbore DU discarding sabot rounds a hell of a lot faster 2-3x faster) than the equivalent Russian clockwork auto loader set ups. Having a really strong man as the loader also precluded having to encircle the entire turret ring with ready rounds for the auto loader, and that's a nice plus because that unprotected ammo is the main reason you see T-72s throw their turrets explosively when hit, whereas Abrams ammo is protected behind isolated blow out compartments.

    Busting and changing track is back-breaking work that requires tremendous physical strength as well, and just loading dozens of heavy ass 120mm rounds boxes and boxes of .50 up from ground level and into the turret is no picnic.

    Tankers have significantly more use cases for pure strength than infantrymen, so a woman would be at even greater disadvantage in an armor unit than with the legs.

    Replies: @El Dato

    That’s interesting. In a normal world, one would would expect the Russians to adopt the “Ivan does it” approach and the Americans to adopt the “Autoloader(tm) does it” approach instead.

    I suppose the Russian side wanted to optimize something here … overall height of tank maybe?

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @El Dato

    Sadly one cannot edit posts later, but I just thought of this superflatty made in Sweden:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

    It is optimized for low profile to a degree that it doesn't even have a turret. But it has an autoloader. Crew of 3: Commander, gunner/driver, rear driver.

    , @Alfa158
    @El Dato

    The new Russian T-14 tank doesn’t even have anyone in the turret. The crew is in a heavily armored compartment in the hull. The improves crew survivability, allows the turret to be more compact, and the auto loading machinery can operate faster without the risk of maiming a crew member who got in the way.

    , @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @El Dato

    Yes, they certainly did, they have always been more concerned about tank height than us (which is weird, since doctrinally the US expected to be fighting hull down in prepared positions in an active defense, while the Russians were advancing pell-mell to get into range to "grab our belt buckle". So you would think we would care a lot more about profile than them, but apparently not.)

    The biggest reason for the autoloader though was that you can eliminate one crewman, so you can field more tanks for your total population of tankers. Remember the USSR was 100% all-in mechanized and considered overwhelming armored vehicle hull numerical superiority to be key. Hell, the ENTIRE Red Army had literally zero light infantry units, only heavy mechanized, until the late 1980s.

    Also the US Army was using volunteers and expecting their tankers to do a fair amount of their own maintenance on the vehicle, so having an additional guy helps to get everything done. The USSR was using conscripts who it was not really worthwhile to train in any kind of advanced maintenance, so all their overhauls and even more minor repairs had to be done by special recovery units, since you had short training cycles, and wanted to field as many tanks as possible.

    The USA also had to get our counterpunch tanks across the Atlantic before West Germany folded to a Warsaw Pact assault so, assumably learning from the severe mauling US M4s took from the Nazi "Big Cats" in the invasion of Europe we figured an exquisite tank, with a larger and much more trained crew was the best option when you had limited sealift capacity and a small time window to operate in.

    Sorry for the wall of text, I find the US vs USSR approaches to the same problems really interesting as both sides are quite logical and well thought out, but they came to very different conclusions. I have a lot of admiration for the men on both sides, even the Soviets who were trying to make things happen with a bunch of disadvantages and still really made a 9-inning game out of it.

    , @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @El Dato

    Also, there is always a trade off between internal volume and overall mass for a tank. Once mass reaches a certain point you have to either sacrifice mobility or protection, (the ternary diagram of all tank design is mobility, protection, and firepower). Adding another crew member significantly increases the required total volume, so by using an autoloader the Russians could make more tanks (because each required less steel) and provide them all with more armor and greater power to weight ratio than a roomy western tank. If you want to put a steep slope on the armor (always a good idea) than the mass constraints of a roomy tank become really, really severe. That's one of the big problems the King Tiger ran into in WW2. This isn't a new bias by the Americans: during WW2 the slope of armor on our Shermans significantly decreased from 1941-1945. We have always had a strong emphasis on "fightability", basically ergonomics where the T-34 didn't even have a turret basket or seats(!).

    Those aren't negligible advantages in favor of the autoloader, and in many cases totally obviate the rate of fire advantage you get from having a single-digit ASVAB scorer loading the cannon. In fact, from 1962-1980, USSR tanks were projected by NATO as being clearly superior to our own vehicles in both the tactical and strategic sense, and the only hope the ground combat element had against Soviet armor would come from AGTM equipped infantry and suicidally bold A-10 AH-1 and AH-64 air interdiction against armor columns. The Russian paradigm was superior by even our own analysis.

    That only changed with the Abrams after 3-4 failed programs to address the issue. And Abrams had a bunch of voodoo black magic that allowed it to overcome in the internal volume problem. British Burlington armor was mated with DU laminate to give superior armor protection even with less thickness and slope, the Chrysler Gas Turbine gave the tank an excellent power to weight ratio despite it's huge mass, and the thermal sights+autostabilizer+105mm (later 120mm) main gun with DU sabots gave superior trajectory and terminal effects. The only way we finally validated our doctrine was by merging these three very exotic technologies, which was by no means easy or assured and almost failed many times. Still, even with voodoo DARPA magic, the Abrams gets about the same gas mileage as the IJN Yamato sailing upwind. We figured we could get away with that due to interior lines of supply and the natural logistical advantage of the defender. Still, for most of the Cold War, the USSR theories were vindicated.

    Replies: @El Dato, @74v56ruthiyj

  45. @Anonymous
    That reminds me of this tale: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5775737/First-woman-join-infantry-regiment-quits-two-weeks.html

    The recruit dropped out of an 18-week course this month after falling behind her male counterparts on endurance marches and failing other physical tests at a training base in Suffolk.

    It is understood that when the woman resigned, she admitted having underestimated the physical requirements of being an infantry recruit.
     

    ... many commanders fear that women are incapable of withstanding the rigours of infantry training, in particular the requirement to carry heavy equipment and weapons over long distances.
     
    Note that British Army training involves an unusually large amount of long distance forced marches. Previous experience in war has convinced the army command that you cannot rely on vehicles to move troops reliably as they either end up at the bottom of the Atlantic (Falklands) or the duct tape holding them together dries out in the sun (Iraq) or they make easy IED targets (Afghanistan). There are few men that are capable of maintaining this level of fitness and, up to now, no women at all.

    Now, it should be noted that the lady in question was trying to join the RAF regiment, a force whose task is airfield defence and is always mentioned in scornful tones by British Army regiments.

    Replies: @El Dato, @Jack D, @YetAnotherAnon

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it’s extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    … but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It’s crazy. Do they have elephants’ feet?

    • Replies: @Mike Tre
    @El Dato

    Being able to carry loads over long distances is an ability that requires conditioning. You said sometimes. If I sometimes go to the gym to lift weights, I'm going to get really sore and wonder how other gym goers manage to get so strong.

    Infantrymen get good at marching long distances under heavy packs because they do it everyday. The jungle boots and full leather boots I was issued in the MC were very well suited for it: Hard soles with deep treads and very good ankle support. We used Bates for our dress shoes. Their "combat boot" is more of an urban boot IMO. Cops like them. You see a lot of really expensive hiking boots out there but one thing to factor as well is their weight. Over long distances it's a huge consideration, especially if they get soaked. The military issue boots didn't retain much water relatively speaking, but some of these expensive boots that are really thick and insulated are going to weigh a ton when wet.

    , @mikeInThe716
    @El Dato

    Ex enlisted Mech Infantry, 87-91 (Gulf War Vet) here.


    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It’s crazy. Do they have elephants’ feet?
     
    Like any other physical task, you slowly build up. Your feet become accustomed to longer and longer marches with heavier and heavier packs. It's an amazing transformation when you're young. In Germany, shortly after basic training, I suffered through what we called the 20km "Friedburg Death March". After, I had 1/2 my big toe nail clipped off due to a blister/infection.

    That said, close to 1/5 did not make it through my enlisted basic infantry course in '87. IIRC, half were mentally unsuited, half were physically unsuited. And the physically unsuited half were almost all related to feet/legs.

    Replies: @El Dato

    , @Buffalo Joe
    @El Dato

    El, back in the day, ironworkers grabbed rebars and hoisted them to their shoulders to bring up to a bridge deck. Eight hours of back and forth carrying fifty or sixty pounds of rusty, rough surfaced rods all day and then again the next and next. Not saying it wasn't hard and exhausting, but you get used to it, in all weather by the way. Wear out a pair of boots in a couple of weeks.

    , @reactionry
    @El Dato

    Dearest Darlin' Dato:

    Your feet might suffer less if y'all (H. L. Mencken observed that this second person pronoun can be used in the singular) were to start wearing SOCKS and trimming your LONG, DIRTY TOENAILS.

    Plain But Appealing,
    Laura "Ima-Hogg" Hogue, Esq.
    Brunswick, Georgia

    , @Sick 'n Tired
    @El Dato

    Get an ajustable weight vest, it's more comfortable and natural for your body, you can increase the weight every few weeks. They make them up to 40lbs. After that, add some ankle & wrist weights, wear them and just go about your day, take walks, clean your house, chop wood, do push ups, leg raises, bar hangs, throw punches, hike on the beach, etc. It's a more comfortable and natutal way to work out, and I find I can tolerate it better than just lifting a few sets of weights in a gym. Plus when you take it off after wearing it for a while, you feel much more lighter and energetic that you'll want to go for a jog or do some extra pull ups.

  46. Quotas. Or handicaps. As long as everything is explicit and everyone knows what is going on, I’m O.K. with it. It’s when the obfuscation begins that you have trouble, like with SAT-free college admissions.

  47. Meanwhile in France:

    Differently gendered judo specialists settle their concubinal differences (also, perhaps, “women are into high-T men in spite of danger signs”):

    ‘What was missing, my death?’ Fury in France as judo coach cleared of assaulting female Olympic champ

    A French judo coach accused of domestic violence against his Olympic champion partner has been acquitted in a case which has caused shock and outrage across the nation.

    Alain Schmitt allegedly attacked Tokyo 2020 mixed team gold medalist Margaux Pinot at her flat on the outskirts of Paris last weekend by wrestling her to the floor, verbally abusing her, and punching her and smashing her head on the ground before trying to strangle her.

    Pinot, 27, displayed serious facial injuries and a fractured nose in a social media post and asked: “What was missing? My death at the end, perhaps?”

    Everybody has black eyes, funnily including the lawyer of Monsieur Schmitt (what is it called when you have eyes that are naturally surrounded by dark circles?)

    • Thanks: Achmed E. Newman
    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @El Dato

    "serious facial injuries and a fractured nose"

    Man shouldn't beat women up, indeed people shouldn't beat people up. But the eyes and forehead look like an amateur rugby forward looks after a particularly bruising game.


    This is a serious facial injury, it needed 30 stitches after which the player returned to the field - against the All Blacks.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Evdt6huXAAgyXvM.jpg

  48. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Napoleon was of average height for a man of his time. His alleged “shortness” was part of the British media campaign to discredit him. Also popular at the time in England was a chamber pot with “little Boney’s” portrait in it. This was revived a century later with Hitler taking the place of honor in the pot, and for quite the same reason, British rage that a strong European leader had once again defeated their invading army.

    • Replies: @Ben tillman
    @Observator

    And Hitler also wasn’t short. He was 5’ 11”.

    , @Art Deco
    @Observator

    Don't know how to break it to you, but Hitler did not defeat the Anglo-American army which invaded in June of 1944.

    , @J.Ross
    @Observator

    That chamber pot is counted in the online catalog of anti-Semitic images. Not sure what their reasoning was.
    ---------
    One of the more common motifs is a trio of fur merchants conversing. This appears to have been popular, a meme of its time, and there must have been some joke-story which went along with it.

  49. @El Dato
    @anonymous


    The Nature paper tells us that women are better, as measured by those school grades, than men at everything. This is, as with all these discussions, about population averages and is no guide whatsoever to the skills, interests, or talents of an individual. Nor is it a guide to what choices any one person should make either. Women are also better, or their advantage over men is greater, in non-STEM subjects than in STEM.

    If this is so, and we add our Ricardo on trade knowledge to it, what do we get?

    Men are less bad at STEM than they are at everything else. Women are better at everything, that’s absolute advantage, but they’re that greater better at non-STEM, the comparative advantage. Thus men should be doing the STEM, women the non-STEM, and we’ll swap the results and that’s how we’ll all become collectively better off.
     
    Oh yeah, good idea. Men do the STEM and women carry the burden of HR. Sorted!

    I remember all those times I had physics & math explained to me by girls in the specialization years of high school.

    Replies: @Feryl

    Male brains take 4-5 years longer to develop than female brains. That’s a big reason for the grade gap. Assuming a guy goes to college when he’s 18-22, that means he’s a Senior when he’s still got 4 years to mature, while the typical female 22 year old is 90-100% developed.

    Another reason for the grade gap is that males born since the mid-1960’s have spent large amounts of their time playing video games, watching MTV, dawdling on the internet, etc. while girls are better mentally at juggling distractions and applying oneself. To the typical young dude, burying oneself in studies is just not appealing given the amount of stimulation one gets from post-1980 media. And most young guys are too immature to appreciate the harm they are doing to themselves by not focusing on studies. Imagine how much easier things were for young males when there was just one TV in the family room, no video games, no cable TV, no internet, etc.

    Post 1980 is also when the West became hyper individualistic and competitive, but females are more socially conformist so they soaked in this mentality and started studying harder, going to college at higher rates, etc. It’s been males who are more likely to stubbornly refuse to get with this program. Back in the New Deal era of circa 1930-1979, the working and middle class did just fine at having families and maintaining “respectability”. But since 1980 we’ve seen stuff like like the “slacker” and incel culture take off. Gen X and subsequent generations of young males have been plagued by an ever increasing sense of isolation from the high achievers within their generation, while the communal stability of the working and middle class has been shredded. The Breakfast Club, from way back in 1985, understood this. The kids feel lots of pressure from their parents and within their clique, while feeling alienated from the other cliques and the familial backgrounds they are associated with. The poor kid resents the rich kid, the nerd thinks everyone else is stupid, the jock thinks the nerds are weak, etc.

    • Thanks: El Dato, Calvin Hobbes
    • Replies: @Verymuchalive
    @Feryl


    Post 1980 is also when the West became hyper individualistic and competitive, but
    females are more socially conformist so they soaked in this mentality and started studying harder, going to college at higher rates, etc. It’s been males who are more likely to stubbornly refuse to get with this program.

     
    Mention must be made of the disastrous effect of globalisation and offshoring, particularly since the 1990s. Prior to that, a whole strata of male students had a strong incentive to study hard as it provided entry to technical work and apprenticeships. Now that incentive has gone,as there are far fewer of these jobs. For example, machine tools are a basic and very important sector of any advanced economy. In 1980, America represented 21% of the World's machine tool industry. Now, it's less than 5%.

    As you've written, Females are more socially conformist than males. They continue to go to college at higher rates, even if the end result is a job in a call centre, restaurant or no job at all. Obviously, this can't go on much longer. When the economic collapse occurs later this decade, the whole academic monstrosity will puncture and collapse likewise.
  50. @usNthem
    Women will never be up to rigorous strength physicality vs men and you sure as hell don’t want them in leadership positions. How about KP duty?

    Replies: @Achmed E. Newman, @Tony massey

    Of course i do agree with you.
    Imo the answer to physical fitness, moarso for women but all, is yoga. No membership needed. No equipment necessary. You can do it on the toilet. You don’t need all your appendages. ANYONE can do no matter how fucked up they are…not withstanding certain injuries/paralysis y’all.
    I’ve dated 3 yoga instructors. Again and again over and over i was constantly surprised at the absolute strength those gals possessed. Rock solid core.
    That last one i dated…110 lbs. There’s not a fat out of shape guy out there that could take her. She would show them what’s really ☝. She would always say, it’s the plank Tony it’s the plank. I’m fairly sure she coulda posed in the plank and stared is straight ahead without blinking for longer than any rat could ever tread water, which is about 3 days i hear. Kat would’ve straight up embarrassed alot of men if they thought she was just a little woman. No sir.
    It’s yoga. I’m telling you. I’ve always been fairly strong. I’ve never been a weight lifter(other than just core training) so I’m not competition but…so far as average is concerned that’s what I’m saying… I’m much stronger than your average pasty but these serious yoga folks…I’m telling ya…they have unbelievable strength.
    My friend k is mid 50s and been doing yoga for the last 30 years 5-6 hours per week without fail. She’s mid 50s woman chunky. Not fat. Ya know the sort. I’m telling ya I’m yelling it…kate would put to shame prolly a 1/3 of the fucking Army in a straight up physical fitness test and k…dude…that bitch is fucking strong. The only exercise she has ever done in her adult life is yoga.
    You don’t Fuck with yoga people buddy

    • LOL: SteveRogers42
    • Replies: @ATate
    @Tony massey

    Your unrequited crush on chubby gilf Yoga ladies (love the pants!) clouds your judgement.

    Strong? Sure, for a woman who does an activity 5-6 hours a week.

    Strong enough to beat up a (any) male 18-25? GTFO.

    Your typical Army male, doughy as they may be, would absolutely destroy some 50 year women, no matter how many downward dogs she does. Hell your typical Army male would fuck start the face of your typical 50 year old male.

    Testosterone is a helluva PED.

    Now back to your fevered wet dreams about chunky Kathy and her Hotha practice.

  51. If there is no such thing as race, then why should there be such a thing as gender? Suck it up, GI Janx.

  52. Also…I’ve known many serious yoga people. The ones that took it really really really serious….i wouldn’t bet against those people in any endeavour they set out on.
    I would bet on them. Every time.
    It’s yoga. I try to do it but…eh it just don’t take for me. I like the spandex tho and all the cool mats. I bought an etsu mat just yesterday. Can’t wait to style with that. Yeh i mainly go just to show off my mats and spandex. So?
    Yoga people. You can achieve hard to do shit in life if you truly make it as much a part of your life as breathing. You will succeed. I guarantee it.
    Yoga. It works. It’s like some kinda miracle thing and it doesn’t cost. Anyone can do it pretty much any where.
    And yoga people are generally imo nice conscientious folk.
    Go do yoga and watch your life improve.
    And guys yoga instructors don’t make shit. Most of the money pays for the room and lights you’re doing it in and think of that when you pay your 30-50 buck monthly fees. I always pay double. Just saying ya know. Most aren’t making anything off you. They just like doing it. Pay moar to the really good ones at any rate.

  53. @74v56ruthiyj
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was 5'4", not short for a Frenchman of his time. And he had great physical endurance, at least when he was younger. By the time of Waterloo, he had declined.

    Replies: @dearieme

    not short for a Frenchman of his time

    Yeah, but how short was it for an Italian of his time (which is what he was after all).

  54. @anonymous
    This is silly. Men are going to be outmatched on the ACFT 3.0, just look at the the top results of this relevant internet search:

    Biden: There Isn’t A ‘Single Thing A Man Can Do’ That A Woman Can’t Do Better
     
    https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/24/joe-biden-equal-pay-day-women/

    Judy Murray: Anything men can do, women can do better
     
    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/anything-men-can-do-we-can-do-better-like-running-the-world/

    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!
     
    https://www.drphil.com/shows/1624/

    Women are better than men at everything
     
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/women-are-better-than-men-at-everything-thats-why-men-should-do-the-engineering

    Replies: @El Dato, @Wade Hampton, @AnotherDad, @SteveRogers42

    The immortal Keel and Hutton testify.

  55. @anonymous
    How much of combat is about infantry? Are other areas going to become much important like air defense? In 2020, Iran was able to fire missiles at US bases in Iraq and the bases looked defenseless. Sadly, it's likely there will be an Iran War within 10 years so air defense is something that needs work and qualified people. For those with military experience, would an air defense unit filled with smart but physically weak people do better than the same unit with not as smart people who are physically strong?

    Replies: @Cool Daddy Jimbo, @Sick 'n Tired

    “For those with military experience, would an air defense unit filled with smart but physically weak people do better than the same unit with not as smart people who are physically strong?”

    In a word, no. Everything about the military is physical. Air defense? You just push buttons, right? No. You dig foxholes. You fill thousands of sandbags. You load and unload equipment. You bury cables. You dig latrines. When the air raid siren goes off, you run, and dive into one of the foxholes. The physical work never ends.

    • Replies: @SteveRogers42
    @Cool Daddy Jimbo

    And when the enemy SOF raids the airbase to take out the various assets, the air defense troops have to do that ol' infantry thing:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_2012_raid_on_Camp_Bastion

  56. @reactionry
    Core strength is not correlated with the capacity to accomplish the U.S. Army's core mission of crushing core Americans.

    Remember, it's not just a job (Corps) - it's beyond peradventure a genocide!

    Skirting the Issue of "Fetishists in Frocks,"
    Admiral Rachel "Ted" Levine

    CC:
    U.S. Army Corps of Social Engineers
    Barack "Corpse-Man" Obama
    iSteve Commenter Buffalo "Bill" Joe

    Replies: @Charles

    Speaking of the Corps or a corpse, years ago I really and truly heard a TV reporter refer to the French cosmetics company L’Oreal as “lor-reel”.

  57. @El Dato
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    That's interesting. In a normal world, one would would expect the Russians to adopt the "Ivan does it" approach and the Americans to adopt the "Autoloader(tm) does it" approach instead.

    I suppose the Russian side wanted to optimize something here ... overall height of tank maybe?

    Replies: @El Dato, @Alfa158, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    Sadly one cannot edit posts later, but I just thought of this superflatty made in Sweden:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stridsvagn_103

    It is optimized for low profile to a degree that it doesn’t even have a turret. But it has an autoloader. Crew of 3: Commander, gunner/driver, rear driver.

  58. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Anonymous


    Furthermore, he wasn’t the “greatest general of the past 500 years”, wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmSQriq0zTc

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/defence-and-security-blog/2015/jun/09/waterloo-a-german-victory

    Waterloo: A German victory?

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Alden, @Old Prude

    Wellington defeated every one of Napoleon’s Marshals, then he defeated Napoleon himself. Napoleon, nor his Marshals ever defeated Wellington in battle. Not losing, or avoiding battle, is often much more important than victory, as one catastrophic defeat can wipe out all victories. The Battle of Zama wiped out all Hannibal’s victories, for example.

  59. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Let me guess : You have never been in the military. If you have been in the military , it was not in the combat arms. However, you have seen a lot or garbage out of Hollywood.

  60. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    How do you come to that metric? Eugene of Savoy accomplished quite a lot with far fewer resources. Or look at what Frederick the Great pulled off holding a very weak hand. Napoleon had the advantages of being able to use Europe’s first “popular” army, the ability to select supporting officers by merit not birth and a fairly mediocre set of opponents.

  61. @Mina Horowitz
    China is laughing at America.

    Replies: @Peter Akuleyev

    China isn’t laughing, they are terrified they are in the same situation. China’s younger generation is filled with spoiled only-children, the “little emperor syndrome”, who are completely unfit for military service. Hence the sudden emphasis on trying to get boys to man up and stop idolizing femmy South Korean pop singers. Will it work? Maybe. Or maybe far too late.

    Meanwhile Serbia actually is laughing at us. Now there is a country with real men who enjoy drinking, hunting, fixing cars, lifting weights and gambling. Some enterprising Serb should really start a “Serbian Manliness Camp” – could probably get great business both from China and from worried Americans.

    • Agree: Paul Mendez
    • Replies: @JMcG
    @Peter Akuleyev

    You forgot smoking. I don’t think anyone smokes as much as the Serbs. Maybe my uncle.

    , @El Dato
    @Peter Akuleyev

    As pièce de résistance, you will have to create an edible salad from an area full of american depleted uranium dust.

  62. @Anonymous
    @Zero Philosopher


    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.
     
    Napoleon was slightly above average height for men at the time and had served in the French artillery, a physically demanding role.

    Furthermore, he wasn't the "greatest general of the past 500 years", wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian, @Hapalong Cassidy

    Wellington beating Napoleon was sort of like Leon Spinks beating Muhammad Ali. If there was a contestant for better general of the last 500 years, the only one who comes close might be Georgy Zhukov during WW2.

    • Replies: @LondonBob
    @Hapalong Cassidy

    Napoleon was a dated general, completely neglected logistics and ignored advances in technologies with the impact they had on battle tactics and strategy.

    Claiming Napoleon was a superior general to Wellington is like claiming Lee was a superior general to Grant, what JFC Fuller has to say in that regard equally applies to Napoleon and Wellington. People prefer beautiful losers. WWI and the ACW would have been better fought had the officers conducting those wars instead studied Wellington and Grant rather than their vanquished opponents.

  63. An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill? Obviously medical care positions come to mind, but given the well known differences in personality traits and capabilities between the sexes, are there other roles where the average woman is likely to be a better fit than the average man? I would think spatial reasoning and decision making under duress are key in the overwhelming majority of military jobs and that still argues for men over women wherever possible.

    • Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose
    @Arclight

    Women can make excellent snipers. Haven't heard of any from our recent wars, though, which is curious. You'd think that would be right up the Zeitgeist alley.

    https://owlcation.com/humanities/Deadliest-Female-Snipers-in-History

    I personally know a couple of women who are excellent shots. By any standard.

    , @Art Deco
    @Arclight

    An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill?

    Women in uniform were prior to 1972 assigned to auxilliary corps. Margaret Chase Smith put considerable effort into selling full integration to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Not one of her more admirable projects.

    Replies: @SafeNow

  64. When they hire personal security or the secret service they go for strength and fitness. But our public military is ok to be full of girls playing dress up.

  65. @Feryl
    @El Dato

    Male brains take 4-5 years longer to develop than female brains. That's a big reason for the grade gap. Assuming a guy goes to college when he's 18-22, that means he's a Senior when he's still got 4 years to mature, while the typical female 22 year old is 90-100% developed.

    Another reason for the grade gap is that males born since the mid-1960's have spent large amounts of their time playing video games, watching MTV, dawdling on the internet, etc. while girls are better mentally at juggling distractions and applying oneself. To the typical young dude, burying oneself in studies is just not appealing given the amount of stimulation one gets from post-1980 media. And most young guys are too immature to appreciate the harm they are doing to themselves by not focusing on studies. Imagine how much easier things were for young males when there was just one TV in the family room, no video games, no cable TV, no internet, etc.

    Post 1980 is also when the West became hyper individualistic and competitive, but females are more socially conformist so they soaked in this mentality and started studying harder, going to college at higher rates, etc. It's been males who are more likely to stubbornly refuse to get with this program. Back in the New Deal era of circa 1930-1979, the working and middle class did just fine at having families and maintaining "respectability". But since 1980 we've seen stuff like like the "slacker" and incel culture take off. Gen X and subsequent generations of young males have been plagued by an ever increasing sense of isolation from the high achievers within their generation, while the communal stability of the working and middle class has been shredded. The Breakfast Club, from way back in 1985, understood this. The kids feel lots of pressure from their parents and within their clique, while feeling alienated from the other cliques and the familial backgrounds they are associated with. The poor kid resents the rich kid, the nerd thinks everyone else is stupid, the jock thinks the nerds are weak, etc.

    Replies: @Verymuchalive

    Post 1980 is also when the West became hyper individualistic and competitive, but
    females are more socially conformist so they soaked in this mentality and started studying harder, going to college at higher rates, etc. It’s been males who are more likely to stubbornly refuse to get with this program.

    Mention must be made of the disastrous effect of globalisation and offshoring, particularly since the 1990s. Prior to that, a whole strata of male students had a strong incentive to study hard as it provided entry to technical work and apprenticeships. Now that incentive has gone,as there are far fewer of these jobs. For example, machine tools are a basic and very important sector of any advanced economy. In 1980, America represented 21% of the World’s machine tool industry. Now, it’s less than 5%.

    As you’ve written, Females are more socially conformist than males. They continue to go to college at higher rates, even if the end result is a job in a call centre, restaurant or no job at all. Obviously, this can’t go on much longer. When the economic collapse occurs later this decade, the whole academic monstrosity will puncture and collapse likewise.

  66. The tests seem more weighted towards absolute strength than past tests which focus on relative strength, and I guess that’s more practical in a combat situation – the arty round doesn’t care how much you weigh, just that you gotta move it that far. Hence all the deadlift tests.

    I’m strong and fit for my size (171cm, 65kg), can do pullups and even one handed pushups, and I can pass my country’s military fitness tests (bodyweight based) with ease. Heck, I could run 2.4km faster than most of my male students who are half my age.

    But when it came to those f***ing heavy armor plates (>45kg) for the portable pillboxes my unit was assigned, I can only do so much before my body gives out on me, and then I’m completely useless and a deadweight for the rest of the operation.

    We usually put the big burly guys in reserve only for these plates and ask them to chill and stay on guard while the rest of us do everything else before we need them for the really heavy lifting.

    I will probably do well for the hand-release pushups, leg tuck and 2 mile run, and get close to the max score, but probably not for the standing power throw, deadlift and sprint-drag-carry, though I can still get a passing grade. Smaller guys like me will find these tougher.

    • Thanks: Old Prude
  67. Here is a very relevant article written by Fred Reed a very long time ago about women in combat:

    https://www.heretical.com/miscella/frcombat.html

    From the article:

    “From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces (report date November 15, 1992, published in book form by Brassey’s in 1993):

    The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength… An Army study of 124 men and 186 women done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer fractures as men.

    Further:

    The Commission heard an abundance of expert testimony about the physical differences between men and women that can be summarized as follows:

    Women’s aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.

    In terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man.”

    I’m skeptical of the use of deadlifts. Performing a proper deadlift requires proper instruction and careful observation of each trainee until it is performed correctly and consistently. This is not a realistic expectation within platoon based training. With heavy weights an improper deadlift can lead to significant injury, especially among women. Then there’s the equipment. Yeah the Pentagon can afford to buy 10,000 Olympic barbells and 30,000 45 pound plates, but someone is getting a kickback in that deal.

    I’m all for making the physical requirements more stringent but the Army is just throwing money at the concept. Lifting the larger, sand filled ammo cans would provide a more realistic simulation of battlefield conditions, and be a hell of a lot cheaper.

    • Replies: @RAZ
    @Mike Tre

    I get what you are saying about deadlifts though the test is doing them with a hex or trapezoidal bar as opposed to a regular barbell. The trap bar for deadlifts is easier and more forgiving of bad form and poor flexibility than the standard barbell is. At my advanced age I am still doing deadlifts but I'm using the trap bar.

    I don't know how they score the test and what they are expecting for men and for women. I was very impressed when my neighbor showed me a pic of his triathlon competing daughter doing a standard barbell dl with 350 lbs. Few women can do that. Neither can I anymore.

  68. @Almost Missouri

    might unintentionally marginalize women in the Army
     
    They should really do it intentionally, but unintentionally is better than not at all.

    Ladies, in combat, the margin is where you want to be.

    Replies: @LP5, @3g4me

    Ladies, in combat, the margin is where you want to be.

    So, catfights in the typing pool?

  69. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    One of the issues with the old physical fitness test is not the passing score but the unofficial requirement that infantry and the like max the text. The two mile run was easy for black soldiers to pass but hard for them to max. The changes to a six even test was suppose to help younger black soldiers. However, the inclusion of the two mile run still hurts them.

    The Army also a an issue with the old test when they change the scoring criteria to require women to do as many sit up as men and shorten the time to pass the two mile run.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @guest007


    ...when they change the scoring criteria to require women to do as many sit up as men...
     
    Should be when they began to require that men do as many as women. Women do better in situps due to childbirth related musculature. The powers that be were happy to find one event where they could require equal standards without failing too many women or letting men, particularly men in combat arms, off too easily.
  70. @ivvenalis
    The ulterior motive behind this test is to create something that would shut down all informal opposition to women being promoted to high rank (it's not even about "unit integration" per se). It is to the Army's credit I suppose that they haven't been able to square this (impossible) circle by e.g. making the test so easy that anyone could pass it.

    By the way, the Army already eliminated the old test in 2020 and the new one still is not officially in effect. So, they will actually have go about two years without any physical fitness test at all (there are still bodyfat % standards, at least).

    As far as I can tell, they will probably gender-norm the test while going out of their way to obfuscate the degree of difference, something that cannot be done with the completely transparent age-and-gender standards for the old test.

    "Leadership qualities" and "technical skills" are, of course, not exactly evenly distributed among the sexes (especially since one of the technical skills that the Army is most vocal about is software development) but they are far more subjective, and it's thus much easier to hide the pro-female discrimination required to promote the desired number of women.

    Replies: @guest007, @Mr. Anon, @SteveRogers42

    There was always complaints that the body fat (tape test) was unfair to black women since the tables were designed using data collected from white female college students.

  71. @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it's extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    ... but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It's crazy. Do they have elephants' feet?

    Replies: @Mike Tre, @mikeInThe716, @Buffalo Joe, @reactionry, @Sick 'n Tired

    Being able to carry loads over long distances is an ability that requires conditioning. You said sometimes. If I sometimes go to the gym to lift weights, I’m going to get really sore and wonder how other gym goers manage to get so strong.

    Infantrymen get good at marching long distances under heavy packs because they do it everyday. The jungle boots and full leather boots I was issued in the MC were very well suited for it: Hard soles with deep treads and very good ankle support. We used Bates for our dress shoes. Their “combat boot” is more of an urban boot IMO. Cops like them. You see a lot of really expensive hiking boots out there but one thing to factor as well is their weight. Over long distances it’s a huge consideration, especially if they get soaked. The military issue boots didn’t retain much water relatively speaking, but some of these expensive boots that are really thick and insulated are going to weigh a ton when wet.

    • Thanks: El Dato
  72. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Most sources say Napoleon was 5’6. That’s on the low end of normal today, and was probably average or slightly above average for the time.

    I’d guess the average American man is around 5’9, but lies and claims to be 6 feet.

  73. @martin_2
    @Zachary Smith


    lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.
     
    This is naive. Its not fat that makes people fat, its refined carbohydrate. People lose weight on a high fat low carbohydrate diet.

    Replies: @S. Anonyia, @Stealth

    This is modern junk science. Notice that high fat low carb diets are more popular than ever, and yet people are fatter than ever.

    I’m not saying high carb is the solution…but weight loss is all about physical exercise (especially cardio, the idea you can get fit through weightlifting alone is delusional) and creating a calorie deficit. Calories in vs. calories out.

    High fat foods have lots of calories just like sugary high carb foods. You’d have to eat extremely small portions to lose weight on a high fat diet. Some people succeed with the portion control which is why keto type diets work for a small percentage of the population. Doesn’t work for most though.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @S. Anonyia

    The key is satiation. Fats are more satisfying than carbs. Fewer fat calories keep hunger at bay for longer.
    Hunger is the other key. Eat when hungry. Errr, unsatiated.

  74. @Mike_from_SGV
    We know the drill, they will water down the test difficulty until the desired percentage of females pass. The Army is largely a jobs program anyway, not a war-winning organization, outside of specialized groups like Rangers etc .

    Replies: @AnotherDad

    The Army is largely a jobs program anyway, not a war-winning organization, outside of specialized groups like Rangers etc .

    The security of the US requires only:
    — the nuclear deterrent and related technology–including R+D–to keep it capable

    — a navy that can do required anti-smuggling, anti-piracy and sea lane policing operations–and technology to keep it capable

    — a few hundred thousand ground pounders hunting and killing border invaders until Trump’s Wall is built … and then once that’s done the corresponding Wall at the northern border to keep out the hordes from their as Canada–sadly–turns itself into a globoslum

    Women add basically zero value on any of this.

  75. @El Dato
    Meanwhile in France:

    Differently gendered judo specialists settle their concubinal differences (also, perhaps, "women are into high-T men in spite of danger signs"):

    ‘What was missing, my death?’ Fury in France as judo coach cleared of assaulting female Olympic champ


    A French judo coach accused of domestic violence against his Olympic champion partner has been acquitted in a case which has caused shock and outrage across the nation.

    Alain Schmitt allegedly attacked Tokyo 2020 mixed team gold medalist Margaux Pinot at her flat on the outskirts of Paris last weekend by wrestling her to the floor, verbally abusing her, and punching her and smashing her head on the ground before trying to strangle her.

    Pinot, 27, displayed serious facial injuries and a fractured nose in a social media post and asked: "What was missing? My death at the end, perhaps?"
     

    Everybody has black eyes, funnily including the lawyer of Monsieur Schmitt (what is it called when you have eyes that are naturally surrounded by dark circles?)

    https://twitter.com/MargauxPinot2/status/1466027874100592653

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    “serious facial injuries and a fractured nose”

    Man shouldn’t beat women up, indeed people shouldn’t beat people up. But the eyes and forehead look like an amateur rugby forward looks after a particularly bruising game.

    This is a serious facial injury, it needed 30 stitches after which the player returned to the field – against the All Blacks.

  76. @Observator
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was of average height for a man of his time. His alleged "shortness" was part of the British media campaign to discredit him. Also popular at the time in England was a chamber pot with "little Boney's" portrait in it. This was revived a century later with Hitler taking the place of honor in the pot, and for quite the same reason, British rage that a strong European leader had once again defeated their invading army.

    Replies: @Ben tillman, @Art Deco, @J.Ross

    And Hitler also wasn’t short. He was 5’ 11”.

  77. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    That may hold true foe a general who is middle-aged. But what about the guys in the line, who are expected to lead by example? One of the halmarks of leadership is not having to ask your men to do something that you are not willing and able to do youself. I think from time to time combat is still a primitive test of strength. I know Marines were still kicking doors down in Iraq and killing guys with their combat knives not all that long ago. Are we to assume the Russians and the Chinese will be good enough to keep their style of warfare to something a woman leading an infantry squad can easily cope with?

    • Replies: @odin
    @Walker88


    Are we to assume the Russians and the Chinese will be good enough to keep their style of warfare to something a woman leading an infantry squad can easily cope with?
     
    That seems to align with other military planning assumptions. On a tour of Annapolis we were told that during hand-to-hand combat training, women only fight other women.
  78. @JimDandy
    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @Reg Cæsar, @Ben tillman, @Possumman

    Now that was funny.

  79. @Russ
    Will Thomas swam three years for Penn; this year, as Lia Thomas s/he's breaking women's swimming records. Surely Lia would do fine with the new testing (while this gender dysphoria rages).

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10266627/Fury-unfair-competition-trans-swimmer-smashing-womens-records.html

    Replies: @AndrewR, @Henry's Cat, @Alfa158

    The thing preventing the extinction of women’s sports is that the few men who decide that they are actually women come from the lower performance level of men’s sports. They seem to be guys who finished 53rd in their sport at the try-outs for the US Olympic team, except for Bruce Jenner who did it long after his career was over, so they haven’t yet simply driven real women out of competition.

    • Replies: @YetAnotherAnon
    @Alfa158

    "the thing preventing the extinction of women’s sports is that the few men who decide that they are actually women come from the lower performance level of men’s sports"

    Like "Lauren Jeska", born Michael Graham Jameson, who ran cross-country as a boy but became women’s 2010, 2011 and 2012 English fell-running champion, and won the (women's) British Championship in 2012?

    She took a First in Physics, a subject of great appeal to women, at Oxford.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/14/champion-runner-lauren-jeska-jailed-for-attempted-of-uk-athletics-official-ralph-knibbs

  80. @El Dato
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    That's interesting. In a normal world, one would would expect the Russians to adopt the "Ivan does it" approach and the Americans to adopt the "Autoloader(tm) does it" approach instead.

    I suppose the Russian side wanted to optimize something here ... overall height of tank maybe?

    Replies: @El Dato, @Alfa158, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    The new Russian T-14 tank doesn’t even have anyone in the turret. The crew is in a heavily armored compartment in the hull. The improves crew survivability, allows the turret to be more compact, and the auto loading machinery can operate faster without the risk of maiming a crew member who got in the way.

  81. @74v56ruthiyj
    @Zachary Smith

    Have you ever changed the tracks on a tank? Humped 105 or nowadays 120mm shells? Tankers need to be strong.

    Replies: @Blodgie

    No, I’ve never changed tracks on a tank or charged a machine gun nest on command or signed my life away to be controlled by a corrupt government.

    Because I’m not a clueless fool with a subconscious death wish and latent blood lust.

  82. I’m incredibly well-suited to my current time place and social class: extremely high aptitude in both mathematical reasoning and verbal ability; good genetics for health and longevity; 6′ tall, in very good condition for my age and reasonably good-looking, though nowhere close to a 10. This has worked out well for me as I’ve gotten quite rich and overall had a really positive, interesting life.

    But I’m also a physical wimp. I’m a good runner, but clumsy with very poor upper-body strength. While all guys want to think they’d be a bad-ass in a full-on fight, I haven’t been in one since I was about 14 (I did OK), and am completely confident that some guy with any real training would kill me in about 30 seconds.

    Yes, I could certainly improve with training. But just as if you take some random Marine and put him in intensive math classes, he’s very unlikely ever to be as good at math as I am, he’s also still going to be able to kill me quickly and efficiently no matter much I train for battle. I’m built for symbolic manipulation, and he’s built to win a physical fight.

    Here’s the thing: I don’t show up at a Marine recruiting center and demand that they organize themselves around letting me pretend to win battles. Because if they did, they’d lose real battles. It’s part of why I respect men who are willing and able to do that. It’s only the illusion of invulnerability that allows the American leadership class to hollow out the military, which is the most fundamental job of any government. Like it’s always going to be half-way wars, and there’s never going to be another Battle of Midway that we have to win when outnumbered and without superior technology.

    • Thanks: Calvin Hobbes
  83. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    And yet…

    …Waterloo…

    …and the Moscow Retreat.

  84. The Army always had a different Physical standard for women.

    The two mile run must be completed in under 19 minutes for females and 16 minutes for males. While men must do 30 push-ups to pass , Women are only required to complete 10 push-ups to pass.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @Travis

    Women were required to do more situps for many years, until situp standards were equalized so the powers that be could say they had equal standards for one event. The female advantage in this event is due to childbirth related musculature.

  85. @Observator
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was of average height for a man of his time. His alleged "shortness" was part of the British media campaign to discredit him. Also popular at the time in England was a chamber pot with "little Boney's" portrait in it. This was revived a century later with Hitler taking the place of honor in the pot, and for quite the same reason, British rage that a strong European leader had once again defeated their invading army.

    Replies: @Ben tillman, @Art Deco, @J.Ross

    Don’t know how to break it to you, but Hitler did not defeat the Anglo-American army which invaded in June of 1944.

  86. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    He died on an island in the south Atlantic where lives about 5,000 people. If he were all that he’d have had better headline performance.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @Art Deco

    Napoleon's defeats are greater than others' victories.

    And of course, he should not be judged by his military exploits alone. Others may be famous. Napoleon is icon.

    https://standpointmag.co.uk/books-october-14-enlightenment-on-horseback-andrew-roberts-napoleon/

    The Enlightenment on Horseback

  87. @Arclight
    An honest question - if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill? Obviously medical care positions come to mind, but given the well known differences in personality traits and capabilities between the sexes, are there other roles where the average woman is likely to be a better fit than the average man? I would think spatial reasoning and decision making under duress are key in the overwhelming majority of military jobs and that still argues for men over women wherever possible.

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose, @Art Deco

    Women can make excellent snipers. Haven’t heard of any from our recent wars, though, which is curious. You’d think that would be right up the Zeitgeist alley.

    https://owlcation.com/humanities/Deadliest-Female-Snipers-in-History

    I personally know a couple of women who are excellent shots. By any standard.

    • Agree: Paul Mendez
  88. @Arclight
    An honest question - if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill? Obviously medical care positions come to mind, but given the well known differences in personality traits and capabilities between the sexes, are there other roles where the average woman is likely to be a better fit than the average man? I would think spatial reasoning and decision making under duress are key in the overwhelming majority of military jobs and that still argues for men over women wherever possible.

    Replies: @Ghost of Bull Moose, @Art Deco

    An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill?

    Women in uniform were prior to 1972 assigned to auxilliary corps. Margaret Chase Smith put considerable effort into selling full integration to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Not one of her more admirable projects.

    • Replies: @SafeNow
    @Art Deco

    “An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill?”

    In The Coast Guard right now, the most highly desired person who can possibly walk into a recruiter’s office is someone with a culinary degree! I don’t know the other branches, but surely they have things like public-affairs specialist, electronics mate, and watchstander.

    Replies: @Hibernian

  89. @anonymous
    This is silly. Men are going to be outmatched on the ACFT 3.0, just look at the the top results of this relevant internet search:

    Biden: There Isn’t A ‘Single Thing A Man Can Do’ That A Woman Can’t Do Better
     
    https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/24/joe-biden-equal-pay-day-women/

    Judy Murray: Anything men can do, women can do better
     
    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/anything-men-can-do-we-can-do-better-like-running-the-world/

    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!
     
    https://www.drphil.com/shows/1624/

    Women are better than men at everything
     
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/women-are-better-than-men-at-everything-thats-why-men-should-do-the-engineering

    Replies: @El Dato, @Wade Hampton, @AnotherDad, @SteveRogers42

    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!

    That quickly became the position of minoritarian (2 wave+) feminism and now the official establishment position.

    For the whole “oppression” narrative to really fly–and get adherents all excited–there can’t be much nuance, much less any suggestion that maybe the old order had something to do with the natural abilities/capabilities of men and women. (I look at the roles/domains my grandmother and grandfather had on the farm–kitchen, hen house, garden, root cellar vs. barns, livestock, fields, machinery–pretty much makes sense to me.)

    And ironically it rolls with little resistance because men are chivalrous toward women. We generally don’t go around and say “hey you just suck”. It’s basically the same as the “you don’t hit a girl” deal. What’s the point of arguing or demonstrating male superiority across the vast domains of physical, intellectual and technical abilities and skills? “Whooee you beat a girl. BFD.”

    • Replies: @martin_2
    @AnotherDad


    And ironically it rolls with little resistance because men are chivalrous toward women.
     
    Mr Roger Devlin has made the same excellent point. The willingness to admit women into traditional male roles, to which women are unsuited, is nothing other than OLD FASHIONED CHIVALRY.
  90. @Almost Missouri

    might unintentionally marginalize women in the Army
     
    They should really do it intentionally, but unintentionally is better than not at all.

    Ladies, in combat, the margin is where you want to be.

    Replies: @LP5, @3g4me

    @4 Almost Missouri: None of the womyn in the US military are ‘ladies.’ And their failure in combat would not represent any great loss to society – they are already either non-White or useless wombs. I think all young women – daddy’s princesses, blue-haired crazies, and woke college achievers – ought to be drafted and suffer the just consequences when AINO’s military suffers its well-deserved defeat.

    • Replies: @Bardon Kaldian
    @3g4me


    I think all young women – daddy’s princesses, blue-haired crazies, and woke college achievers – ought to be drafted and suffer the just consequences when AINO’s military suffers its well-deserved defeat.
     
    Sounds alluring ....
  91. @Reg Cæsar
    @JimDandy


    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

     

    Tell that to Selective Service. They do not recognize "trans women". Possibly the last US agency that doesn't.

    "Lia" Thomas still has almost four years of having to notify SSS of any address change. Assuming "she" is registered at all-- but a guy needs that to get financial aid.

    By the way, I thought sports officials were against drugs.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    It has never been more confusing to be a young female athlete than it is today. If an athletically-inclined girl came to me today asking for advice, I would strongly urge her to get into wrestling, become a trans boy, and move to a state that requires wrestlers to only wrestle people of the same biological sex. That way (s)he can take powerful testosterone supplements while wrestling adolescent girls who are not allowed to take any performance-enhancing substances of any kind. What’s more, no matter what school is hosting a meet, (s)he will always have something of a home field advantage as anyone caught booing her/sher will be doxxed and destroyed. Anyway, that’s just a little life-hack that can provide young female athletes with the winning edge!

  92. @PaceLaw
    @JimDandy

    Absolutely spot on! More “women” who can do feats of masculine strength without much effort. This would be an absolutely superb recommendation, but for the fact that trans women are insane.

    Replies: @JimDandy

    It would enable our armed forces to increase the number of suicide missions.

    • Replies: @PaceLaw
    @JimDandy

    You are a genius sir! Include more trans “women“ in the military and encourage them to take highly risky missions, with the benefit that if they were to die they would be honored as genuine women, which would mean they would definitely take on these suicidal missions. A win-win all the way around. Just think, the first tranny to win the first congressional Medal of Honor? Yeah, pretty much every tranny would volunteer for that.

  93. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Mina Horowitz

    China isn't laughing, they are terrified they are in the same situation. China's younger generation is filled with spoiled only-children, the "little emperor syndrome", who are completely unfit for military service. Hence the sudden emphasis on trying to get boys to man up and stop idolizing femmy South Korean pop singers. Will it work? Maybe. Or maybe far too late.

    Meanwhile Serbia actually is laughing at us. Now there is a country with real men who enjoy drinking, hunting, fixing cars, lifting weights and gambling. Some enterprising Serb should really start a "Serbian Manliness Camp" - could probably get great business both from China and from worried Americans.

    Replies: @JMcG, @El Dato

    You forgot smoking. I don’t think anyone smokes as much as the Serbs. Maybe my uncle.

  94. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    PioAny one who thinks having people in the Army who can’t make it without cheating for them is clueless as to how negatively this effects the others–anyone who actually served knows this– this is why Basic Training was used to locate them and get rid of them…

    I was at West Point when women came in — lots of crying and guys carrying their packs on marches etc. (their PE Classes which were vicious for men were completely different, in many respects they were going to a different Academy created so they could make it….) while the NYSlimes lied they were better than the men (still lying)– if any guy had CRIED or pulled any of that he would have been over — maybe even beat up first…now West Point is all homosexualized due to Obama (male Cadets “marrying” each other at Graduation under Crossed Sabres LOL) and woke with CRT with actual out Communists attending–a joke like most of the rest of the USA military now….

    The amount of lies they have to tell to maintain the Woke Agenda is breathtaking.

    • Thanks: Calvin Hobbes
    • Replies: @Alden
    @Getaclue

    Read the military novels and articles by Lucian Truscott 4. He’s from generations of West Pointers and army officers. He claims there’s always been a hard core of gay high ranking officers running the army.

    What use is the American military. Last war we won was against Japan August 1945. They don’t defend our borders. We are invaded by low level countries like Mexico and even Guatemala etc. with no resistance whatsoever. We have trillions of dollars worth of submarines air craft carriers planes and other craft roaming the world. But our shores are open to any and all invaders.

    American military functions appear to be 1 losing wars all over the world and 2 a giant welfare department.

    , @Old Prude
    @Getaclue

    '79. Last of the Line...

    '81 was the last class with all-male companies.

    There were always females and minorities who didn't belong there and would never be there otherwise. But now, the place is an anti-white gay pride parade.

    Replies: @Getaclue

  95. @International Jew
    @Zachary Smith


    women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank.
     
    What about hoisting wounded crew members out of the tank?
    What about loading rounds for the gun?

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Wielgus

    What about hoisting wounded crew members out of the tank?

    Well, for high status women in Politics like Patsy Schroeder and Margaret Chase Smith the matter of vital national importance here is whether General Jane Doe – who could have been me had I chosen to serve the public by joining the Military rather than Politics!- gets 1 star or two stars. Whether wounded tanker Stevie Grunt lives or dies,on the other hand, meh whatever. From the sociopathic viewpoint of certain politicians it makes good sense.

  96. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Zero, I have visited a number of Civil War museums, both North and South, the uniforms on display will quickly show you how small the men of that era were.

    • Replies: @PiltdownMan
    @Buffalo Joe

    Buffalo Joe, this well known photograph of Abraham Lincoln at Antietam comes to mind.

    Lincoln was 6'4" and I figure his chin must have been at the 5' 8" or 5' 7" level (allowing for his stoop.)

    The tops of the hats of those Union generals and soldiers next to him barely come up to his chin. A lot of those guys were 5'6" or shorter.

    https://historydaily.org/content/125703/dc455ba0a9ca6c529bff459b7f060938.jpg

    Replies: @Wielgus

  97. @El Dato
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    That's interesting. In a normal world, one would would expect the Russians to adopt the "Ivan does it" approach and the Americans to adopt the "Autoloader(tm) does it" approach instead.

    I suppose the Russian side wanted to optimize something here ... overall height of tank maybe?

    Replies: @El Dato, @Alfa158, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    Yes, they certainly did, they have always been more concerned about tank height than us (which is weird, since doctrinally the US expected to be fighting hull down in prepared positions in an active defense, while the Russians were advancing pell-mell to get into range to “grab our belt buckle”. So you would think we would care a lot more about profile than them, but apparently not.)

    The biggest reason for the autoloader though was that you can eliminate one crewman, so you can field more tanks for your total population of tankers. Remember the USSR was 100% all-in mechanized and considered overwhelming armored vehicle hull numerical superiority to be key. Hell, the ENTIRE Red Army had literally zero light infantry units, only heavy mechanized, until the late 1980s.

    Also the US Army was using volunteers and expecting their tankers to do a fair amount of their own maintenance on the vehicle, so having an additional guy helps to get everything done. The USSR was using conscripts who it was not really worthwhile to train in any kind of advanced maintenance, so all their overhauls and even more minor repairs had to be done by special recovery units, since you had short training cycles, and wanted to field as many tanks as possible.

    The USA also had to get our counterpunch tanks across the Atlantic before West Germany folded to a Warsaw Pact assault so, assumably learning from the severe mauling US M4s took from the Nazi “Big Cats” in the invasion of Europe we figured an exquisite tank, with a larger and much more trained crew was the best option when you had limited sealift capacity and a small time window to operate in.

    Sorry for the wall of text, I find the US vs USSR approaches to the same problems really interesting as both sides are quite logical and well thought out, but they came to very different conclusions. I have a lot of admiration for the men on both sides, even the Soviets who were trying to make things happen with a bunch of disadvantages and still really made a 9-inning game out of it.

    • Thanks: Paul Mendez, El Dato
  98. Anytime women are “made equal” for physically demanding jobs, standards have to be lowered.

  99. @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it's extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    ... but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It's crazy. Do they have elephants' feet?

    Replies: @Mike Tre, @mikeInThe716, @Buffalo Joe, @reactionry, @Sick 'n Tired

    Ex enlisted Mech Infantry, 87-91 (Gulf War Vet) here.

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It’s crazy. Do they have elephants’ feet?

    Like any other physical task, you slowly build up. Your feet become accustomed to longer and longer marches with heavier and heavier packs. It’s an amazing transformation when you’re young. In Germany, shortly after basic training, I suffered through what we called the 20km “Friedburg Death March”. After, I had 1/2 my big toe nail clipped off due to a blister/infection.

    That said, close to 1/5 did not make it through my enlisted basic infantry course in ’87. IIRC, half were mentally unsuited, half were physically unsuited. And the physically unsuited half were almost all related to feet/legs.

    • Replies: @El Dato
    @mikeInThe716


    After, I had 1/2 my big toe nail clipped off due to a blister/infection.
     
    Oh man I had that, I was afraid I was getting gangrene, there was just a mess of blood & lymph liquid coming out from underneath the destroyed nail.

    Used Iso-betadine-in-water foot baths until this eldrich horror dried out, then gingerly removed the parts of the nail that were loose.

    I think I also used salt to get it dried out, not sure what the doc would say to that.
  100. @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it's extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    ... but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It's crazy. Do they have elephants' feet?

    Replies: @Mike Tre, @mikeInThe716, @Buffalo Joe, @reactionry, @Sick 'n Tired

    El, back in the day, ironworkers grabbed rebars and hoisted them to their shoulders to bring up to a bridge deck. Eight hours of back and forth carrying fifty or sixty pounds of rusty, rough surfaced rods all day and then again the next and next. Not saying it wasn’t hard and exhausting, but you get used to it, in all weather by the way. Wear out a pair of boots in a couple of weeks.

  101. @Peter Akuleyev
    @Mina Horowitz

    China isn't laughing, they are terrified they are in the same situation. China's younger generation is filled with spoiled only-children, the "little emperor syndrome", who are completely unfit for military service. Hence the sudden emphasis on trying to get boys to man up and stop idolizing femmy South Korean pop singers. Will it work? Maybe. Or maybe far too late.

    Meanwhile Serbia actually is laughing at us. Now there is a country with real men who enjoy drinking, hunting, fixing cars, lifting weights and gambling. Some enterprising Serb should really start a "Serbian Manliness Camp" - could probably get great business both from China and from worried Americans.

    Replies: @JMcG, @El Dato

    As pièce de résistance, you will have to create an edible salad from an area full of american depleted uranium dust.

  102. @AnotherDad
    @anonymous


    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!
     
    That quickly became the position of minoritarian (2 wave+) feminism and now the official establishment position.

    For the whole "oppression" narrative to really fly--and get adherents all excited--there can't be much nuance, much less any suggestion that maybe the old order had something to do with the natural abilities/capabilities of men and women. (I look at the roles/domains my grandmother and grandfather had on the farm--kitchen, hen house, garden, root cellar vs. barns, livestock, fields, machinery--pretty much makes sense to me.)

    And ironically it rolls with little resistance because men are chivalrous toward women. We generally don't go around and say "hey you just suck". It's basically the same as the "you don't hit a girl" deal. What's the point of arguing or demonstrating male superiority across the vast domains of physical, intellectual and technical abilities and skills? "Whooee you beat a girl. BFD."

    Replies: @martin_2

    And ironically it rolls with little resistance because men are chivalrous toward women.

    Mr Roger Devlin has made the same excellent point. The willingness to admit women into traditional male roles, to which women are unsuited, is nothing other than OLD FASHIONED CHIVALRY.

  103. @El Dato
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    That's interesting. In a normal world, one would would expect the Russians to adopt the "Ivan does it" approach and the Americans to adopt the "Autoloader(tm) does it" approach instead.

    I suppose the Russian side wanted to optimize something here ... overall height of tank maybe?

    Replies: @El Dato, @Alfa158, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    Also, there is always a trade off between internal volume and overall mass for a tank. Once mass reaches a certain point you have to either sacrifice mobility or protection, (the ternary diagram of all tank design is mobility, protection, and firepower). Adding another crew member significantly increases the required total volume, so by using an autoloader the Russians could make more tanks (because each required less steel) and provide them all with more armor and greater power to weight ratio than a roomy western tank. If you want to put a steep slope on the armor (always a good idea) than the mass constraints of a roomy tank become really, really severe. That’s one of the big problems the King Tiger ran into in WW2. This isn’t a new bias by the Americans: during WW2 the slope of armor on our Shermans significantly decreased from 1941-1945. We have always had a strong emphasis on “fightability”, basically ergonomics where the T-34 didn’t even have a turret basket or seats(!).

    Those aren’t negligible advantages in favor of the autoloader, and in many cases totally obviate the rate of fire advantage you get from having a single-digit ASVAB scorer loading the cannon. In fact, from 1962-1980, USSR tanks were projected by NATO as being clearly superior to our own vehicles in both the tactical and strategic sense, and the only hope the ground combat element had against Soviet armor would come from AGTM equipped infantry and suicidally bold A-10 AH-1 and AH-64 air interdiction against armor columns. The Russian paradigm was superior by even our own analysis.

    That only changed with the Abrams after 3-4 failed programs to address the issue. And Abrams had a bunch of voodoo black magic that allowed it to overcome in the internal volume problem. British Burlington armor was mated with DU laminate to give superior armor protection even with less thickness and slope, the Chrysler Gas Turbine gave the tank an excellent power to weight ratio despite it’s huge mass, and the thermal sights+autostabilizer+105mm (later 120mm) main gun with DU sabots gave superior trajectory and terminal effects. The only way we finally validated our doctrine was by merging these three very exotic technologies, which was by no means easy or assured and almost failed many times. Still, even with voodoo DARPA magic, the Abrams gets about the same gas mileage as the IJN Yamato sailing upwind. We figured we could get away with that due to interior lines of supply and the natural logistical advantage of the defender. Still, for most of the Cold War, the USSR theories were vindicated.

    • Thanks: The Wild Geese Howard
    • Replies: @El Dato
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    Holy damn that was an immediate lecture in engineering constraints/design balance.

    , @74v56ruthiyj
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    The armor on an Abrams tank is not thinner than its predecessor, the M-60. The front of the turret is about two feet thick, the sides maybe a foot. The turret's much larger than the M-60's, as a quick look at photos will show, but not much roomier inside. That's not two feet of solid steel, but basically a steel box filled with layers of different stuff at weird angles that absorb and deflect the incoming shot. After taking a hit, you go to the repair depot and they cut the top of the box off and refill it with new layers of different stuff at weird angles.

    BTW, I believe that the armor is called "Chobham", not "Burlington".

    Re Shermans: IIRC, the frontal armor was re-angled to allow the driver and front gunner hatches to be made larger, to allow a quick escape in the event of fire.

    Replies: @Anon

  104. @Anonymous
    That reminds me of this tale: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5775737/First-woman-join-infantry-regiment-quits-two-weeks.html

    The recruit dropped out of an 18-week course this month after falling behind her male counterparts on endurance marches and failing other physical tests at a training base in Suffolk.

    It is understood that when the woman resigned, she admitted having underestimated the physical requirements of being an infantry recruit.
     

    ... many commanders fear that women are incapable of withstanding the rigours of infantry training, in particular the requirement to carry heavy equipment and weapons over long distances.
     
    Note that British Army training involves an unusually large amount of long distance forced marches. Previous experience in war has convinced the army command that you cannot rely on vehicles to move troops reliably as they either end up at the bottom of the Atlantic (Falklands) or the duct tape holding them together dries out in the sun (Iraq) or they make easy IED targets (Afghanistan). There are few men that are capable of maintaining this level of fitness and, up to now, no women at all.

    Now, it should be noted that the lady in question was trying to join the RAF regiment, a force whose task is airfield defence and is always mentioned in scornful tones by British Army regiments.

    Replies: @El Dato, @Jack D, @YetAnotherAnon

    What’s impressive about army marches is not just the distances involved but the amount of stuff that they have to carry. 100 lb. loads and more are not uncommon.

    Patton said that no soldier should be compelled to walk until he actually enters battle. From that point forward he should carry nothing but what he wears, his ammunition, his rations and his toilet articles. I think Patton is right – humans are not mules and the tendency is to overload modern troops and make them walk too far carrying too much stuff.

    https://legionathletics.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/10.1.1.214.8896.pdf

    In the future (I hope) infantry will be accompanied by robot pack mules who will carry all the heavy stuff.

    The photo is “Big Dog” , circa 2004, who was shelved due to noise concerns but future robots could be made quieter.

    PS if I was walking thru a minefield, Big Dog would walk in front of me.

    • Replies: @Joe Stalin
    @Jack D

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3AVaUfbrrmc

    Used in Vietnam War.

  105. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.

    You don’t know what you’re talking about. Hope you choke a low fat, on a high carbohydrate diet.

    Anyhow, women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank.

    M1 Abrams tanks don’t have autoloaders. A human inside the turret has to load the ammunition into the main gun.

    https://asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-item/tank-ammunition/

  106. @PaceLaw
    Women in the military are primarily for logistics and administrative support. Women are not seriously considered for combat positions at all, in any respect (well, maybe as pilots). This fitness report is really much ado about nothing because the military will find a way to keep pushing large amounts of women into these non-combat related positions.

    Just think, if you were a seasoned combat soldier, would you want a woman next to you if you were going up to fight against Russia, China or Islamic terrorists? The answer is obvious . . .

    Replies: @Tony massey

    in the most recent conflicts their were no front lines and enemy positions were never exactly fixed.
    The enemy didn’t even have uniforms lest they happen to be wearing the one you were or one among the coalition of the willing.
    Think 88 mike. Truck driver. They got hit coming and going. Often. KBR said fuck that shit and the military had to deliver its own fucking shit once real legitimate hostilities broke out of which it was very fluid as to which group specifically was hostile to your convoy and you may never see them on the field of battle(a highway) again.
    Other examples are rife.
    Less than 3% during the most recent conflicts even pulled a trigger and moar often than not it was not in pitched battle to win some piece of prized turf. Nope. Usually just drive-bys. Lots of hand waving in general usually followed up with a few potshots(maybe a roadside ka-boom tough break that)and then just the same fucking noise you ALWAYS hear.
    And if a real trigger puller is needing moar rounds so he can keep derping that trigger what fucking diff does it make to him what the gender of the soldier bringing it is? Believe me boyo those non combatants are getting lifted up to their makers just like those combatants.

  107. @martin_2
    @Zachary Smith


    lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they’re in now.
     
    This is naive. Its not fat that makes people fat, its refined carbohydrate. People lose weight on a high fat low carbohydrate diet.

    Replies: @S. Anonyia, @Stealth

    Yes, eating large amounts of fat while consuming a surplus of calories indeed makes people fat. People lose weight on a law carbohydrate diet because they are either in ketosis or consuming vastly fewer calories than before.

    • Agree: S. Anonyia
  108. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    Dude, I can’t take you seriously when you post a low information voter comment like this:

    Napoleon was short and physicallt (sic) unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    You have to research more and try harder. Your one post where you quote extensively from some chemistry paper was your best; the others not so much.

  109. @Observator
    @Zero Philosopher

    Napoleon was of average height for a man of his time. His alleged "shortness" was part of the British media campaign to discredit him. Also popular at the time in England was a chamber pot with "little Boney's" portrait in it. This was revived a century later with Hitler taking the place of honor in the pot, and for quite the same reason, British rage that a strong European leader had once again defeated their invading army.

    Replies: @Ben tillman, @Art Deco, @J.Ross

    That chamber pot is counted in the online catalog of anti-Semitic images. Not sure what their reasoning was.
    ———
    One of the more common motifs is a trio of fur merchants conversing. This appears to have been popular, a meme of its time, and there must have been some joke-story which went along with it.

  110. @ivvenalis
    The ulterior motive behind this test is to create something that would shut down all informal opposition to women being promoted to high rank (it's not even about "unit integration" per se). It is to the Army's credit I suppose that they haven't been able to square this (impossible) circle by e.g. making the test so easy that anyone could pass it.

    By the way, the Army already eliminated the old test in 2020 and the new one still is not officially in effect. So, they will actually have go about two years without any physical fitness test at all (there are still bodyfat % standards, at least).

    As far as I can tell, they will probably gender-norm the test while going out of their way to obfuscate the degree of difference, something that cannot be done with the completely transparent age-and-gender standards for the old test.

    "Leadership qualities" and "technical skills" are, of course, not exactly evenly distributed among the sexes (especially since one of the technical skills that the Army is most vocal about is software development) but they are far more subjective, and it's thus much easier to hide the pro-female discrimination required to promote the desired number of women.

    Replies: @guest007, @Mr. Anon, @SteveRogers42

    By the way, the Army already eliminated the old test in 2020 and the new one still is not officially in effect. So, they will actually have go about two years without any physical fitness test at all (there are still bodyfat % standards, at least).

    Or perhaps, in the hiatus, they’ll simply determine that no tests are required anyway. Just as many universities are now doing away with the SAT. Maybe recruits could submit an essay about physical fitness and they’ll call it good enough.

    • LOL: Hibernian
  111. @International Jew
    @Zachary Smith


    women don’t belong in ground combat – unless they’re inside a Tank.
     
    What about hoisting wounded crew members out of the tank?
    What about loading rounds for the gun?

    Replies: @kaganovitch, @Wielgus

    Many modern tanks have automatic loaders, which is just as well considering how much the shells weigh.

    • Replies: @Mike Tre
    @Wielgus

    The rounds still have to be hand loaded into the turret pre-op. The M2 Browning weighs 85 pounds. Can a broad mount one on the turret by herself? Doubtful. Each track shoe in the track assembly weighs IIRC about 50 pounds. Ever thrown track out in the desert on a hot summer day in Kuwait? The pin that connects the track shoes has to be broken loose and then pounded out with a drift pin and sledge hammer. How about changing a broken torsion bar? Road wheels: 10-12 lug nuts hold each road wheel on its hub and are torqued to something like 75 foot pounds. Just breaking the lug nuts loose on a single wheel with a breaker bar will have a fit male drenched in 10 minutes. Suspension work on a tracked vehicle is a motherfucking BITCH even in the most favorable situation. Woman have no business operating any combat vehicle in any capacity, ever.

    The pro women-in-the-military people here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Forget the physical limitations for a moment. What are the consequences of inserting a female into an all male unit? Distraction? Creates unhealthy and wasteful competition between males. Creates temptation. Self censorship - no more fuck jokes while old girl is around unless you want a reprimand or worse. Suspicion. Resentment. Manipulation - females will use their wares to get men to do their share of the workload. Females who get pregnant get a shitload of time off PLUS they stay on the same promotion track as their male counterparts, even though they are way behind in real service time. Prostitution: deployed females often prostitute themselves. My first platoon SGT told me stories about Desert Shield where female marines were making 1000's of dollars selling sex to the men. It went on for months and the officers looked the other way.

    No healthy society should be enlisting their women in the military, let alone sending them to combat.

    Replies: @Wielgus

  112. @Tony massey
    @usNthem

    Of course i do agree with you.
    Imo the answer to physical fitness, moarso for women but all, is yoga. No membership needed. No equipment necessary. You can do it on the toilet. You don't need all your appendages. ANYONE can do no matter how fucked up they are...not withstanding certain injuries/paralysis y'all.
    I've dated 3 yoga instructors. Again and again over and over i was constantly surprised at the absolute strength those gals possessed. Rock solid core.
    That last one i dated...110 lbs. There's not a fat out of shape guy out there that could take her. She would show them what's really ☝. She would always say, it's the plank Tony it's the plank. I'm fairly sure she coulda posed in the plank and stared is straight ahead without blinking for longer than any rat could ever tread water, which is about 3 days i hear. Kat would've straight up embarrassed alot of men if they thought she was just a little woman. No sir.
    It's yoga. I'm telling you. I've always been fairly strong. I've never been a weight lifter(other than just core training) so I'm not competition but...so far as average is concerned that's what I'm saying... I'm much stronger than your average pasty but these serious yoga folks...I'm telling ya...they have unbelievable strength.
    My friend k is mid 50s and been doing yoga for the last 30 years 5-6 hours per week without fail. She's mid 50s woman chunky. Not fat. Ya know the sort. I'm telling ya I'm yelling it...kate would put to shame prolly a 1/3 of the fucking Army in a straight up physical fitness test and k...dude...that bitch is fucking strong. The only exercise she has ever done in her adult life is yoga.
    You don't Fuck with yoga people buddy

    Replies: @ATate

    Your unrequited crush on chubby gilf Yoga ladies (love the pants!) clouds your judgement.

    Strong? Sure, for a woman who does an activity 5-6 hours a week.

    Strong enough to beat up a (any) male 18-25? GTFO.

    Your typical Army male, doughy as they may be, would absolutely destroy some 50 year women, no matter how many downward dogs she does. Hell your typical Army male would fuck start the face of your typical 50 year old male.

    Testosterone is a helluva PED.

    Now back to your fevered wet dreams about chunky Kathy and her Hotha practice.

  113. idk about the pushups, but the hand-release is np!

  114. The solution to all of this is simple- all female combat soldiers serve in their own units, all men serve in their own units. We won’t have to worry about women getting men killed in combat, and we won’t have to worry about men getting women killed in combat. Deal?

  115. @Art Deco
    @Zero Philosopher

    yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    He died on an island in the south Atlantic where lives about 5,000 people. If he were all that he'd have had better headline performance.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    Napoleon’s defeats are greater than others’ victories.

    And of course, he should not be judged by his military exploits alone. Others may be famous. Napoleon is icon.

    https://standpointmag.co.uk/books-october-14-enlightenment-on-horseback-andrew-roberts-napoleon/

    The Enlightenment on Horseback

  116. “After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?”

    After all, what do womyn have to do with leadership qualities in combat?

  117. What normal woman would want to join the military anyway? There’s got to be something wrong with female recruits even beside being something of a last ditch employment/welfare program.

  118. @Art Deco
    @Arclight

    An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill?

    Women in uniform were prior to 1972 assigned to auxilliary corps. Margaret Chase Smith put considerable effort into selling full integration to the Senate Armed Services Committee. Not one of her more admirable projects.

    Replies: @SafeNow

    “An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill?”

    In The Coast Guard right now, the most highly desired person who can possibly walk into a recruiter’s office is someone with a culinary degree! I don’t know the other branches, but surely they have things like public-affairs specialist, electronics mate, and watchstander.

    • Replies: @Hibernian
    @SafeNow


    ...but surely they have things like public-affairs specialist, electronics mate, and watchstander.
     
    One of those things is not likr the other two, other than being in the Coast Guard.
  119. One of the things they should test for but never will, is how you perform under stress.
    Women notoriously perform worse than usual when placed under stress while men do better.
    A recent study (too idle to hunt it down) claims, plausibly, to have discovered why.
    The test monitored activity in various parts of the brain when a series of activities were performed and then again under stress (something as simple as placing one hand in ice water).
    In women, the parts of the brain dedicated to deciphering facial signals shoed a marked increase under stress, in men, markedly less.

    Under stress, it’s more important for women to know what other people are thinking.
    Men merely think; how do I fix this.

    Thank God warfare is a stress-free occupation.

    • Replies: @Old Prude
    @Bill Jones

    I'll never forget a female E5 started to cry when I told her she needed to learn to drive a duece-and-a-half if she wanted a good EER.

    Unimaginable for even the very lowest, worst male enlisted to react that way.

  120. @Alfa158
    @Russ

    The thing preventing the extinction of women’s sports is that the few men who decide that they are actually women come from the lower performance level of men’s sports. They seem to be guys who finished 53rd in their sport at the try-outs for the US Olympic team, except for Bruce Jenner who did it long after his career was over, so they haven’t yet simply driven real women out of competition.

    Replies: @YetAnotherAnon

    “the thing preventing the extinction of women’s sports is that the few men who decide that they are actually women come from the lower performance level of men’s sports”

    Like “Lauren Jeska”, born Michael Graham Jameson, who ran cross-country as a boy but became women’s 2010, 2011 and 2012 English fell-running champion, and won the (women’s) British Championship in 2012?

    She took a First in Physics, a subject of great appeal to women, at Oxford.

    https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2017/mar/14/champion-runner-lauren-jeska-jailed-for-attempted-of-uk-athletics-official-ralph-knibbs

  121. @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @El Dato

    Also, there is always a trade off between internal volume and overall mass for a tank. Once mass reaches a certain point you have to either sacrifice mobility or protection, (the ternary diagram of all tank design is mobility, protection, and firepower). Adding another crew member significantly increases the required total volume, so by using an autoloader the Russians could make more tanks (because each required less steel) and provide them all with more armor and greater power to weight ratio than a roomy western tank. If you want to put a steep slope on the armor (always a good idea) than the mass constraints of a roomy tank become really, really severe. That's one of the big problems the King Tiger ran into in WW2. This isn't a new bias by the Americans: during WW2 the slope of armor on our Shermans significantly decreased from 1941-1945. We have always had a strong emphasis on "fightability", basically ergonomics where the T-34 didn't even have a turret basket or seats(!).

    Those aren't negligible advantages in favor of the autoloader, and in many cases totally obviate the rate of fire advantage you get from having a single-digit ASVAB scorer loading the cannon. In fact, from 1962-1980, USSR tanks were projected by NATO as being clearly superior to our own vehicles in both the tactical and strategic sense, and the only hope the ground combat element had against Soviet armor would come from AGTM equipped infantry and suicidally bold A-10 AH-1 and AH-64 air interdiction against armor columns. The Russian paradigm was superior by even our own analysis.

    That only changed with the Abrams after 3-4 failed programs to address the issue. And Abrams had a bunch of voodoo black magic that allowed it to overcome in the internal volume problem. British Burlington armor was mated with DU laminate to give superior armor protection even with less thickness and slope, the Chrysler Gas Turbine gave the tank an excellent power to weight ratio despite it's huge mass, and the thermal sights+autostabilizer+105mm (later 120mm) main gun with DU sabots gave superior trajectory and terminal effects. The only way we finally validated our doctrine was by merging these three very exotic technologies, which was by no means easy or assured and almost failed many times. Still, even with voodoo DARPA magic, the Abrams gets about the same gas mileage as the IJN Yamato sailing upwind. We figured we could get away with that due to interior lines of supply and the natural logistical advantage of the defender. Still, for most of the Cold War, the USSR theories were vindicated.

    Replies: @El Dato, @74v56ruthiyj

    Holy damn that was an immediate lecture in engineering constraints/design balance.

  122. @JimDandy
    @PaceLaw

    It would enable our armed forces to increase the number of suicide missions.

    Replies: @PaceLaw

    You are a genius sir! Include more trans “women“ in the military and encourage them to take highly risky missions, with the benefit that if they were to die they would be honored as genuine women, which would mean they would definitely take on these suicidal missions. A win-win all the way around. Just think, the first tranny to win the first congressional Medal of Honor? Yeah, pretty much every tranny would volunteer for that.

  123. @Anonymous
    That reminds me of this tale: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5775737/First-woman-join-infantry-regiment-quits-two-weeks.html

    The recruit dropped out of an 18-week course this month after falling behind her male counterparts on endurance marches and failing other physical tests at a training base in Suffolk.

    It is understood that when the woman resigned, she admitted having underestimated the physical requirements of being an infantry recruit.
     

    ... many commanders fear that women are incapable of withstanding the rigours of infantry training, in particular the requirement to carry heavy equipment and weapons over long distances.
     
    Note that British Army training involves an unusually large amount of long distance forced marches. Previous experience in war has convinced the army command that you cannot rely on vehicles to move troops reliably as they either end up at the bottom of the Atlantic (Falklands) or the duct tape holding them together dries out in the sun (Iraq) or they make easy IED targets (Afghanistan). There are few men that are capable of maintaining this level of fitness and, up to now, no women at all.

    Now, it should be noted that the lady in question was trying to join the RAF regiment, a force whose task is airfield defence and is always mentioned in scornful tones by British Army regiments.

    Replies: @El Dato, @Jack D, @YetAnotherAnon

    “The most famous yomp of recent times was during the 1982 Falklands War. After disembarking from ships at San Carlos on East Falkland, on 21 May 1982, Royal Marines and members of the Parachute Regiment yomped (and tabbed) with their equipment across the islands, covering 56 miles (90 km) in three days carrying 80-pound (36 kg) loads. They were supposed to be transported by helicopters, but after the Atlantic Conveyor, which carried the helicopters, was sunk by Argentinian Exocet missiles on 25 May, the soldiers had to march across the island.”

    56 miles over rough country in 3 days is good going when you are carrying only your food and water for one day, and have a beer, a shower, a meal, clean socks and a cosy bed waiting each evening. Doing that carrying 80lbs, and sleeping in your clothes in the open each night, is pretty impressive, and when all those (literal – soldiers do sometimes die of exhaustion, though the Army try to avoid it) death marches over the Brecon Beacons or Dartmoor come into their own.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yomp

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_march

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @YetAnotherAnon

    And that was heading into the deep winter in the southern hemisphere.

  124. @mikeInThe716
    @El Dato

    Ex enlisted Mech Infantry, 87-91 (Gulf War Vet) here.


    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It’s crazy. Do they have elephants’ feet?
     
    Like any other physical task, you slowly build up. Your feet become accustomed to longer and longer marches with heavier and heavier packs. It's an amazing transformation when you're young. In Germany, shortly after basic training, I suffered through what we called the 20km "Friedburg Death March". After, I had 1/2 my big toe nail clipped off due to a blister/infection.

    That said, close to 1/5 did not make it through my enlisted basic infantry course in '87. IIRC, half were mentally unsuited, half were physically unsuited. And the physically unsuited half were almost all related to feet/legs.

    Replies: @El Dato

    After, I had 1/2 my big toe nail clipped off due to a blister/infection.

    Oh man I had that, I was afraid I was getting gangrene, there was just a mess of blood & lymph liquid coming out from underneath the destroyed nail.

    Used Iso-betadine-in-water foot baths until this eldrich horror dried out, then gingerly removed the parts of the nail that were loose.

    I think I also used salt to get it dried out, not sure what the doc would say to that.

  125. Thank God, the Chinese are also prioritizing the advancement of women in their armed forces. 🤔🤔🤔 Otherwise we might be at a disadvantage.😖😖😖

  126. @Jack D
    @Anonymous

    What's impressive about army marches is not just the distances involved but the amount of stuff that they have to carry. 100 lb. loads and more are not uncommon.

    Patton said that no soldier should be compelled to walk until he actually enters battle. From that point forward he should carry nothing but what he wears, his ammunition, his rations and his toilet articles. I think Patton is right - humans are not mules and the tendency is to overload modern troops and make them walk too far carrying too much stuff.

    https://legionathletics.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/10.1.1.214.8896.pdf

    In the future (I hope) infantry will be accompanied by robot pack mules who will carry all the heavy stuff.

    https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/976/cpsprodpb/13E9A/production/_87426518_131107-m-rp886-001.jpg

    The photo is "Big Dog" , circa 2004, who was shelved due to noise concerns but future robots could be made quieter.

    PS if I was walking thru a minefield, Big Dog would walk in front of me.

    Replies: @Joe Stalin

    Used in Vietnam War.

  127. @Zachary Smith
    Concerns About New Army Combat Physical Fitness Test
    https://www.veteransoutreachministries.org/patriotism/concerns-about-new-army-combat-physical-fitness-test/

    The Good and the Bad of the Army’s New Physical Fitness Test

    https://mwi.usma.edu/good-bad-armys-new-physical-fitness-test/

    So far as I'm concerned the new test is BS, for I seriously doubt the physical exercise will continue year round. Between tests the troops will resume the bad habits and lousy fat-soaked diets which have them in the near-obese condition they're in now.

    Anyhow, women don't belong in ground combat - unless they're inside a Tank. There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don't require physical strength. Put the women there. This may mean we ditch the insane Privatization of the support arms, but so be it.

    Replies: @HammerJack, @74v56ruthiyj, @International Jew, @martin_2, @GeologyAnon Mk 3, @guest007, @David Davenport, @raga10

    There are plenty of jobs in the Military Services which don’t require physical strength. Put the women there.

    I agree! Certainly the ability to throw medicine balls is crucial in modern warfare, but women can still be useful in other areas. Soviets for example put thousands of women into combat roles in WWII as snipers as well as pilots (they had several all-female air units, including fighter squadron). From what I’ve read they performed adequately; especially the snipers.

  128. Obscure irony department posting. Trigger warning: includes cryptic diss of distaff ditzes.

    Haskell is one of the more mathematically rigorous computer programming languages. Category Theory, separation of (Alonzo) Church and State, applicative functors (don’t ask, can’t tell you), etc., etc..

    Co-Star uses Haskell to develop their platform for … astrology.

    https://www.costarastrology.com/

    Why Co–Star uses Haskell

    “Co–Star is built by a small team of thirty. Thirty humans, with backgrounds in big fashion, independent publishing, intentional communities, and tech, create software for 25% of young women in the US. …”

    https://www.costarastrology.com/why-haskell/

    Apparently, 25% of American women between the ages of 18-25 use this astrology app. Presumably, there are other such astrology apps, so maybe 33% of young women in the U.S. use either Co-Star or an equivalent app. The percentages of young white women in the U.S. who use such apps is probably much higher.

  129. @3g4me
    @Almost Missouri

    @4 Almost Missouri: None of the womyn in the US military are 'ladies.' And their failure in combat would not represent any great loss to society - they are already either non-White or useless wombs. I think all young women - daddy's princesses, blue-haired crazies, and woke college achievers - ought to be drafted and suffer the just consequences when AINO's military suffers its well-deserved defeat.

    Replies: @Bardon Kaldian

    I think all young women – daddy’s princesses, blue-haired crazies, and woke college achievers – ought to be drafted and suffer the just consequences when AINO’s military suffers its well-deserved defeat.

    Sounds alluring ….

  130. It consists of six exercises: a medicine-ball throw, hand-release pushups, deadlifts, a 2-mile run, sprint-drag-carry exercises, and leg tucks or planks.

    Perhaps the drag part, between the sprint and the carry, is a nod to the sensibility of the times.

  131. The old PT test from decades ago was in all truth a joke. Pushups, sit-ups and a timed two mile run designed to test just exactly what always baffled me. It’s important to be able to move quickly with a combat load but exactly where pushups and sit-ups come into play has always been a mystery to me. True upper body strength is developed and measured in better ways which is why it seems push-ups are more of a tradition in the army as a way to smoke or reform a soldier primarily in a training unit. Airborne and infantry need to be light and capable of moving distances which up until recently were restricted to men only.
    If the goal of a pt test is to measure those physical qualities deemd crucial for a soldier on the battlefield then it should involve humping a distance with full load and rifle, ability to pass an obstacle course while measuring stamina. If somebody can handle themselves , lift a certain weight such as heavy weapons, mortars base plate, ammo boxes, shells and carry a wounded soldier then they can be considered a pass on army fitness. Certain jobs require different physical fitness levels, rangers vs admin clerk are quite different and it would be a challenge to fill the ranks if we adopted ranger fitness standards for the company clerks and truck drivers.
    It’s also important to remember that the modern battlefield is not the civil war, ww1 or ww1 or even Vietnam. Soldiers are unlikely to be humping many miles for days on end. and that aside from those few select MOS’s many jobs involve sitting at a computer which means the level of fitness need not be as great as in past armies and conflicts.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Fuzzbunny

    It's easy to make a decent test of fitness or intelligence, it's hard to make a much better one.

  132. @guest007
    @Zachary Smith

    One of the issues with the old physical fitness test is not the passing score but the unofficial requirement that infantry and the like max the text. The two mile run was easy for black soldiers to pass but hard for them to max. The changes to a six even test was suppose to help younger black soldiers. However, the inclusion of the two mile run still hurts them.

    The Army also a an issue with the old test when they change the scoring criteria to require women to do as many sit up as men and shorten the time to pass the two mile run.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    …when they change the scoring criteria to require women to do as many sit up as men…

    Should be when they began to require that men do as many as women. Women do better in situps due to childbirth related musculature. The powers that be were happy to find one event where they could require equal standards without failing too many women or letting men, particularly men in combat arms, off too easily.

  133. @Travis
    The Army always had a different Physical standard for women.

    The two mile run must be completed in under 19 minutes for females and 16 minutes for males. While men must do 30 push-ups to pass , Women are only required to complete 10 push-ups to pass.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    Women were required to do more situps for many years, until situp standards were equalized so the powers that be could say they had equal standards for one event. The female advantage in this event is due to childbirth related musculature.

  134. @Buffalo Joe
    @Zero Philosopher

    Zero, I have visited a number of Civil War museums, both North and South, the uniforms on display will quickly show you how small the men of that era were.

    Replies: @PiltdownMan

    Buffalo Joe, this well known photograph of Abraham Lincoln at Antietam comes to mind.

    Lincoln was 6’4″ and I figure his chin must have been at the 5′ 8″ or 5′ 7″ level (allowing for his stoop.)

    The tops of the hats of those Union generals and soldiers next to him barely come up to his chin. A lot of those guys were 5’6″ or shorter.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    @PiltdownMan

    Whereas "Little Mac" directly facing him was a little shorter than the average at the time.

  135. @JimDandy
    In other words, the need for trans women in the military had never been greater.

    Replies: @PaceLaw, @Reg Cæsar, @Ben tillman, @Possumman

    They are cleaning up on Jeopardy!

  136. @Fuzzbunny
    The old PT test from decades ago was in all truth a joke. Pushups, sit-ups and a timed two mile run designed to test just exactly what always baffled me. It's important to be able to move quickly with a combat load but exactly where pushups and sit-ups come into play has always been a mystery to me. True upper body strength is developed and measured in better ways which is why it seems push-ups are more of a tradition in the army as a way to smoke or reform a soldier primarily in a training unit. Airborne and infantry need to be light and capable of moving distances which up until recently were restricted to men only.
    If the goal of a pt test is to measure those physical qualities deemd crucial for a soldier on the battlefield then it should involve humping a distance with full load and rifle, ability to pass an obstacle course while measuring stamina. If somebody can handle themselves , lift a certain weight such as heavy weapons, mortars base plate, ammo boxes, shells and carry a wounded soldier then they can be considered a pass on army fitness. Certain jobs require different physical fitness levels, rangers vs admin clerk are quite different and it would be a challenge to fill the ranks if we adopted ranger fitness standards for the company clerks and truck drivers.
    It's also important to remember that the modern battlefield is not the civil war, ww1 or ww1 or even Vietnam. Soldiers are unlikely to be humping many miles for days on end. and that aside from those few select MOS's many jobs involve sitting at a computer which means the level of fitness need not be as great as in past armies and conflicts.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    It’s easy to make a decent test of fitness or intelligence, it’s hard to make a much better one.

  137. @Cool Daddy Jimbo
    @anonymous

    "For those with military experience, would an air defense unit filled with smart but physically weak people do better than the same unit with not as smart people who are physically strong?"

    In a word, no. Everything about the military is physical. Air defense? You just push buttons, right? No. You dig foxholes. You fill thousands of sandbags. You load and unload equipment. You bury cables. You dig latrines. When the air raid siren goes off, you run, and dive into one of the foxholes. The physical work never ends.

    Replies: @SteveRogers42

    And when the enemy SOF raids the airbase to take out the various assets, the air defense troops have to do that ol’ infantry thing:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_2012_raid_on_Camp_Bastion

  138. @S. Anonyia
    @martin_2

    This is modern junk science. Notice that high fat low carb diets are more popular than ever, and yet people are fatter than ever.

    I’m not saying high carb is the solution...but weight loss is all about physical exercise (especially cardio, the idea you can get fit through weightlifting alone is delusional) and creating a calorie deficit. Calories in vs. calories out.

    High fat foods have lots of calories just like sugary high carb foods. You’d have to eat extremely small portions to lose weight on a high fat diet. Some people succeed with the portion control which is why keto type diets work for a small percentage of the population. Doesn’t work for most though.

    Replies: @Anon

    The key is satiation. Fats are more satisfying than carbs. Fewer fat calories keep hunger at bay for longer.
    Hunger is the other key. Eat when hungry. Errr, unsatiated.

  139. @anonymous
    This is silly. Men are going to be outmatched on the ACFT 3.0, just look at the the top results of this relevant internet search:

    Biden: There Isn’t A ‘Single Thing A Man Can Do’ That A Woman Can’t Do Better
     
    https://dailycaller.com/2021/03/24/joe-biden-equal-pay-day-women/

    Judy Murray: Anything men can do, women can do better
     
    https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/anything-men-can-do-we-can-do-better-like-running-the-world/

    Anything Men Can Do, Women Can Do Better!
     
    https://www.drphil.com/shows/1624/

    Women are better than men at everything
     
    https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/women-are-better-than-men-at-everything-thats-why-men-should-do-the-engineering

    Replies: @El Dato, @Wade Hampton, @AnotherDad, @SteveRogers42

    The USMC conducted a test of this theorem a few years ago:

  140. Humans come as packages and sex-related genes are at least 80% of physiognomy: women’s leadership skills and tech adaptation average about as far behind men as their physical fitness performance.

  141. @YetAnotherAnon
    @Anonymous

    "The most famous yomp of recent times was during the 1982 Falklands War. After disembarking from ships at San Carlos on East Falkland, on 21 May 1982, Royal Marines and members of the Parachute Regiment yomped (and tabbed) with their equipment across the islands, covering 56 miles (90 km) in three days carrying 80-pound (36 kg) loads. They were supposed to be transported by helicopters, but after the Atlantic Conveyor, which carried the helicopters, was sunk by Argentinian Exocet missiles on 25 May, the soldiers had to march across the island."

    56 miles over rough country in 3 days is good going when you are carrying only your food and water for one day, and have a beer, a shower, a meal, clean socks and a cosy bed waiting each evening. Doing that carrying 80lbs, and sleeping in your clothes in the open each night, is pretty impressive, and when all those (literal - soldiers do sometimes die of exhaustion, though the Army try to avoid it) death marches over the Brecon Beacons or Dartmoor come into their own.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yomp

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_march

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    And that was heading into the deep winter in the southern hemisphere.

    • Agree: YetAnotherAnon
  142. @ivvenalis
    The ulterior motive behind this test is to create something that would shut down all informal opposition to women being promoted to high rank (it's not even about "unit integration" per se). It is to the Army's credit I suppose that they haven't been able to square this (impossible) circle by e.g. making the test so easy that anyone could pass it.

    By the way, the Army already eliminated the old test in 2020 and the new one still is not officially in effect. So, they will actually have go about two years without any physical fitness test at all (there are still bodyfat % standards, at least).

    As far as I can tell, they will probably gender-norm the test while going out of their way to obfuscate the degree of difference, something that cannot be done with the completely transparent age-and-gender standards for the old test.

    "Leadership qualities" and "technical skills" are, of course, not exactly evenly distributed among the sexes (especially since one of the technical skills that the Army is most vocal about is software development) but they are far more subjective, and it's thus much easier to hide the pro-female discrimination required to promote the desired number of women.

    Replies: @guest007, @Mr. Anon, @SteveRogers42

    They still run the old APFT for the record and where the equipment is available, they run the new ACFT to establish baseline metrics.

  143. “After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?”

    Doesn’t most of army need to be follower’s, not leaders? Like follow me up that hill with a 60 pound ruck sack, jump out of that plane with a bunch of gear, keep handing me those 95 pound 155 mm howitzers shells.

    • Replies: @74v56ruthiyj
    @George Taylor

    A tank has a crew of four. One of them has to be the leader. An infantry fire team can be only two or three men. One of them is the leader. Direct combat needs lots of leaders, and sometimes immediate replacements for them.

    , @Hibernian
    @George Taylor

    Good leaders don't ask subordinates, at least only one or two levels down, to do anything they can't do themselves.

  144. @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it's extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    ... but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It's crazy. Do they have elephants' feet?

    Replies: @Mike Tre, @mikeInThe716, @Buffalo Joe, @reactionry, @Sick 'n Tired

    Dearest Darlin’ Dato:

    Your feet might suffer less if y’all (H. L. Mencken observed that this second person pronoun can be used in the singular) were to start wearing SOCKS and trimming your LONG, DIRTY TOENAILS.

    Plain But Appealing,
    Laura “Ima-Hogg” Hogue, Esq.
    Brunswick, Georgia

  145. @GeologyAnon Mk 3
    @El Dato

    Also, there is always a trade off between internal volume and overall mass for a tank. Once mass reaches a certain point you have to either sacrifice mobility or protection, (the ternary diagram of all tank design is mobility, protection, and firepower). Adding another crew member significantly increases the required total volume, so by using an autoloader the Russians could make more tanks (because each required less steel) and provide them all with more armor and greater power to weight ratio than a roomy western tank. If you want to put a steep slope on the armor (always a good idea) than the mass constraints of a roomy tank become really, really severe. That's one of the big problems the King Tiger ran into in WW2. This isn't a new bias by the Americans: during WW2 the slope of armor on our Shermans significantly decreased from 1941-1945. We have always had a strong emphasis on "fightability", basically ergonomics where the T-34 didn't even have a turret basket or seats(!).

    Those aren't negligible advantages in favor of the autoloader, and in many cases totally obviate the rate of fire advantage you get from having a single-digit ASVAB scorer loading the cannon. In fact, from 1962-1980, USSR tanks were projected by NATO as being clearly superior to our own vehicles in both the tactical and strategic sense, and the only hope the ground combat element had against Soviet armor would come from AGTM equipped infantry and suicidally bold A-10 AH-1 and AH-64 air interdiction against armor columns. The Russian paradigm was superior by even our own analysis.

    That only changed with the Abrams after 3-4 failed programs to address the issue. And Abrams had a bunch of voodoo black magic that allowed it to overcome in the internal volume problem. British Burlington armor was mated with DU laminate to give superior armor protection even with less thickness and slope, the Chrysler Gas Turbine gave the tank an excellent power to weight ratio despite it's huge mass, and the thermal sights+autostabilizer+105mm (later 120mm) main gun with DU sabots gave superior trajectory and terminal effects. The only way we finally validated our doctrine was by merging these three very exotic technologies, which was by no means easy or assured and almost failed many times. Still, even with voodoo DARPA magic, the Abrams gets about the same gas mileage as the IJN Yamato sailing upwind. We figured we could get away with that due to interior lines of supply and the natural logistical advantage of the defender. Still, for most of the Cold War, the USSR theories were vindicated.

    Replies: @El Dato, @74v56ruthiyj

    The armor on an Abrams tank is not thinner than its predecessor, the M-60. The front of the turret is about two feet thick, the sides maybe a foot. The turret’s much larger than the M-60’s, as a quick look at photos will show, but not much roomier inside. That’s not two feet of solid steel, but basically a steel box filled with layers of different stuff at weird angles that absorb and deflect the incoming shot. After taking a hit, you go to the repair depot and they cut the top of the box off and refill it with new layers of different stuff at weird angles.

    BTW, I believe that the armor is called “Chobham”, not “Burlington”.

    Re Shermans: IIRC, the frontal armor was re-angled to allow the driver and front gunner hatches to be made larger, to allow a quick escape in the event of fire.

    • Replies: @Anon
    @74v56ruthiyj

    I see how I was unclear but I did not mean to indicate that the Abrams ever had thinner armor than the Patton, I meant the Abrams had thinner armor (but with greater cross sectional density) that would be possible for the same level of RHA equivalent protection given by solid steel. I have heard the term "Chobham" before as well, as far as I understand it is interchangeable. Also, I've never cut one open (I image that would have been good for an NJP), just been around them for a couple years of my life, but my understanding as a non-tanker is that the armor laminate isn't internally angled to different pitches inside the plate, but is all the same slope with layers and individual internal scales of different metallurgy or chemistry, and the rapid density anisotropy is what defeats the penetrator or plasma jet. I think a big reason behind the sandwiching laminates is that some of the laminae are probably extremely hard, but very brittle so they need a layer of steel around them on each side to make the armor effective. I believe the exact composition is still classified, but I could be wrong.

    Or were you referring to the big, 'chipmunk cheek' bulges you see on modern Abrams turret faces from the last 5-7 years? Because I think that is unique to the SEP V3 variant and I don't know enough about TUSK or SEP programs to even say confidently that the protruberances are armor at all and not some other new subsystem added to the machine. They don't really look like armor to me, but I could be wrong. I really have no idea what they do.

    I am not sure why the Sherman was reangled, but your theory would align with my thought that it was primarily an ergonomic or human-factor concern, and I'm inclined to agree with you. I know Shermans ended the war with the lowest rate of men killed per knockout per tank, and wet stowage and easy bail outs would both support that.

    (Unz won't let me post with me GeologyAnon handle through a VPN or something)

  146. @George Taylor

    “After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?”
     
    Doesn't most of army need to be follower's, not leaders? Like follow me up that hill with a 60 pound ruck sack, jump out of that plane with a bunch of gear, keep handing me those 95 pound 155 mm howitzers shells.

    Replies: @74v56ruthiyj, @Hibernian

    A tank has a crew of four. One of them has to be the leader. An infantry fire team can be only two or three men. One of them is the leader. Direct combat needs lots of leaders, and sometimes immediate replacements for them.

  147. My dad was still getting the Navy Times the first few years after he moved in with me in 2013. I think every issue I looked at had something about the PT test and uniforms, possible changes to them, gripes about them, and gripes about changes.

    It’s one thing to need some equipment for the new test, but they’ll also need lots more of it, including lighter weights, for people to train with so they can pass the test.

  148. Anon[351] • Disclaimer says:
    @74v56ruthiyj
    @GeologyAnon Mk 3

    The armor on an Abrams tank is not thinner than its predecessor, the M-60. The front of the turret is about two feet thick, the sides maybe a foot. The turret's much larger than the M-60's, as a quick look at photos will show, but not much roomier inside. That's not two feet of solid steel, but basically a steel box filled with layers of different stuff at weird angles that absorb and deflect the incoming shot. After taking a hit, you go to the repair depot and they cut the top of the box off and refill it with new layers of different stuff at weird angles.

    BTW, I believe that the armor is called "Chobham", not "Burlington".

    Re Shermans: IIRC, the frontal armor was re-angled to allow the driver and front gunner hatches to be made larger, to allow a quick escape in the event of fire.

    Replies: @Anon

    I see how I was unclear but I did not mean to indicate that the Abrams ever had thinner armor than the Patton, I meant the Abrams had thinner armor (but with greater cross sectional density) that would be possible for the same level of RHA equivalent protection given by solid steel. I have heard the term “Chobham” before as well, as far as I understand it is interchangeable. Also, I’ve never cut one open (I image that would have been good for an NJP), just been around them for a couple years of my life, but my understanding as a non-tanker is that the armor laminate isn’t internally angled to different pitches inside the plate, but is all the same slope with layers and individual internal scales of different metallurgy or chemistry, and the rapid density anisotropy is what defeats the penetrator or plasma jet. I think a big reason behind the sandwiching laminates is that some of the laminae are probably extremely hard, but very brittle so they need a layer of steel around them on each side to make the armor effective. I believe the exact composition is still classified, but I could be wrong.

    Or were you referring to the big, ‘chipmunk cheek’ bulges you see on modern Abrams turret faces from the last 5-7 years? Because I think that is unique to the SEP V3 variant and I don’t know enough about TUSK or SEP programs to even say confidently that the protruberances are armor at all and not some other new subsystem added to the machine. They don’t really look like armor to me, but I could be wrong. I really have no idea what they do.

    I am not sure why the Sherman was reangled, but your theory would align with my thought that it was primarily an ergonomic or human-factor concern, and I’m inclined to agree with you. I know Shermans ended the war with the lowest rate of men killed per knockout per tank, and wet stowage and easy bail outs would both support that.

    (Unz won’t let me post with me GeologyAnon handle through a VPN or something)

  149. Sophisticated modern and future miitary technology primarily involves sitting in front of scopes and computers which involves a different level of fitness compared to past wars like ww1-2 civil war ect.

    Modern armies reliance on technology for mobility and less on soldiers humpng gear for miles on end negates much of the past thinking on the military’s conception of fitness.

    Infantry 11b, 19d cav scout and including rangers are primarily transported in apcs, helicopters and would not normally be xpected to hump that great of a distance to accomplish the mission. But it is possible to find oneself humping in heavy gear in bad weather on long patrols on hills so a level of fitness is still needed at some level.

    Contact with the enemy and being engaged in close combat is a situation that could involve lifting and carrying a wounded buddy or carrying ammo cans , shells. A test around those attributes would probably provide a better assessment of a soldiers true level of combat fitness along with an obstacle course in combat gear.

    • Replies: @anon
    @Fuzzbunny

    In some ways, I agree, but in other ways not.

    For example as I am sure you know, the infantry now carry the heaviest combat load ever-- in the entire history of warfare. There has been a fair bit of military theory expended on how the fundamental point of the infantry in modern war is essentially as a beast of burden for sensors and ammunition for MMGS and mortars that fix the enemy long enough for them to be destroyed by air or artillery, but it's undeniable that the average weight in pounds that a soldier carries on patrol has increased in every war since the founding, and now is consistently at around 85 pounds. So while you aren't running people through with swords or something now, the physical demands are in some ways more intense than ever for the ground combatants. Sure, we are a mechanized force largely now, but plenty of boots and knees and backs were worn out in Afghanistan all the same.

    Another really interesting facet that isn't talked about at all, as far as I can tell, is the frequency of combat or coming under some kind of contact per the total amount of time in country. Infantry in WW2, during the Invasion of Europe, were directly engaged in active fighting with the enemy for an average of only 18 days per year of the war. By time Vietnam rolled around, that number had climbed to 58/year. You could argue that the earlier wars had less duration of combat, but much fiercer fighting when it happened, and that' s probably valid. But the human body is not designed to be in constant adrenal overload fight-or-flight response for literally months on end. As usual in biology, when you push a body well past its design parameters, the much more complicated female form breaks down faster than the utilitarian male.

  150. I wonder how long this will last. What’s the maximum weight requirement for a 5’4 black woman recruit now? 150? 160?

  151. “ The old tests didn’t require any equipment” That’s the key sentence. Some manufacturers of gym equipment bribed the pentagon to buy their Chinese made equipment for the new fitness test.

    My mottoes follow the money and who benefits.

  152. @Wielgus
    @International Jew

    Many modern tanks have automatic loaders, which is just as well considering how much the shells weigh.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

    The rounds still have to be hand loaded into the turret pre-op. The M2 Browning weighs 85 pounds. Can a broad mount one on the turret by herself? Doubtful. Each track shoe in the track assembly weighs IIRC about 50 pounds. Ever thrown track out in the desert on a hot summer day in Kuwait? The pin that connects the track shoes has to be broken loose and then pounded out with a drift pin and sledge hammer. How about changing a broken torsion bar? Road wheels: 10-12 lug nuts hold each road wheel on its hub and are torqued to something like 75 foot pounds. Just breaking the lug nuts loose on a single wheel with a breaker bar will have a fit male drenched in 10 minutes. Suspension work on a tracked vehicle is a motherfucking BITCH even in the most favorable situation. Woman have no business operating any combat vehicle in any capacity, ever.

    The pro women-in-the-military people here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Forget the physical limitations for a moment. What are the consequences of inserting a female into an all male unit? Distraction? Creates unhealthy and wasteful competition between males. Creates temptation. Self censorship – no more fuck jokes while old girl is around unless you want a reprimand or worse. Suspicion. Resentment. Manipulation – females will use their wares to get men to do their share of the workload. Females who get pregnant get a shitload of time off PLUS they stay on the same promotion track as their male counterparts, even though they are way behind in real service time. Prostitution: deployed females often prostitute themselves. My first platoon SGT told me stories about Desert Shield where female marines were making 1000’s of dollars selling sex to the men. It went on for months and the officers looked the other way.

    No healthy society should be enlisting their women in the military, let alone sending them to combat.

    • Agree: Old Prude
    • Replies: @Wielgus
    @Mike Tre

    I remember reading an interesting account of the Israeli armed forces in a book about modern warfare. It probably relied on an Israeli source so I cannot vouch for its reliability. It claimed that the IDF decided to no longer put women soldiers in situations where they might become involved in combat, because of an incident, presumably in 1973, where Arab opponents (I forget whether it was Egyptians or Syrians) attacked an Israeli position much more vigorously than usual because they realised there were woman soldiers there. This was because 1) they felt women would not fight as well as men and 2) if the Arabs took the position, they might capture some women they could rape - traditional spoils of war.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

  153. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Anonymous


    Furthermore, he wasn’t the “greatest general of the past 500 years”, wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmSQriq0zTc

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/defence-and-security-blog/2015/jun/09/waterloo-a-german-victory

    Waterloo: A German victory?

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Alden, @Old Prude

    Waterloo was a German, actually Prussian victory under General Blucher???? Something like that. Every historian knows that. Except for the British chauvinists and ignorant Americans afflicted with what Mark Twain called Walter Scott disease.

    Much of the medieval early modern and right up to 1939 warfare in Europe was instigated by England. For the purposes of preventing the fractious warlords from overthrowing the current King , loot and ransom.

  154. @Getaclue
    @Zero Philosopher

    PioAny one who thinks having people in the Army who can't make it without cheating for them is clueless as to how negatively this effects the others--anyone who actually served knows this-- this is why Basic Training was used to locate them and get rid of them...

    I was at West Point when women came in -- lots of crying and guys carrying their packs on marches etc. (their PE Classes which were vicious for men were completely different, in many respects they were going to a different Academy created so they could make it....) while the NYSlimes lied they were better than the men (still lying)-- if any guy had CRIED or pulled any of that he would have been over -- maybe even beat up first...now West Point is all homosexualized due to Obama (male Cadets "marrying" each other at Graduation under Crossed Sabres LOL) and woke with CRT with actual out Communists attending--a joke like most of the rest of the USA military now....

    The amount of lies they have to tell to maintain the Woke Agenda is breathtaking.

    Replies: @Alden, @Old Prude

    Read the military novels and articles by Lucian Truscott 4. He’s from generations of West Pointers and army officers. He claims there’s always been a hard core of gay high ranking officers running the army.

    What use is the American military. Last war we won was against Japan August 1945. They don’t defend our borders. We are invaded by low level countries like Mexico and even Guatemala etc. with no resistance whatsoever. We have trillions of dollars worth of submarines air craft carriers planes and other craft roaming the world. But our shores are open to any and all invaders.

    American military functions appear to be 1 losing wars all over the world and 2 a giant welfare department.

    • Agree: JMcG, Old Prude
  155. @Feryl
    @ben tillman

    There are a handful (and I stress, a handful) who could be useful in some capacity. But to winnow out the ones who won't cause drama, won't get pregnant to dodge their duties, won't hide behind their gender to excuse lackluster performance or character, etc. would require high entrance requirements and high standards of accountability for those who make it. By all honest accounts over the last couple decades male personel end up working harder to compensate for deficient performance among the women, and plenty of women end up getting pregnant on purpose in order to basically go on a glorified vacation.

    Anyway, I personally have never been good at push-ups. I've been doing literal heavy lifting at my job for years*, building up good core strength, but still I struggle with push ups. So I guess to be better at push-ups, just do more push-ups (and if that's true than what practical strength do they really measure)? I'm fairly thin for a 21st century American but I guess losing 20 lbs or so would make the push ups a lot easier (and as a matter of fact the special forces often select for a wiry build due to the emphasis on grueling protracted fitness tests that would kill burly guys).

    *Ever notice that working stiffs generally don't look like fitness models? Pure practical strength required to do these jobs generally doesn't lead to an impressive physique unless one starves oneself (and those working outdoors in colder climates are probably better off with a decent layer of fat anyway). The model physique is largely reserved for Upper Class people who spend lots of time at the gym and avoid carbs, beer, and soda (those who actually do manual labor don't have enough energy left to spend hours at the gym).

    Replies: @Old Prude

    If the medicine ball throw is anything like the overhanded basket ball throw required to qualify for acceptance to West Point in the 80’s, then its highly discriminatory against anyone with small hands.

    I think push-ups and sprints are fairly body-type neutral in regards to results. Pull ups definitely favor small folks.

    I don’t know what was wrong with the old APFT. This change of tests strikes me as justification to keep staff officers busy, like changing the camo patterns every few years.

  156. @Bardon Kaldian
    @Anonymous


    Furthermore, he wasn’t the “greatest general of the past 500 years”, wherever he ranks it will be behind the Duke of Wellington, for obvious reasons.
     
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmSQriq0zTc

    https://www.theguardian.com/news/defence-and-security-blog/2015/jun/09/waterloo-a-german-victory

    Waterloo: A German victory?

    Replies: @Verymuchalive, @Alden, @Old Prude

    “German Victory?” Blucher deserves some credit for the win at Waterloo…

  157. @Walker88
    @Zero Philosopher

    That may hold true foe a general who is middle-aged. But what about the guys in the line, who are expected to lead by example? One of the halmarks of leadership is not having to ask your men to do something that you are not willing and able to do youself. I think from time to time combat is still a primitive test of strength. I know Marines were still kicking doors down in Iraq and killing guys with their combat knives not all that long ago. Are we to assume the Russians and the Chinese will be good enough to keep their style of warfare to something a woman leading an infantry squad can easily cope with?

    Replies: @odin

    Are we to assume the Russians and the Chinese will be good enough to keep their style of warfare to something a woman leading an infantry squad can easily cope with?

    That seems to align with other military planning assumptions. On a tour of Annapolis we were told that during hand-to-hand combat training, women only fight other women.

  158. @Getaclue
    @Zero Philosopher

    PioAny one who thinks having people in the Army who can't make it without cheating for them is clueless as to how negatively this effects the others--anyone who actually served knows this-- this is why Basic Training was used to locate them and get rid of them...

    I was at West Point when women came in -- lots of crying and guys carrying their packs on marches etc. (their PE Classes which were vicious for men were completely different, in many respects they were going to a different Academy created so they could make it....) while the NYSlimes lied they were better than the men (still lying)-- if any guy had CRIED or pulled any of that he would have been over -- maybe even beat up first...now West Point is all homosexualized due to Obama (male Cadets "marrying" each other at Graduation under Crossed Sabres LOL) and woke with CRT with actual out Communists attending--a joke like most of the rest of the USA military now....

    The amount of lies they have to tell to maintain the Woke Agenda is breathtaking.

    Replies: @Alden, @Old Prude

    ’79. Last of the Line…

    ’81 was the last class with all-male companies.

    There were always females and minorities who didn’t belong there and would never be there otherwise. But now, the place is an anti-white gay pride parade.

    • Replies: @Getaclue
    @Old Prude

    Class of 79 LCWB

  159. @Bill Jones
    One of the things they should test for but never will, is how you perform under stress.
    Women notoriously perform worse than usual when placed under stress while men do better.
    A recent study (too idle to hunt it down) claims, plausibly, to have discovered why.
    The test monitored activity in various parts of the brain when a series of activities were performed and then again under stress (something as simple as placing one hand in ice water).
    In women, the parts of the brain dedicated to deciphering facial signals shoed a marked increase under stress, in men, markedly less.

    Under stress, it's more important for women to know what other people are thinking.
    Men merely think; how do I fix this.

    Thank God warfare is a stress-free occupation.

    Replies: @Old Prude

    I’ll never forget a female E5 started to cry when I told her she needed to learn to drive a duece-and-a-half if she wanted a good EER.

    Unimaginable for even the very lowest, worst male enlisted to react that way.

    • Agree: Getaclue
  160. thesoldierproject.org

    Only 20-10 percent of army soldiers enter into combat premise. Many are support units. Only 10 percent army soldiers actually engage in combat.

    Navy and Air Force don’t seem to engage in combat at all.

    GIGO the entire military is a giant welfare department for blacks. As I understand it, black men are as unlikely to be in combat arms as women. And the black men have a tendency to leave the army as drunken deranged derelict drug addicts. Who have turned the giant Los Angeles veteran hospital and surrounding neighborhood into a public nuisance in the full legal meaning of the word.

    PTSD from what? Too many brain destroying drugs? Getting caught stealing from the warehouses they idle about in all day instead of working? Some woman they tried to rape got away thus destroying his macho pride? GIGO

    • Replies: @GeologyAnonMk3
    @Alden

    I don't disagree with you about the Navy and Air Force, speaking as a former sailor. It's been a long time since we had anything remotely like high-intensity combat on the seas. It's alarming because any war with China will be almost entirely a Navy show with some important support from the Air Force. Naval combat, when it goes down against a near peer, is quick, decisive, unbelievably violent, and utterly terrifying. I find it equally amusing and annoying when people laud the Marines of Guadacanal for managing somehow to defeat an enemy with no tanks, virtually no heavy artillery, very limited air support, and who was outnumbered by at least 2.5:1 at all times but ignore the fact that more than 3x as many Sailors were killed in the naval battles in the Slot that actually determined the outcome. Look how many ships were lost in WW2 with more than 300 men killed in a few minutes, seconds sometimes. The Navy hasn't been challenged in a long time, and outside the Naval Aviators and SEALs, I don't know if Joe Bluejacket has the steel to answer all bells into the enemy's missile engagement zone when he sees a destroyer alongside him get vaporized by a hypersonic waveglider and go down with all hands in about 3 seconds.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Johann Ricke

  161. @Mike Tre
    Here is a very relevant article written by Fred Reed a very long time ago about women in combat:

    https://www.heretical.com/miscella/frcombat.html

    From the article:


    "From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces (report date November 15, 1992, published in book form by Brassey’s in 1993):

    The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength... An Army study of 124 men and 186 women done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer fractures as men.

    Further:

    The Commission heard an abundance of expert testimony about the physical differences between men and women that can be summarized as follows:

    Women’s aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.

    In terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man."
     

    I'm skeptical of the use of deadlifts. Performing a proper deadlift requires proper instruction and careful observation of each trainee until it is performed correctly and consistently. This is not a realistic expectation within platoon based training. With heavy weights an improper deadlift can lead to significant injury, especially among women. Then there's the equipment. Yeah the Pentagon can afford to buy 10,000 Olympic barbells and 30,000 45 pound plates, but someone is getting a kickback in that deal.

    I'm all for making the physical requirements more stringent but the Army is just throwing money at the concept. Lifting the larger, sand filled ammo cans would provide a more realistic simulation of battlefield conditions, and be a hell of a lot cheaper.

    Replies: @RAZ

    I get what you are saying about deadlifts though the test is doing them with a hex or trapezoidal bar as opposed to a regular barbell. The trap bar for deadlifts is easier and more forgiving of bad form and poor flexibility than the standard barbell is. At my advanced age I am still doing deadlifts but I’m using the trap bar.

    I don’t know how they score the test and what they are expecting for men and for women. I was very impressed when my neighbor showed me a pic of his triathlon competing daughter doing a standard barbell dl with 350 lbs. Few women can do that. Neither can I anymore.

  162. @Old Prude
    @Getaclue

    '79. Last of the Line...

    '81 was the last class with all-male companies.

    There were always females and minorities who didn't belong there and would never be there otherwise. But now, the place is an anti-white gay pride parade.

    Replies: @Getaclue

    Class of 79 LCWB

  163. LOL — Lucian Truscott IV was the equivalent of Abby Hoffman/a hippy/a Beatnik going to West Point — you do know that? (I read now they think he’s great there, he was invited to come up and sign autographs on a following book after “Dress Grey” , which tells you that it is NOT the same place it traditionally was, but when I was there he and his “legacy” were loathed/hated and he was known as “Troosh the Doosh”) there was zero love for him at West Point before the “change” era– believe me. (I’m writing this in regards to what I experienced–personally I had zero contact with him and don’t know anything about him other than his public “work” etc., he may be wonderful or whatever I have no clue… — but I was there when “Dress Grey” came out and he was NOT popular and the book was considered total and complete garbage there then….)

    Truscott came from a line of military but my understanding is he loathed West Point (probably had to go due to the family “tradition” so he went but hated it (which is understandable as you would have to be mentally ill to like it there back then)….)– he sued the school as to the fact Chapel was required. You have no idea how radical, how way, way far out, it would have been for a Cadet to do anything like that back then. Any normal Cadet would NEVER have thought to do so. He wasn’t a “normal” Cadet in any way shape or form and his whole life has been as some kind of Hunter S. Thompson type “writer”/Leftist etc. deal from what I’ve observed as to him over the years when I’ve seen his name pop up — so quoting him on anything and not understanding who he is = problematic….

    What I was told back then while I was there is I believe it was Gen. Wesley Clark was Commandant while he was there and after he graduated he was assigned a base where Clark was then in charge (who hated him) and soon after to avoid going to Viet Nam he took a less than Honorable Discharge and got out of his 5 year commitment he owed the Army. This is not “normal” for a Cadet at West Point back then. His “Dress Grey” fiction came out while I was there and it was total and utter bs, no basis in reality as to what went on in it, zero — it was his “revenge” against West Point — he had the “gay” thing all over and in there too (he did some article on Stonewall Gay thing also while he was at West Point so that seems to be a deal or “thing” with him?)….– utter and total bs — back then if you were “gay” and it was found out you were out, fast. Friends in the Navy told me the same — totally different world than now– no comparison.

    The “everyone was gay” thing is a tactic that has been played now for decades — we are told Lincoln was “gay” etc. — all part of the psychological warfare to normalize something that had a very small minority participating in it to make it look like it was much more widespread. (All their tactics worked finally as I see 1/3 of the most recent generations all view themselves as “Bi” or “gay” — if again it can be believed but it is more believable now given all we are seeing….).

    I’m no supporter of GAE (Empire Americana) or the USA Military Masonic killing machine so as to that I don’t dispute you…. Further, I will tell you the only people who can understand what West Point was (given obviously it isn’t that anymore….) are people who went there — the saying was “It’s a great place to be from, it’s a terrible place to be at….” — You would have to be mentally ill to “enjoy” it — the first year being unbelievably brutal full of hazing and mental torture and the following years marginally better but in no way close to any “normal” 4 year college. Hazing was common and people lost their minds, the stress was unbelievable.

    When I was there it was still exceptionally hard to get in and you got this big send off in the home town papers etc. and you had guys from “family lines” there (like Truscott but not hippies or whatever he was– he was a complete aberration) — some of which could not make it — it was known that some of these committed suicide there as a result — drinking Brasso I think was a favorite — rather than take the disgrace of resigning/failing — it was that much of a mind fk and more….As I said if you didn’t go there back then you really can’t imagine it, incomprehensible — something like Marine Boot Camp back then that didn’t end — in my Summer Training we were still running around with Bayonets on M14s (in the rain) while even the Marines had stopped that….Like I said as to the US Military and what it is and has been used for I can’t disagree but as to your views on “everyone’s gay” bs and quoting Truscott — no that’s just lies. All best…!

    ps. This wiki just touches the surface as to him but I think an intelligent person can read it and between the lines given what I told you I experienced first hand as to him above:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian_K._Truscott_IV

    pss. Interesting story also while I was there — supposedly some Cadets in the Old Division — where like Gen. Robt E. Lee and those types would have had their rooms — reported someone coming thru at night in Cross Belts playing a drum or something like that — they reported it and were soon on an Honor Board for lying. The story goes the Officer presiding went to the room overnight….The charges were dropped and the room walled up. Since the one’s telling us this were under the Honor Code I wouldn’t take it they were lying — the place was that weird and more so — but obviously what is there now is basically there in name only as compared to what it once was….

    • Replies: @Alden
    @Getaclue

    Thank you. I read Truscott’s book. It was a very well done investigation by army MPs procedural. A thriller with gay generals flying to West Point to enjoy the cadets. Just read his blurb on the book jacket. Thanks for the information.


    I’ve always heard that West Point was a torture chamber. Was it Thayer? The founder copied some sadistic Prussian military academy exactly. Back in the Prussian army when the point was founded there was 1 sergeant for every 3 soldiers who could bear them with canes no trial no accusation just beat them. Also running the gauntlet. After some sort of trial the accused had to run between 2 lines of soldiers who hit him with canes If he fell he had to do it again a couple days later. Also MPs in the back to shoot any front line soldiers who tried to run. Well, a lot better than the British army where officers could order soldiers whipped to death. Until the 1840s when a civilian county coroner and prosecutor indicted and convicted both the officers and the executioner who whipped the soldier till he died.

    West Point sounds a nightmare when you were there.

    Replies: @Wielgus

  164. @SafeNow
    @Art Deco

    “An honest question – if we accept the fact that there are military jobs where physical strength is not a core requirement, what jobs are women most suited for that the military should actively be seeking more women to fill?”

    In The Coast Guard right now, the most highly desired person who can possibly walk into a recruiter’s office is someone with a culinary degree! I don’t know the other branches, but surely they have things like public-affairs specialist, electronics mate, and watchstander.

    Replies: @Hibernian

    …but surely they have things like public-affairs specialist, electronics mate, and watchstander.

    One of those things is not likr the other two, other than being in the Coast Guard.

  165. @George Taylor

    “After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?”
     
    Doesn't most of army need to be follower's, not leaders? Like follow me up that hill with a 60 pound ruck sack, jump out of that plane with a bunch of gear, keep handing me those 95 pound 155 mm howitzers shells.

    Replies: @74v56ruthiyj, @Hibernian

    Good leaders don’t ask subordinates, at least only one or two levels down, to do anything they can’t do themselves.

  166. anon[335] • Disclaimer says:
    @Fuzzbunny
    Sophisticated modern and future miitary technology primarily involves sitting in front of scopes and computers which involves a different level of fitness compared to past wars like ww1-2 civil war ect.

    Modern armies reliance on technology for mobility and less on soldiers humpng gear for miles on end negates much of the past thinking on the military's conception of fitness.

    Infantry 11b, 19d cav scout and including rangers are primarily transported in apcs, helicopters and would not normally be xpected to hump that great of a distance to accomplish the mission. But it is possible to find oneself humping in heavy gear in bad weather on long patrols on hills so a level of fitness is still needed at some level.

    Contact with the enemy and being engaged in close combat is a situation that could involve lifting and carrying a wounded buddy or carrying ammo cans , shells. A test around those attributes would probably provide a better assessment of a soldiers true level of combat fitness along with an obstacle course in combat gear.

    Replies: @anon

    In some ways, I agree, but in other ways not.

    For example as I am sure you know, the infantry now carry the heaviest combat load ever– in the entire history of warfare. There has been a fair bit of military theory expended on how the fundamental point of the infantry in modern war is essentially as a beast of burden for sensors and ammunition for MMGS and mortars that fix the enemy long enough for them to be destroyed by air or artillery, but it’s undeniable that the average weight in pounds that a soldier carries on patrol has increased in every war since the founding, and now is consistently at around 85 pounds. So while you aren’t running people through with swords or something now, the physical demands are in some ways more intense than ever for the ground combatants. Sure, we are a mechanized force largely now, but plenty of boots and knees and backs were worn out in Afghanistan all the same.

    Another really interesting facet that isn’t talked about at all, as far as I can tell, is the frequency of combat or coming under some kind of contact per the total amount of time in country. Infantry in WW2, during the Invasion of Europe, were directly engaged in active fighting with the enemy for an average of only 18 days per year of the war. By time Vietnam rolled around, that number had climbed to 58/year. You could argue that the earlier wars had less duration of combat, but much fiercer fighting when it happened, and that’ s probably valid. But the human body is not designed to be in constant adrenal overload fight-or-flight response for literally months on end. As usual in biology, when you push a body well past its design parameters, the much more complicated female form breaks down faster than the utilitarian male.

  167. @Alden
    thesoldierproject.org

    Only 20-10 percent of army soldiers enter into combat premise. Many are support units. Only 10 percent army soldiers actually engage in combat.

    Navy and Air Force don’t seem to engage in combat at all.

    GIGO the entire military is a giant welfare department for blacks. As I understand it, black men are as unlikely to be in combat arms as women. And the black men have a tendency to leave the army as drunken deranged derelict drug addicts. Who have turned the giant Los Angeles veteran hospital and surrounding neighborhood into a public nuisance in the full legal meaning of the word.

    PTSD from what? Too many brain destroying drugs? Getting caught stealing from the warehouses they idle about in all day instead of working? Some woman they tried to rape got away thus destroying his macho pride? GIGO

    Replies: @GeologyAnonMk3

    I don’t disagree with you about the Navy and Air Force, speaking as a former sailor. It’s been a long time since we had anything remotely like high-intensity combat on the seas. It’s alarming because any war with China will be almost entirely a Navy show with some important support from the Air Force. Naval combat, when it goes down against a near peer, is quick, decisive, unbelievably violent, and utterly terrifying. I find it equally amusing and annoying when people laud the Marines of Guadacanal for managing somehow to defeat an enemy with no tanks, virtually no heavy artillery, very limited air support, and who was outnumbered by at least 2.5:1 at all times but ignore the fact that more than 3x as many Sailors were killed in the naval battles in the Slot that actually determined the outcome. Look how many ships were lost in WW2 with more than 300 men killed in a few minutes, seconds sometimes. The Navy hasn’t been challenged in a long time, and outside the Naval Aviators and SEALs, I don’t know if Joe Bluejacket has the steel to answer all bells into the enemy’s missile engagement zone when he sees a destroyer alongside him get vaporized by a hypersonic waveglider and go down with all hands in about 3 seconds.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @GeologyAnonMk3

    The British lost five ships to the Argentines in the Falklands, one to a guided missile, four to WWII style iron bombs, and could have lost 4 more if other iron bomb hits had not been duds.

    Replies: @Wielgus

    , @Johann Ricke
    @GeologyAnonMk3


    I don’t disagree with you about the Navy and Air Force, speaking as a former sailor. It’s been a long time since we had anything remotely like high-intensity combat on the seas. It’s alarming because any war with China will be almost entirely a Navy show with some important support from the Air Force.
     
    Wouldn't the Air Force rapidly acquire some spanking new bases on Taiwan from which they would begin attempting to reduce the size of both the Chinese Air Force and Navy? Flying sorties from Okinawa seems like a really long round trip.
  168. @anonymous
    How much of combat is about infantry? Are other areas going to become much important like air defense? In 2020, Iran was able to fire missiles at US bases in Iraq and the bases looked defenseless. Sadly, it's likely there will be an Iran War within 10 years so air defense is something that needs work and qualified people. For those with military experience, would an air defense unit filled with smart but physically weak people do better than the same unit with not as smart people who are physically strong?

    Replies: @Cool Daddy Jimbo, @Sick 'n Tired

    Long gone are the days of mass ground wars that require storming a beach like Normandy, or charging up a hill thru machine gun fire like Iwo Jima or in Vietnam. Today’s wars are fought with satellites, drones, guided missiles, shelling from warships, carpet bombing, then the ground troops move in and establish control. In another 20 years the military will consist of human soldiers controlling armed Boston Dynamics robots like a video game on the other side of the world from some base in Nevada.

  169. @GeologyAnonMk3
    @Alden

    I don't disagree with you about the Navy and Air Force, speaking as a former sailor. It's been a long time since we had anything remotely like high-intensity combat on the seas. It's alarming because any war with China will be almost entirely a Navy show with some important support from the Air Force. Naval combat, when it goes down against a near peer, is quick, decisive, unbelievably violent, and utterly terrifying. I find it equally amusing and annoying when people laud the Marines of Guadacanal for managing somehow to defeat an enemy with no tanks, virtually no heavy artillery, very limited air support, and who was outnumbered by at least 2.5:1 at all times but ignore the fact that more than 3x as many Sailors were killed in the naval battles in the Slot that actually determined the outcome. Look how many ships were lost in WW2 with more than 300 men killed in a few minutes, seconds sometimes. The Navy hasn't been challenged in a long time, and outside the Naval Aviators and SEALs, I don't know if Joe Bluejacket has the steel to answer all bells into the enemy's missile engagement zone when he sees a destroyer alongside him get vaporized by a hypersonic waveglider and go down with all hands in about 3 seconds.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Johann Ricke

    The British lost five ships to the Argentines in the Falklands, one to a guided missile, four to WWII style iron bombs, and could have lost 4 more if other iron bomb hits had not been duds.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    @Steve Sailer

    I had a Whittaker's Almanac carrying a full list of Royal Navy ships in 1982, and I remember crossing off the ones the Argentines sank as it happened. The latter came closer to winning the war than the British like to admit. Nor were the losses in ground combat totally lopsided in favour of the British.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

  170. @El Dato
    @Anonymous

    I sometimes try to ferry a light load of water containers over uneven terrain for a few hours. I have some fondness for a boot made by BATES for the sandy lands, it's extremely light and flexible although it loses all traction on wet stones and if you are in stony terrain, the sole is not hard enough. I tried another and it just scraped through the skin of my heel in 2 hours flat and that was the end of it.

    ... but I always get at least one blister (plus exhaustion for 24h+).

    How do those people do it with much heavier load? It's crazy. Do they have elephants' feet?

    Replies: @Mike Tre, @mikeInThe716, @Buffalo Joe, @reactionry, @Sick 'n Tired

    Get an ajustable weight vest, it’s more comfortable and natural for your body, you can increase the weight every few weeks. They make them up to 40lbs. After that, add some ankle & wrist weights, wear them and just go about your day, take walks, clean your house, chop wood, do push ups, leg raises, bar hangs, throw punches, hike on the beach, etc. It’s a more comfortable and natutal way to work out, and I find I can tolerate it better than just lifting a few sets of weights in a gym. Plus when you take it off after wearing it for a while, you feel much more lighter and energetic that you’ll want to go for a jog or do some extra pull ups.

  171. @Getaclue
    LOL -- Lucian Truscott IV was the equivalent of Abby Hoffman/a hippy/a Beatnik going to West Point -- you do know that? (I read now they think he's great there, he was invited to come up and sign autographs on a following book after "Dress Grey" , which tells you that it is NOT the same place it traditionally was, but when I was there he and his "legacy" were loathed/hated and he was known as "Troosh the Doosh") there was zero love for him at West Point before the "change" era-- believe me. (I'm writing this in regards to what I experienced--personally I had zero contact with him and don't know anything about him other than his public "work" etc., he may be wonderful or whatever I have no clue... -- but I was there when "Dress Grey" came out and he was NOT popular and the book was considered total and complete garbage there then....)

    Truscott came from a line of military but my understanding is he loathed West Point (probably had to go due to the family "tradition" so he went but hated it (which is understandable as you would have to be mentally ill to like it there back then)....)-- he sued the school as to the fact Chapel was required. You have no idea how radical, how way, way far out, it would have been for a Cadet to do anything like that back then. Any normal Cadet would NEVER have thought to do so. He wasn't a "normal" Cadet in any way shape or form and his whole life has been as some kind of Hunter S. Thompson type "writer"/Leftist etc. deal from what I've observed as to him over the years when I've seen his name pop up -- so quoting him on anything and not understanding who he is = problematic....

    What I was told back then while I was there is I believe it was Gen. Wesley Clark was Commandant while he was there and after he graduated he was assigned a base where Clark was then in charge (who hated him) and soon after to avoid going to Viet Nam he took a less than Honorable Discharge and got out of his 5 year commitment he owed the Army. This is not "normal" for a Cadet at West Point back then. His "Dress Grey" fiction came out while I was there and it was total and utter bs, no basis in reality as to what went on in it, zero -- it was his "revenge" against West Point -- he had the "gay" thing all over and in there too (he did some article on Stonewall Gay thing also while he was at West Point so that seems to be a deal or "thing" with him?)....-- utter and total bs -- back then if you were "gay" and it was found out you were out, fast. Friends in the Navy told me the same -- totally different world than now-- no comparison.

    The "everyone was gay" thing is a tactic that has been played now for decades -- we are told Lincoln was "gay" etc. -- all part of the psychological warfare to normalize something that had a very small minority participating in it to make it look like it was much more widespread. (All their tactics worked finally as I see 1/3 of the most recent generations all view themselves as "Bi" or "gay" -- if again it can be believed but it is more believable now given all we are seeing....).

    I'm no supporter of GAE (Empire Americana) or the USA Military Masonic killing machine so as to that I don't dispute you.... Further, I will tell you the only people who can understand what West Point was (given obviously it isn't that anymore....) are people who went there -- the saying was "It's a great place to be from, it's a terrible place to be at...." -- You would have to be mentally ill to "enjoy" it -- the first year being unbelievably brutal full of hazing and mental torture and the following years marginally better but in no way close to any "normal" 4 year college. Hazing was common and people lost their minds, the stress was unbelievable.

    When I was there it was still exceptionally hard to get in and you got this big send off in the home town papers etc. and you had guys from "family lines" there (like Truscott but not hippies or whatever he was-- he was a complete aberration) -- some of which could not make it -- it was known that some of these committed suicide there as a result -- drinking Brasso I think was a favorite -- rather than take the disgrace of resigning/failing -- it was that much of a mind fk and more....As I said if you didn't go there back then you really can't imagine it, incomprehensible -- something like Marine Boot Camp back then that didn't end -- in my Summer Training we were still running around with Bayonets on M14s (in the rain) while even the Marines had stopped that....Like I said as to the US Military and what it is and has been used for I can't disagree but as to your views on "everyone's gay" bs and quoting Truscott -- no that's just lies. All best...!

    ps. This wiki just touches the surface as to him but I think an intelligent person can read it and between the lines given what I told you I experienced first hand as to him above:
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lucian_K._Truscott_IV

    pss. Interesting story also while I was there -- supposedly some Cadets in the Old Division -- where like Gen. Robt E. Lee and those types would have had their rooms -- reported someone coming thru at night in Cross Belts playing a drum or something like that -- they reported it and were soon on an Honor Board for lying. The story goes the Officer presiding went to the room overnight....The charges were dropped and the room walled up. Since the one's telling us this were under the Honor Code I wouldn't take it they were lying -- the place was that weird and more so -- but obviously what is there now is basically there in name only as compared to what it once was....

    Replies: @Alden

    Thank you. I read Truscott’s book. It was a very well done investigation by army MPs procedural. A thriller with gay generals flying to West Point to enjoy the cadets. Just read his blurb on the book jacket. Thanks for the information.

    I’ve always heard that West Point was a torture chamber. Was it Thayer? The founder copied some sadistic Prussian military academy exactly. Back in the Prussian army when the point was founded there was 1 sergeant for every 3 soldiers who could bear them with canes no trial no accusation just beat them. Also running the gauntlet. After some sort of trial the accused had to run between 2 lines of soldiers who hit him with canes If he fell he had to do it again a couple days later. Also MPs in the back to shoot any front line soldiers who tried to run. Well, a lot better than the British army where officers could order soldiers whipped to death. Until the 1840s when a civilian county coroner and prosecutor indicted and convicted both the officers and the executioner who whipped the soldier till he died.

    West Point sounds a nightmare when you were there.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    @Alden

    I was reading about George Marshall in Wikipedia and his experience of the Virginia Military Institute seems to have been horrific. He was hazed by older cadets who made him squat over a bayonet. He fainted and stabbed himself in the buttock. He apparently won respect by not snitching on those who hazed him, but it seems pretty unpleasant, with more than a hint of homosexual SM.

  172. @Zero Philosopher
    Steve Sailer:

    "After all, what does physical strength have to do with leadership qualities in combat?"

    Actually, nothing. Napoleon was short and physicallt unimposing, and yet he was the greatest general of the past 500 years.

    Replies: @Zpaladin, @74v56ruthiyj, @Anonymous, @Wilkey, @Joe Paluka, @Observator, @WJ, @Peter Akuleyev, @S. Anonyia, @Walker88, @joe tentpeg, @Art Deco, @Getaclue, @Buffalo Joe, @Captain Tripps, @Unladen Swallow

    A man the size of an average woman, ( who would be short for a man ) would still have roughly forty pounds of additional lean muscle over what that woman had, at the same age.

  173. @Hapalong Cassidy
    @Anonymous

    Wellington beating Napoleon was sort of like Leon Spinks beating Muhammad Ali. If there was a contestant for better general of the last 500 years, the only one who comes close might be Georgy Zhukov during WW2.

    Replies: @LondonBob

    Napoleon was a dated general, completely neglected logistics and ignored advances in technologies with the impact they had on battle tactics and strategy.

    Claiming Napoleon was a superior general to Wellington is like claiming Lee was a superior general to Grant, what JFC Fuller has to say in that regard equally applies to Napoleon and Wellington. People prefer beautiful losers. WWI and the ACW would have been better fought had the officers conducting those wars instead studied Wellington and Grant rather than their vanquished opponents.

  174. @Steve Sailer
    @GeologyAnonMk3

    The British lost five ships to the Argentines in the Falklands, one to a guided missile, four to WWII style iron bombs, and could have lost 4 more if other iron bomb hits had not been duds.

    Replies: @Wielgus

    I had a Whittaker’s Almanac carrying a full list of Royal Navy ships in 1982, and I remember crossing off the ones the Argentines sank as it happened. The latter came closer to winning the war than the British like to admit. Nor were the losses in ground combat totally lopsided in favour of the British.

    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    @Wielgus

    The Argentine pilots were skillful and brave. The conscript infantry wasn't as ardent, especially after the Falklanders had spent months telling the poor draftees from Buenos Aires about how the Gurkhas were savages who were going to saw their heads off with big machetes.

    Replies: @GeologyAnonMk3

  175. @Mike Tre
    @Wielgus

    The rounds still have to be hand loaded into the turret pre-op. The M2 Browning weighs 85 pounds. Can a broad mount one on the turret by herself? Doubtful. Each track shoe in the track assembly weighs IIRC about 50 pounds. Ever thrown track out in the desert on a hot summer day in Kuwait? The pin that connects the track shoes has to be broken loose and then pounded out with a drift pin and sledge hammer. How about changing a broken torsion bar? Road wheels: 10-12 lug nuts hold each road wheel on its hub and are torqued to something like 75 foot pounds. Just breaking the lug nuts loose on a single wheel with a breaker bar will have a fit male drenched in 10 minutes. Suspension work on a tracked vehicle is a motherfucking BITCH even in the most favorable situation. Woman have no business operating any combat vehicle in any capacity, ever.

    The pro women-in-the-military people here have absolutely no idea what they are talking about. Forget the physical limitations for a moment. What are the consequences of inserting a female into an all male unit? Distraction? Creates unhealthy and wasteful competition between males. Creates temptation. Self censorship - no more fuck jokes while old girl is around unless you want a reprimand or worse. Suspicion. Resentment. Manipulation - females will use their wares to get men to do their share of the workload. Females who get pregnant get a shitload of time off PLUS they stay on the same promotion track as their male counterparts, even though they are way behind in real service time. Prostitution: deployed females often prostitute themselves. My first platoon SGT told me stories about Desert Shield where female marines were making 1000's of dollars selling sex to the men. It went on for months and the officers looked the other way.

    No healthy society should be enlisting their women in the military, let alone sending them to combat.

    Replies: @Wielgus

    I remember reading an interesting account of the Israeli armed forces in a book about modern warfare. It probably relied on an Israeli source so I cannot vouch for its reliability. It claimed that the IDF decided to no longer put women soldiers in situations where they might become involved in combat, because of an incident, presumably in 1973, where Arab opponents (I forget whether it was Egyptians or Syrians) attacked an Israeli position much more vigorously than usual because they realised there were woman soldiers there. This was because 1) they felt women would not fight as well as men and 2) if the Arabs took the position, they might capture some women they could rape – traditional spoils of war.

    • Replies: @Mike Tre
    @Wielgus

    That's another good point - captured female soldiers become instant incubators for their capturer's rape baby. Theoretically - an impregnated female soldier that is allowed to return home gets to treat the taxpayer to a lifetime of paying for an enemy's child.

    Replies: @Wielgus

  176. @Wielgus
    @Steve Sailer

    I had a Whittaker's Almanac carrying a full list of Royal Navy ships in 1982, and I remember crossing off the ones the Argentines sank as it happened. The latter came closer to winning the war than the British like to admit. Nor were the losses in ground combat totally lopsided in favour of the British.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer

    The Argentine pilots were skillful and brave. The conscript infantry wasn’t as ardent, especially after the Falklanders had spent months telling the poor draftees from Buenos Aires about how the Gurkhas were savages who were going to saw their heads off with big machetes.

    • Replies: @GeologyAnonMk3
    @Steve Sailer

    When I was going through tailhook/strike training pipeline, they had a couple pictures of the Argentine pilots in the big classroom building near the simulator bays. Apparently they had all been trained there. They only had pictures or paintings of guys considered excellent jet aviators, the only other one beside the Argentines I remember was a big mural of Duke Cunningham's dogfight against Colonel Toon.

    The Brits like to crow about their kill ratio against the Argentines, but the pK on an AIM-9L over the far south Atlantic is approaching 1 due to the thermal contrast between sea and exhaust. The Argies knew that and saddled up anyway.

  177. @PiltdownMan
    @Buffalo Joe

    Buffalo Joe, this well known photograph of Abraham Lincoln at Antietam comes to mind.

    Lincoln was 6'4" and I figure his chin must have been at the 5' 8" or 5' 7" level (allowing for his stoop.)

    The tops of the hats of those Union generals and soldiers next to him barely come up to his chin. A lot of those guys were 5'6" or shorter.

    https://historydaily.org/content/125703/dc455ba0a9ca6c529bff459b7f060938.jpg

    Replies: @Wielgus

    Whereas “Little Mac” directly facing him was a little shorter than the average at the time.

  178. Just had my third outpatient physical therapy visit for the knee and I noticed something: every single client other than me has been a female, mostly of them young. I asked the therapist about it and he said that teenaged girls and their knee injuries are about 40% of his patients.

    • Replies: @JMcG
    @Brutusale

    Soccer, lacrosse, field hockey.

    Replies: @Brutusale

  179. @Wielgus
    @Mike Tre

    I remember reading an interesting account of the Israeli armed forces in a book about modern warfare. It probably relied on an Israeli source so I cannot vouch for its reliability. It claimed that the IDF decided to no longer put women soldiers in situations where they might become involved in combat, because of an incident, presumably in 1973, where Arab opponents (I forget whether it was Egyptians or Syrians) attacked an Israeli position much more vigorously than usual because they realised there were woman soldiers there. This was because 1) they felt women would not fight as well as men and 2) if the Arabs took the position, they might capture some women they could rape - traditional spoils of war.

    Replies: @Mike Tre

    That’s another good point – captured female soldiers become instant incubators for their capturer’s rape baby. Theoretically – an impregnated female soldier that is allowed to return home gets to treat the taxpayer to a lifetime of paying for an enemy’s child.

    • Replies: @Wielgus
    @Mike Tre

    I have doubts about war rape causing much genetic change, as I think most impregnation culminates in either abortion or infanticide. Getting reliable figures on this is probably impossible, however.

  180. @Brutusale
    Just had my third outpatient physical therapy visit for the knee and I noticed something: every single client other than me has been a female, mostly of them young. I asked the therapist about it and he said that teenaged girls and their knee injuries are about 40% of his patients.

    Replies: @JMcG

    Soccer, lacrosse, field hockey.

    • Replies: @Brutusale
    @JMcG

    The other night two of them happened to be volleyball players from the local high school. Me and two girls in training bras getting poked and rubbed; it was a little too Jeffrey Epstein!

  181. @Mike Tre
    @Wielgus

    That's another good point - captured female soldiers become instant incubators for their capturer's rape baby. Theoretically - an impregnated female soldier that is allowed to return home gets to treat the taxpayer to a lifetime of paying for an enemy's child.

    Replies: @Wielgus

    I have doubts about war rape causing much genetic change, as I think most impregnation culminates in either abortion or infanticide. Getting reliable figures on this is probably impossible, however.

  182. @Alden
    @Getaclue

    Thank you. I read Truscott’s book. It was a very well done investigation by army MPs procedural. A thriller with gay generals flying to West Point to enjoy the cadets. Just read his blurb on the book jacket. Thanks for the information.


    I’ve always heard that West Point was a torture chamber. Was it Thayer? The founder copied some sadistic Prussian military academy exactly. Back in the Prussian army when the point was founded there was 1 sergeant for every 3 soldiers who could bear them with canes no trial no accusation just beat them. Also running the gauntlet. After some sort of trial the accused had to run between 2 lines of soldiers who hit him with canes If he fell he had to do it again a couple days later. Also MPs in the back to shoot any front line soldiers who tried to run. Well, a lot better than the British army where officers could order soldiers whipped to death. Until the 1840s when a civilian county coroner and prosecutor indicted and convicted both the officers and the executioner who whipped the soldier till he died.

    West Point sounds a nightmare when you were there.

    Replies: @Wielgus

    I was reading about George Marshall in Wikipedia and his experience of the Virginia Military Institute seems to have been horrific. He was hazed by older cadets who made him squat over a bayonet. He fainted and stabbed himself in the buttock. He apparently won respect by not snitching on those who hazed him, but it seems pretty unpleasant, with more than a hint of homosexual SM.

  183. @JMcG
    @Brutusale

    Soccer, lacrosse, field hockey.

    Replies: @Brutusale

    The other night two of them happened to be volleyball players from the local high school. Me and two girls in training bras getting poked and rubbed; it was a little too Jeffrey Epstein!

  184. @Steve Sailer
    @Wielgus

    The Argentine pilots were skillful and brave. The conscript infantry wasn't as ardent, especially after the Falklanders had spent months telling the poor draftees from Buenos Aires about how the Gurkhas were savages who were going to saw their heads off with big machetes.

    Replies: @GeologyAnonMk3

    When I was going through tailhook/strike training pipeline, they had a couple pictures of the Argentine pilots in the big classroom building near the simulator bays. Apparently they had all been trained there. They only had pictures or paintings of guys considered excellent jet aviators, the only other one beside the Argentines I remember was a big mural of Duke Cunningham’s dogfight against Colonel Toon.

    The Brits like to crow about their kill ratio against the Argentines, but the pK on an AIM-9L over the far south Atlantic is approaching 1 due to the thermal contrast between sea and exhaust. The Argies knew that and saddled up anyway.

    • Thanks: JMcG
  185. The new Army physical fitness test has caused quite a commotion in the Army and has gone all the way up to Congress.

    The usual suspects in Congress criticized the test as it would impair the promotion potential of female officers.
    https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-12-02/u-s-army-aims-for-stronger-healthier-soldiers-with-new-combat-fitness-test

    Last year defense authorization legislation directed the Army to delay implementation of the new test. Apparently soldiers are taking the new test without the scores counting.

    The former Army test has been around in some form since 1980: pushups situps and 2 mile run.

    Originally soldiers had to do the test in boots. Later the Army allowed running shoes which cut the 2 mile time quite a bit.

    The pushup event was the only part of the test to give soldiers real problems as what counted as a “correct” pushup had some subjectivity involved.

    One super fit west point grad in my basic course barely passed the pushups because an ornery nco refused to count most of his pushups.

    The Army test before 1980 did have more events : monkey bars, crab walk, situps, shuffle run, mile run i recall.

    The horizontal bars were definitely the most challenging for most soldiers. You had to traverse three lengths of a 20 foot horizontal ladder.

    The Army Combined Arms Insitute has a fascinating book length study on the history of Army physical fitness tests and standards.
    https://www.armyupress.army.mil/Portals/7/combat-studies-institute/csi-books/APRT_WhitfieldEast.pdf

    As designed the Army wanted the brand new test to be gender neutral and specify standards that might vary for infantry “persons” and administrative troops.

    Sounds like that will happen for women.

    Irony is the new test was designed to be job specific. IF a woman is going to lead airborne infantry S/HE needs to meet their standards.

    This will fail, and I see the Army giving in and just letting career girls take combat arms leadership jobs.

  186. @GeologyAnonMk3
    @Alden

    I don't disagree with you about the Navy and Air Force, speaking as a former sailor. It's been a long time since we had anything remotely like high-intensity combat on the seas. It's alarming because any war with China will be almost entirely a Navy show with some important support from the Air Force. Naval combat, when it goes down against a near peer, is quick, decisive, unbelievably violent, and utterly terrifying. I find it equally amusing and annoying when people laud the Marines of Guadacanal for managing somehow to defeat an enemy with no tanks, virtually no heavy artillery, very limited air support, and who was outnumbered by at least 2.5:1 at all times but ignore the fact that more than 3x as many Sailors were killed in the naval battles in the Slot that actually determined the outcome. Look how many ships were lost in WW2 with more than 300 men killed in a few minutes, seconds sometimes. The Navy hasn't been challenged in a long time, and outside the Naval Aviators and SEALs, I don't know if Joe Bluejacket has the steel to answer all bells into the enemy's missile engagement zone when he sees a destroyer alongside him get vaporized by a hypersonic waveglider and go down with all hands in about 3 seconds.

    Replies: @Steve Sailer, @Johann Ricke

    I don’t disagree with you about the Navy and Air Force, speaking as a former sailor. It’s been a long time since we had anything remotely like high-intensity combat on the seas. It’s alarming because any war with China will be almost entirely a Navy show with some important support from the Air Force.

    Wouldn’t the Air Force rapidly acquire some spanking new bases on Taiwan from which they would begin attempting to reduce the size of both the Chinese Air Force and Navy? Flying sorties from Okinawa seems like a really long round trip.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Steve Sailer Comments via RSS
PastClassics
The Surprising Elements of Talmudic Judaism
The Shaping Event of Our Modern World
Analyzing the History of a Controversial Movement
Becker update V1.3.2
How America was neoconned into World War IV