Military Affairs & History

[Freddy Rumsen]

When I was stationed at MCAS Iwakuni, Japan I went and did Jungle Warfare Training at Camp Gonsalves (Jungle Skills Course). While we were there another group in an advanced class on the other ridge found a Mitsubishi Zero that had crashed during the battle that had somehow evaded detection for 50 years. That was pretty awesome to see in person.

[dodint]

That's pretty cool. It reminds me of this, at the airfield at forgotten Camp Davis near Lejeune/New River:



Though it has since been collected and scrapped. Some neat anecdotal history of it from: http://www.airfields-freeman.com/NC/Airfields_NC_SE.htm

There is supposed to be a fair bit of wreckage in the woods just east of Cherry Point. A really nice restored show plane crashed in there a few years ago, a US-2B Grumman Tracker. It hung from the power lines after getting tangled up.

[Kaiser]

If you looked youd also find enough drone parts to build your own RQ.

[Freddy Rumsen]

Cool story on the USS Independence

http://sanctuaries.noaa.gov/news/press/ ... urvey.html

[tifosi77]

Seek out the documentary "Sinking An Aircraft Carrier". It was an hour long special about the scuttling of the USS Oriskany (iirc in the Gulf of Mexico) to turn it into a marine sanctuary.

[Freddy Rumsen]

Good stuff

[Shyster]

I could put this in the "grinds my gears" thread, but I think it's better here: I am displeased at the naming of recent aircraft carriers. Aircraft carriers originally started out named after battles (e.g. Lexington, Yorktown, Ticonderoga, Belleau Wood, Antietam) or prior navy ships of renown (e.g. Enterprise, Hornet, Wasp, Boxer, Princeton). The navy started to throw in presidential names with the Midway class (USS Franklin D. Roosevelt) and Kitty Hawk-class (USS John F. Kennedy), and with the Nimitz class they're nothing but presidents and politicians. The newest carrier and the lead ship of the Navy's new class will be the USS Gerald R. Ford. Seriously. Gerald frickin' Ford. He wasn't even elected as president in the first place. It sickens me to see the Navy play political kiss-ass with carrier names. (And don't even get me started on the USS Gabrielle Giffords and the USS John P. Murtha.)

[tifosi77]

At least Kennedy, Ford, and Bush Major were naval vets with wartime service records. Let's also not sell short Ford's work on the Warren Commission......

And strictly speaking, CV-67 (Kennedy) was the only ship in its own class. It was supposed to be nuclear powered, but the Navy was ordered to change it to coal fired I think after the keel was laid. So the smoke exhaust was bodged in, and had to be angled out of the top of the island to keep the glideslope clear for approaching pilots.

Cool story, Kennedy was the first big boat I ever saw in person, at Pier 12 in Norfolk. Seeing a hanger queen F-14 on the flight deck is what sparked my interest in naval aviation.

[columbia]

The Untold Story of the Vengeful Japanese Attack After the Doolittle Raid
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/u ... rHsjsQ2.99

[dodint]

USS Jason Dunham agrees.

[Freddy Rumsen]

This seems like a bad idea

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... omen-afte/

[dodint]

Yup.

I'm kind of surprised. I knew a few women in the Corps that could whip my ass. But everything in the Corps is gauged by upper body strength so I'm not surprised they all washed out. I met one of those 29 as she was on her way to the course, wonder what she's up to now.

[Kaiser]

the article says some females passed the enlisted infantry training. being an infantry officer is more about tactics, composure, leadership, and charisma as a difference between them and the enlisted grunts than having more physical strength. I think a female candidate passing a lower standard test could be just as effective as any other, except for one huge problem.

it would be known that the standards were lowered for them, and on top of being female in that pool of Y chromosomes, it would take a hell of a lot for anyone to respect them after passing that way. the ridicule, whether face to face from other officers, or behind barracks doors from the enlisted, would be brutal and probably unstoppable unless they did something extraordinarily heroic.

[dodint]

The problem exists in the regular ranks as well, but that's a really deep rabbit hole to go down and it's hard to talk about it without sounding misogynistic. My MOS was nearly fully gender integrated so it wasn't a problem with my community so much. USMC Aviation is a little more relaxed than the ground side.

[Freddy Rumsen]

the article says some females passed the enlisted infantry training. being an infantry officer is more about tactics, composure, leadership, and charisma as a difference between them and the enlisted grunts than having more physical strength. I think a female candidate passing a lower standard test could be just as effective as any other, except for one huge problem.

it would be known that the standards were lowered for them, and on top of being female in that pool of Y chromosomes, it would take a hell of a lot for anyone to respect them after passing that way. the ridicule, whether face to face from other officers, or behind barracks doors from the enlisted, would be brutal and probably unstoppable unless they did something extraordinarily heroic.

No offense, but having witnessed the Basic School and done field work in mountain warfare and jungle warfare the bolded and underlined portion I quoted could not be further from the truth. An infantry officer better be twice as better as any of his enlisted men in combat arms and day-to-day life in the field.

As much as the SJW's would like it to be different simple biology prevents females from being effective, long-term frontline combat fighters.

Not to be too crude, but you imagine a female with female hygiene issues living through a month in the Ypres trenches or being pinned down on Tarawa without proper washing facilities?

At the end of the day all of these programs will just further serve to kill morale and make our armed services even more defective than they already are.

[Reveutopique]

the article says some females passed the enlisted infantry training. being an infantry officer is more about tactics, composure, leadership, and charisma as a difference between them and the enlisted grunts than having more physical strength. I think a female candidate passing a lower standard test could be just as effective as any other, except for one huge problem.

it would be known that the standards were lowered for them, and on top of being female in that pool of Y chromosomes, it would take a hell of a lot for anyone to respect them after passing that way. the ridicule, whether face to face from other officers, or behind barracks doors from the enlisted, would be brutal and probably unstoppable unless they did something extraordinarily heroic.

No offense, but having witnessed the Basic School and done field work in mountain warfare and jungle warfare the bolded and underlined portion I quoted could not be further from the truth. An infantry officer better be twice as better as any of his enlisted men in combat arms and day-to-day life in the field.

As much as the SJW's would like it to be different simple biology prevents females from being effective, long-term frontline combat fighters.

Not to be too crude, but you imagine a female with female hygiene issues living through a month in the Ypres trenches or being pinned down on Tarawa without proper washing facilities?

At the end of the day all of these programs will just further serve to kill morale and make our armed services even more defective than they already are.

I wonder how women survived before tampons when they were traversing across continents with children strapped to their back, needing to protect themselves from the elements, predators, and illness.
Must have been a dodint.

[Z'MaattaU]

http://io9.com/5904633/in-1958-america- ... -playhouse

[Freddy Rumsen]

the article says some females passed the enlisted infantry training. being an infantry officer is more about tactics, composure, leadership, and charisma as a difference between them and the enlisted grunts than having more physical strength. I think a female candidate passing a lower standard test could be just as effective as any other, except for one huge problem.

it would be known that the standards were lowered for them, and on top of being female in that pool of Y chromosomes, it would take a hell of a lot for anyone to respect them after passing that way. the ridicule, whether face to face from other officers, or behind barracks doors from the enlisted, would be brutal and probably unstoppable unless they did something extraordinarily heroic.

No offense, but having witnessed the Basic School and done field work in mountain warfare and jungle warfare the bolded and underlined portion I quoted could not be further from the truth. An infantry officer better be twice as better as any of his enlisted men in combat arms and day-to-day life in the field.

As much as the SJW's would like it to be different simple biology prevents females from being effective, long-term frontline combat fighters.

Not to be too crude, but you imagine a female with female hygiene issues living through a month in the Ypres trenches or being pinned down on Tarawa without proper washing facilities?

At the end of the day all of these programs will just further serve to kill morale and make our armed services even more defective than they already are.

I wonder how women survived before tampons when they were traversing across continents with children strapped to their back, needing to protect themselves from the elements, predators, and illness.
Must have been a dodint.

Well, there is a reason why those same trails are full of the graves of women who died from infection and disease which are the result of the lack of preventive hygiene.

[DigitalGypsy66]

Source of the post http://io9.com/5904633/in-1958-america- ... -playhouse

I live (sort of) near the one in SC. I wasn't aware of it and happened to drive near the Historical Marker and nearly drove off the road. Atomic bomb accident? HERE??? LOL

[shafnutz05]

This seems like a bad idea

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... omen-afte/

"Bad" doesn't even do it justice. Gender equality is a wonderful principle, but it simply doesn't exist for the most part in areas like military combat. Crippling our military readiness and putting more soldiers (male and female) in harm's way by relaxing the standards is about as misguided and reckless a political move as it gets.

[columbia]

This seems like a bad idea

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/201 ... omen-afte/

+1

[DigitalGypsy66]

Why did it work in the Soviet Army?

https://www.facebook.com/39316691081310 ... =1&theater

[tifosi77]

As stated earlier, the only way women in combat can have any prayer of success is if the women perform to the exact same physical standards as the men. There are certainly women who are capable of that. I think that's the real threat to morale, not merely having women in the ranks. It's having them in the ranks when they haven't gone through the same crucible.

The notion that women should be kept out of combat roles because they menstruate is kinda funny, in a 12th century kind of way.

[Shyster]

And strictly speaking, CV-67 (Kennedy) was the only ship in its own class. It was supposed to be nuclear powered, but the Navy was ordered to change it to coal fired I think after the keel was laid. So the smoke exhaust was bodged in, and had to be angled out of the top of the island to keep the glideslope clear for approaching pilots.

Yeah, yeah, I know. We could also quibble with the "short hull" vs. "long hull" Essex class carriers or whether the George H.W. Bush should be considered its own class. I'd still prefer they go back to naming them after battles. For example, I'd much rather see a USS Surigao Strait or USS Samar or USS Cape Esperance than another Kennedy (I'm sure you already know that the second Ford class will carry that name).

USS Jason Dunham agrees.

Destroyers are one area where the Navy has pretty much stuck to historical naming conventions. Destroyers are typically either named for accomplished admirals (like Spruance, Fletcher, Zumwalt, and Mitscher) or sailors and marines who won the Navy Cross, Medal of Honor, or otherwise served with distinction or sacrifice. For example, there have been two USS The Sullivans, which were both named for the five Sullivan brothers who died in the sinking of the USS Juneau (the Sullivan brothers were also the inspiration for the plot of the movie Saving Private Ryan).

[tifosi77]

All I know is one of the Ford-class boats will revive the name Enterprise.