tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post5170124345648402029..comments2023-06-19T04:16:51.117-07:00Comments on buggieboy: Sixty Years Since Truman Desegregated the MilitaryJ.D.http://www.blogger.com/profile/09027687985747914971noreply@blogger.comBlogger87125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-328769086790276002008-08-23T18:01:00.000-07:002008-08-23T18:01:00.000-07:00"My favorite part of the Dump was the comments, th..."My favorite part of the Dump was the comments, though. The level of discourse, the (usual) civility, and the ability to "vent" were all what brought me to the Dump. I don't think that is possible on a blog that is part of the Washington Post.<BR/><BR/>"I would like to try it here."<BR/><BR/>Five posts in July, with the last on July 23; none in August.<BR/><BR/>"We former I-D-ites seem to be like Xenophon's lost army."<BR/><BR/>"The sea, the sea." Maybe we'll find it yet, Basil.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-73931049022758823582008-08-19T12:34:00.000-07:002008-08-19T12:34:00.000-07:00Al,I envy you for bopping around Europe on a Vespa...Al,<BR/><BR/>I envy you for bopping around Europe on a Vespa, although to me, a Vespa is a small scooter that was used on college campuses in the sixties.<BR/><BR/>How do you put up with the heat in Southern Italy? I've always wanted to visit there, but have been counseled by several people, not to go there during the summer.<BR/><BR/>I finally convinced my wife that we should try Space A to Europe. Living in NJ, McGuire and Dover AFBs are convenient. What holds us back is the dreadful exchange rate. Back in the day you got 4 DM to the dollar. Granted the currency is now Euros, but I'll probably never again see a deal like that.bigbirdhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00924483815427584643noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-84150819445484638222008-08-11T21:24:00.000-07:002008-08-11T21:24:00.000-07:00We former I-D-ites seem to be like Xenophon's lost...We former I-D-ites seem to be like Xenophon's lost army.<BR/><BR/>...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-13555337738353761742008-08-09T22:12:00.000-07:002008-08-09T22:12:00.000-07:00I just put up a new post on the PEGC blog HERE.I just put up a new post on the PEGC blog <A HREF="http://pegc.blogspot.com/2008/08/bullet-points.html" REL="nofollow">HERE.</A>Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-70716066506846687202008-08-09T21:01:00.000-07:002008-08-09T21:01:00.000-07:00Publius,The software for adding a post in blogger ...Publius,<BR/><BR/>The software for adding a post in blogger is pretty easy to use. You do need to set up a blogger account though.<BR/><BR/>CharlyCharles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-57170222661273206692008-08-09T18:26:00.000-07:002008-08-09T18:26:00.000-07:00Not your responsibility, Al. You've already rende...Not your responsibility, Al. You've already rendered yeoman service. I'd do something if it weren't for two minor problems. First, I'm not authorized. Second, even if I were, I wouldn't have a clue as to how to do it. Spirit may be willing, but the technical knowhow is lacking.<BR/><BR/>This is JD's blog. He was the one who said he was going to keep the Intel Dump flames burning. Unfortunately, we don't hear from JD anymore. Not a knock on him—I'm sure he's got a whole lot of more pressing matters—but still, one wonders about the long-term future of Buggie Boy.<BR/><BR/>Have a great time on your Vespa tour, Al. You're a braver man than me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-4678356715285421452008-08-09T14:34:00.000-07:002008-08-09T14:34:00.000-07:00I'm in the final days of preparations before we he...I'm in the final days of preparations before we head off, on our Vespas, for Italy for a month of touring by motorscooter. So, the ball's in JD's court.<BR/><BR/>If you guys want, I can open a thread for discussion on the recent events in Georgia (not the one that's home to Atlanta). Otherwise, I have to pass. Will be back on the island in mid-Sep.Aviator47https://www.blogger.com/profile/05585964386930142907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-17581225902416474292008-08-08T20:38:00.000-07:002008-08-08T20:38:00.000-07:00I'll second Sheer here. How about a new topic her...I'll second Sheer here. How about a new topic here, J.D.? Or whoever's in charge.<BR/><BR/>It's been more than two weeks since the last topic was posted, and that was by Al, who in fact is holding this whole blog together. <BR/><BR/>You going to do this or not? <BR/><BR/>Incidentally, for those of you who want to stay in the game and need to scratch the itch, I highly recommend Ranger Against War (retired SF officer) and Armchair Generalist (Army reserve officer), two bloggers who are still out there fighting on a daily basis and who I'm sure would welcome the traffic.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-39421921315202109762008-08-08T08:03:00.000-07:002008-08-08T08:03:00.000-07:00:::cough::::::cough::::::newtopic::::::cough::::::...:::cough:::<BR/>:::cough:::<BR/>:::newtopic:::<BR/>:::cough:::<BR/>:::cough:::Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-21150871616430238832008-08-04T14:48:00.000-07:002008-08-04T14:48:00.000-07:00Al,Framed in those terms, the case is:1) The exist...Al,<BR/><BR/>Framed in those terms, the case is:<BR/><BR/>1) The existing policy selects some of the available men and excludes all of the available women. <BR/><BR/>2) Some of the available women are superior to some of the selected men. <BR/><BR/>3) Therefore the policy excludes some of the best available candidates in favor of less qualified individuals. It follows that changing the policy will produce an incremental improvement in overall quality, and hence, performance.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-40360203684357069072008-08-04T12:57:00.000-07:002008-08-04T12:57:00.000-07:00Charles:"my ultimate claim is that integration wil...Charles:<BR/>"my ultimate claim is that integration will provide us better infantry than we have now."<BR/><BR/>Pray tell, what is currently lacking in the infantry that the assignment of 3 or 4 women to each rifle company will cure? Or 6 or 8?Aviator47https://www.blogger.com/profile/05585964386930142907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-2114855595511093452008-08-04T11:32:00.000-07:002008-08-04T11:32:00.000-07:00JP,BS. My arguments are explicit, while your misun...JP,<BR/><BR/>BS. My arguments are explicit, while your misunderstandings, misrepresentations, or inaccuracies are nothing that could be described as my arguments.<BR/><BR/>I've never claimed that the existing policy was unconstitutional -- I am well aware that the Equal Rights Amendment failed ratification. My arguments are moral and pragmatic, not legal, and my ultimate claim is that integration will provide us better infantry than we have now. I'm not saying you're violationg the law, I'm saying your pragmatic arguments are WRONG, and that the policy is, as a matter of FACT, detrimental to the service.<BR/><BR/>And I resent your insinuations that I am in any way, shape, or form arguing against facts, logic, or the law merely for the sake of "having my own way" -- the only one doing that here is you, QED.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-71239796118461987172008-08-04T10:16:00.000-07:002008-08-04T10:16:00.000-07:00Charles, I said your arguments were based on analo...Charles, I said your arguments were based on analogy, not that some humans are analagous to other humans (whatever that might mean).<BR/><BR/>In general I agree with you when you say "each of whom is entitled to be judged in relation to other human beings only on their merits."<BR/><BR/>That is even a matter of law most ways in this country. But I'm not at all sure it would be interpreted as the law by the SC if suit was brought against the DoD. <BR/><BR/>See, your job in the military is whatever the Secretary of Defense says is your job. You might have joined up with a contract that says you're to be a computer operator, or the infantry, and you may have failed all the requirements for any other specialty. <BR/><BR/>But if the SecDef says you carry a rifle, that's what you do. Right and wrong in the philosophical sense doesn't enter into it.<BR/><BR/>But have it your way; you will anyway.<BR/><BR/>Cheers,<BR/><BR/>JPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-79802242422470507562008-08-04T08:51:00.000-07:002008-08-04T08:51:00.000-07:00JP,NO.Human beings are NOT "analogous" to human be...JP,<BR/><BR/>NO.<BR/><BR/>Human beings are NOT "analogous" to human beings, they ARE human beings; and blacks and gays, etc, are NOT separate species of beings, they are HUMANS of different descriptions, each of whom is entitled to be judged in relation to other human beings only on their merits.<BR/><BR/>More to the point, ANY human of ANY description is ONLY useful in regard to a particular military purpose or objective by virtue of their own specific merits.<BR/><BR/>You have no case here at all.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-11939948131510567302008-08-04T08:14:00.000-07:002008-08-04T08:14:00.000-07:00Charles, I think your "logic" is essentially reaso...Charles, <BR/><BR/>I think your "logic" is essentially reasoning by analogy. Like the drunk's lamppost, analogy should be used for illumination rather than support.<BR/><BR/>You seem to be saying that, because invalid reasons were used to exclude blacks and gays from entire categories of service (e.g., limiting blacks to the mess and gravedigging, and excluding gays entirely) -- then there cannot possibly be any valid reason for excluding anyone from any type of service.<BR/><BR/>Reductio ad absurdum pretty much blows that argument out of the water. Quadraplegics should be able to serve anywhere they want to? The US military fails even your "glasses" example -- try getting into a US military flight school with 20/400 vision or color blindness. <BR/><BR/>It's conceivable that a color-blind or even a one-eyed pilot could excel (see Saburo Sakai). But the chances are very slim, and so they don't even let them try. Do you think that exclusion is wrong? <BR/><BR/>The point is that women are not excluded from honorable service in the combat arms the way blacks and gays have been. Neither are people who are color-blind. But I don't think it is unreasonable to exclude people from particular specialties based on the statistical likelihood of their success in that job.<BR/><BR/>Kant be damned. In my experience, complex problems get solved by making trade-offs. I see nothing wrong with examining such trade-offs (e.g., logistics, mission capability and yes, even unit cohesion) in this instance, while you seem to think that your vision of anybody-can-do-anything-they want cannot be traded off against any other concern, period. <BR/><BR/>Frederick be damned, too. If "OBEY!" is the only response to a question about any order or policy, why doesn't that apply to those who are excluded from a specific job, as long as they can still serve in combat?<BR/><BR/>And note that I am not simply asserting that I am right, as you seem to be doing. I'm just trying to contribute to the discussion. Even when you swayed fdchief to your point of view, he still wanted to see the plan, which would of course include pros and cons, facts and figures -- you know, those pesky things that might have to be traded off against one another before a decision is actually made.<BR/><BR/>Cheers,<BR/><BR/>JPAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-77048576046931436992008-08-03T12:54:00.000-07:002008-08-03T12:54:00.000-07:00"I personally believe that permanently integrating..."I personally believe that permanently integrating women into the infantry or any other combat arms is asinine and would be detrimental to our national security."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Which proves exactly one thing: that the real problem here isn't your prejudice, it's your fundamental misunderstanding of warfare. AS IF anyone ever much gave a shit who won the war for them, or that mattered as much as how and why it was done.<BR/><BR/>I've said it before and I'll say it again:<BR/><BR/>BULLSHIT.<BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, C-Span's In Depth program this week is with Ralph Peters, and will interest most of you. His support for McCain is insane, but aside from that, it was fascinating. Asked about the future of the Army, he said "It's all about the people;" of equipment, he said "ARA -- Able, Robust, Affordable," and then observed that there was pressing need to take positive steps to end the wanton malfeasance of defense contractors such as Lockheed-Martin.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-71332709646154892492008-08-03T09:55:00.000-07:002008-08-03T09:55:00.000-07:00PFM:The numbers were from me, but they were not po...PFM:<BR/><BR/>The numbers were from me, but they were not posted to bolster any gender desegregation efforts. I personally believe that permanently integrating women into the infantry or any other combat arms is asinine and would be detrimental to our national security.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, I think the ladies play a vital role in Iraq when attached to small unit infantry patrols that could end up dealing with Iraqi women and children. The Army and Marine leaders who encouraged that are smart cookies in my book.<BR/><BR/>My intent in posting those numbers from the VFW article (I assume the original source was the Pentagon) was to show that women are contributing. They definitely have a role in the middle east. Without them, we would not be getting any cooperation from the Iraqi people.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-69875178402978196102008-08-03T09:16:00.000-07:002008-08-03T09:16:00.000-07:00Al, I said exactly what I thought the benefit was:...Al, <BR/><BR/>I said exactly what I thought the benefit was: a net increase in the quality of the force.<BR/><BR/>I don't care how many women end up in any one unit any more than I care how many Dodger Fans do. There are better reasons to exclude Republicans from military service than there are to exclude women from combat.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-1376370810507989852008-08-03T08:51:00.000-07:002008-08-03T08:51:00.000-07:00Well PFM, I don't know what to tell you except tha...Well PFM, I don't know what to tell you except that when somebody tells me that 1 + 1 = 3, it seems probable their experience is mostly being ignored.<BR/><BR/>You say you haven't seen too many you'd be willing to risk your life on, yet the fact is that you were doing just that every minute in Iraq, because you were dependent on the whole Army for your support, and there were women at work in every part it one way or another.<BR/><BR/>What you really mean is that you haven't seen too many you'd be willing to rely on in action, based on your experience. Well I'm a programmer myself, which is in practice a lot like being an infantryman in a fire fight, where every little thing that goes wrong can potentially be fatal to the mission, and everything is in motion at once, so there all sorts of things that can go wrong at any given moment in time.<BR/><BR/>Give me a break. There isn't anyone that you served with in combat who didn't start out as an untrained recruit or cadet, and there isn't any untrained recruit or cadet that an experienced infantryman would be willing to rely on in combat unless there simply wasn't any other choice. When you have a policy that excludes ALL women from combat, it's hardly surprising that not many women have a lot of combat experience, and it's equally difficult to believe the women serving in the Army get nearly as much serious infantry training as the men do when the policy means that ALL such training is of secondary importance in the specialties that they are allowed to pursue.<BR/><BR/>My understanding of it, both from my long study of military history and my programming experience, is that team-work, morale, and espirit d'corps are a function of training, doctrine, and leadership, and that anyone of reasonable intelligence can be trained to do anything within the broad limits of their capacities. This is where you're arguments are a denial of ALL human experience, which clearly shows that the ability of humans to do anything depends ultimately on their intellectual capacities regardless of their physical limits.<BR/><BR/>Get real already.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-15050582036157579312008-08-03T04:00:00.000-07:002008-08-03T04:00:00.000-07:00Charles-I would never suggest that there are not w...Charles-<BR/><BR/>I would never suggest that there are not women in the Army who are physically and emotionally capable of serving in the Infantry. Possibly a good 20% of the women are so qualified. Assuming that half of them might aspire to infantry billets, that means 1.4% of the Army is women willing and able to serve in the infantry. Were we to begin training and assigning qualified women to the infantry, that would mean that every other platoon of infantry (approx 35 soldiers) would have one female member, and each company would have approximately 2 female soldiers. Hardly a necessary special needs population for which one should expend the resources to find these two women per company, train them and have COL bg set up a special logistics system for. All to meet a philosophical objective. You have offered no sound mission oriented benefit.<BR/><BR/>As to the number of women willing and able to serve in the Infantry, even if you doubled my figure above, that would result in four women per infantry company. Again, what is gained other than symbolic ends?<BR/><BR/>I won't even begin to go into the personnel management burden arising from attempting to manage such a small population. <BR/><BR/>Yes, Charles, it would be possible to assign qualified women to the infantry. It would carry considerable costs and complications. It would probably not improve the capabilities of our infantry, but if that's what you want, then go for it.Aviator47https://www.blogger.com/profile/05585964386930142907noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-28174879549587637582008-08-02T23:21:00.000-07:002008-08-02T23:21:00.000-07:00No rhetoric here, Charles. My observations are ba...No rhetoric here, Charles. My observations are based on actual experience, not wishful thinking. Try it out, sometime - it might give your tirades an air of plausibility.<BR/><BR/>PFMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-59670975528131085362008-08-02T22:38:00.000-07:002008-08-02T22:38:00.000-07:00Hi PFM,I have done my homework.What I've said in e...Hi PFM,<BR/><BR/>I have done my homework.<BR/><BR/>What I've said in essence is that certain arguments are inherently 'sexist', meaning that they are 'bigoted' in relation to sex. When I refer to bigotry I mean something very specific:<BR/><BR/>"To look at another human being as an inferior being, animal, or thing."<BR/><BR/>Beyond that, you might want to try thinking about what I said instead of just tossing more rhetoric at me.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-87587459758786204142008-08-02T20:36:00.000-07:002008-08-02T20:36:00.000-07:00Charles, please do your homework before accusing u...Charles, please do your homework before accusing us of being racist, biased defenders of the old order. I was an Engineer in Iraq, and other than the fact that I rode all over in a Humvee and occasionally shot at people I had almost nothing in common with your average Infantry mission. Not sure if any of the women cited here died clearing houses or engaging the enemy in close quarters, either. That is the primary difference between Infantry and others - their job is to close with and kill the enemy. In a war zone, that should be the primary consideration for the military - how effective are we at destroying the enemy and their assets. Not how effective are we in integrating the service to make the numbers look good for the special interests. Show me the large numbers of women that will engage the enemy effectively in close up and personal urban combat and I'm all for them to enter, but in 24 years of active, guard and reserve time I haven't seen too many that I'd be willing to risk my life on. And that is the primary difference between your number crunching and reality - lives are at stake in this game, not numbers. <BR/><BR/>PFMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-44062871341977129792008-08-02T12:51:00.000-07:002008-08-02T12:51:00.000-07:00Exactly, and nobody ever thinks they're going to b...Exactly, and nobody ever thinks they're going to be one of the ones who takes a hit anyway. I chose that example because it was specific to the context.Charles Gittingshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14669296162762355112noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7610233.post-7533098206003233112008-08-02T12:00:00.000-07:002008-08-02T12:00:00.000-07:00Give me a break. Who do you know who joined the mi...<B>Give me a break. Who do you know who joined the military because they thought it would be free of occupational hazards?</B><BR/><BR/>You don't have to cite the example of the military for that.<BR/><BR/>Nobody wants to farm hoping their arm won't disappear up a grain augur, or postal service recruits hoping their workmates don't pull out assault rifles.<BR/><BR/>I would bet good money a sizeable percentage, maybe even a majority of folk enter the military for educational benefits and a chance to see the world a bit before settling into the great gray abyss of "normal" civilian life.<BR/><BR/>For that reason, you do very well to advocate similar chances in the military for our women.<BR/><BR/>...Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com