Reply to Thread

2nd Lt. USAF 150th Fighter Wing

LTC Bailey, Sir, I admire your honesty and courage and unfaltering ability to stand up for what you believe in regardless of how irritating some "civil" people can be, Sir. Thank you for your excellent service and admirable wisdom, both historically and currently, Sir. As to you women who wish to serve in combat, don't give up hope. You can find what you want, if you know where to look.

I agree that women should be allowed in combat. I also think that saying women are too emotional is a huge generalization. I know too many men who I have laughed and cried with that are fighting machines. They aren't made of stone. And who knows, maybe it'll be like black integration. First we'll go for all female units and work our way to being fully equal. It won't happen over night, or for a very long time even.

I also agree with Paula. Just because you can't go into combat doesn't mean you shouldn't serve. I can't be in combat but I'm doing the closest thing I can get to it.

read

LTC William E. Bailey

Thanks for serving, and always appreciate an educated officer. I served in the Army with a few Units State side and over-sea's. My last Unit was 1/8 Cav. 1CD, Fort Hood Tx. ( Armour ) Also to all the women who have and still serve, thank you. I really never gave the role of a woman serving much thought. As for I was in a Combat unit, all men. Now being a Veteran, often looking at those now serving in Iraq or Afghanistan. I have seen alot of female soldiers doing a lot of important roles. Not to mention the roles women play in the USMC, Air Force and Navy. Thanks again...........

CPL. Sahlin

Originally Posted by Amber

I respect you, Bailey. I didn't understand jusy exactly WHY the hell you won't let this go... you kind of remind me of the 180 one-armed push up girl.

I have no idea what you're referring to. I last responded in this thread 4 years ago. Did you miss the dates of the posts..?

Well, curiousity got the best of me. I googled you.

I'm pretty easy to find, since I post with my real name. I've posted my bona fides on this site many times, and you could have just done a search here.

I wanted to know what you did that makes you so "right".

What makes me right are my combat experience, and education in ground combat. The fact that the higher echelons of the US military agree with me, as well as Congress, and the White House are other reasons why I'm right on this issue. I'm perfectly willing to discuss this issue with anyone, but I prefer to keep the dialogue civil, which at times has been difficult for some of the women posting here.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with you.

Then why are you posting here about me. I'm not the issue. The issue is women serving in modern ground combat, and whether allowing this to occur supports or hinders the security of this nation.

(Studies show that men linger around wounded/hurt women in battle, not only putting themselves at risk, but everyone else as well.)

What studies..? It is a standard for everyone in the military never to leave a fallen comrade. Men are undoubtedly going to be more protective of women, but to my knowledge no studies have been conducted to show this has a deleterious effect on the unit. We can argue about the effect on combat cohesion, but it would be mostly subjective opinion.

I just don't like the way you talk down to women... even IF they deserve it.

Well, I don't agree with your analysis. I try hard not to talk down to anyone, whether they deserve it or not. If I have, or it appears that I have then you have my apology.

Didn't you mother raise you to ALWAYS be a gentleman and NEVER mention a woman's weight.. especially suggesting that she is 'overweight'?

My mother died when I was two years old. If someone is at or above the screening table weight for the US Army, then they are close to being overweight, and I don't care if it hurts their feelings or not.

I came across this article:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us

This is no theoretical assumption on his part. The only green beret ever awarded to a woman came from a judge. According to retired Special Forces officer Lt. Col. William E. Bailey, Cpt. Kathleen Wilder attended all three phases of Special Forces training in the summer of 1980, but during the final week "she and two male students were caught caching their rucksacks. That is, she and her compatriots were not carrying the rucksacks as required by the instructors, but hiding them to pick up at a later time and date in what is referred to as a Mission Support Site. All three were dropped from the course, ostensibly for cheating." The men accepted the outcome, Bailey has written, but Wilder got a lawyer who argued she was a victim of sex discrimination. The court agreed, ordering that she receive a course completion certificate. She never spent a day in an actual Special Forces unit, according to Bailey, but she continues to play off her reputation as "the nation’s only female Green Beret."

Yes, they quoted me from this website without attempting to talk to me first. However, since I stand by my words, what they published is essentially what I wrote here on this website with regard to Katie Wilder.

A little upset that she got "special treatment"? Get over it.

She didn't receive special treatment. She was kicked out of the SF course for cheating. She never received a graduation diploma, never wore the Special Forces Tab, and was never qualified as a Special Forces soldier. She received a course completion certificate because she sued in court, and that is all. I have no feelings about her one way or the other, as we have never met.

P.S.- nice bikes.... and biceps, even for a 57 yr. old man from WA....

I'm in DC.

Bailey?

I respect you, Bailey. I didn't understand jusy exactly WHY the hell you won't let this go... you kind of remind me of the 180 one-armed push up girl.

Well, curiousity got the best of me. I googled you. I wanted to know what you did that makes you so "right". Don't get me wrong, I agree with you. (Studies show that men linger around wounded/hurt women in battle, not only putting themselves at risk, but everyone else as well.) I just don't like the way you talk down to women... even IF they deserve it. Didn't you mother raise you to ALWAYS be a gentleman and NEVER mention a woman's weight.. especially suggesting that she is 'overweight'?

I came across this article:
http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us


This is no theoretical assumption on his part. The only green beret ever awarded to a woman came from a judge. According to retired Special Forces officer Lt. Col. William E. Bailey, Cpt. Kathleen Wilder attended all three phases of Special Forces training in the summer of 1980, but during the final week "she and two male students were caught caching their rucksacks. That is, she and her compatriots were not carrying the rucksacks as required by the instructors, but hiding them to pick up at a later time and date in what is referred to as a Mission Support Site. All three were dropped from the course, ostensibly for cheating." The men accepted the outcome, Bailey has written, but Wilder got a lawyer who argued she was a victim of sex discrimination. The court agreed, ordering that she receive a course completion certificate. She never spent a day in an actual Special Forces unit, according to Bailey, but she continues to play off her reputation as "the nation’s only female Green Beret."

A little upset that she got "special treatment"? Get over it.

P.S.- nice bikes.... and biceps, even for a 57 yr. old man from WA....

Okay. Well I read most of the replies and all I have to say is I happeneed across this sight because a few weeks ago I was looking into joining the army and received an info packet only to find out I could not be in Infantry. I'm sorry but when I think of what I would like to do and where I would be beneficial the Infantry is the only the I can relate to. I was frustrated and decided to look online to see if there was any fighting being done to change this. I think women should be judged on an individual basis instead of as a whole. I have the utmost respect for all the men in the army but I can honestly look at someone and say. I honestly know, beyond a shadow of a doubt if I had to kill someone I could do it. I just feel that if someone can prove themself they should have that right to do it.

Women, tests, and history.

Colonel,

While I fully sympathize with your irritation with teenagers, and emotional rants, there are a few points I would like to make:

Regarding tests: the tests the US Army conducted in the early 1940s, which cleared the way for the women's auxiliary services did not limit themselves to testing for those roles. They tested women in all army career fields. The tests did not validate your arguments. They not only found that women could perform all the functions required of the infantry, but in fact that gender-integrated units were more efficient, had less internal discipline issues, and lost less man-days of duty.

General Marshall was interested in filling slots, however, not in philosophy, so, rather than fight with Congress to get women fully integrated, he only fought to get slots filled, starting with the least controversial jobs and working his way up. Since having the women's auxiliary services satisfied the Army's needs at a that time, he accepted that.

Women have been in front-line combat units, with men. Hundreds, if not thousands fought in Napoleon's army, and while most joined in disguise, most also ended up serving openly. Many were decorated with the highest awards for valour, and they made it into the most elite units, including the Imperial Guard. There is no data to support the idea that this caused internal disruption. Indeed, the army in question is generally held to have been the best of it's era, and while that is a subjective matter, open to debate, there is no question that it was a highly performing fighting force, from which many modern military concepts and practices around the world have been derived. Discipline problems are caused by poor leaders. High standards, correctly enforced, and leading by example are the cure to any such problems.

Women fought openly in the Russian Army in both world wars. Although the all-female Battalions of Death were the most famous, women had been allowed to serve openly in units with men ever since Tsar Alexander granted Nadezhda Durova's request to continue serving as a cavalry officer. Few chose to do so until the Battalions of Death were formed, because of social conventions, but some did, and again, no problems were reported with those that did, or with the hundreds of thousands who served from 1917 onwards. In fact, German Army reports indicated that Russian females were generally more determined and aggressive opponents, and surrendered less frequently.

More recently, as you should be aware, the US Army, in preparation for opening more MOS' to women to meet personnel needs, again conducted tests which found that women could be trained to perform any physical function necessary to meet the needs of any Army MOS.

Finally, any problems caused amongst male infantry by their attitudes towards women are their problem. The Army has no business coddling prejudice. Doing so is no different from humoring racism. You argue that the situation is different, because, you say, gender differences are physical, while racial differences are merely a matter of dislike. But you know well that this is not true. Black people were popularly perceived as being less intelligent, less psychologically stable, and less reliable by American society at the time Truman desegregated the Armed Forces. At that time, the reasons for keeping black people out of white units was perceived as being every bit as real as the supposed differences between genders today by the majority of Americans. It is undoubted that desegregation did cause problems in the services at the time. There were still racial tensions in the Armed Forces 20 and 30 years later. Yet, they got by, and got over it. Following the line of though you argue, the military should assign people only to units made up of people from the same region and culture whenever possible. That would likely lead to better unit cohesion and bonding. It was found useful in the German Army. But the Army does not, for a variety of reasons, political, cultural and administrative. Therefore, logically, there is no reason to regard females differently.

Lastly, I should point out that using military height weight standards as a criticism of fitness for something is rather silly. As a soldier, you should know well enough that the standards set by the military have nothing to do with physical fitness or ability to perform a job. Indeed, those standards were not in place when you began your service. They are artificial, and have more to do with appearance than effectiveness. When I was in the Marines, I knew other Marines who excelled physically, yet because of their body type, never met height/weight standards. They excelled on their PFTs, they out-performed other Marines on 10 and 20 mile marches, but they received administrative discipline, and even separation because of stupid obsession with BMI nonsense. I imagine you yourself probably knew at least one soldier who could meet every physical standard in the Army, but was pushed out by the adoption of the current height/weight regulations.

Your right to respect for your service is unquestioned. Other people ought to be able to hold a civil debate with you without resort to emotional diatribes, rants or threats, and I am sorry that you have to put up with such, despite the young lady's justified frustration with arbitrary rules. But your arguments have made use of several 'facts' which are not actually true. I would ask that you do more research before repeating them.

LT B brings a great point in showing respect for the thousands of women warriors who have and continue to serve our country. I say to every woman out there who wants to pick up a gun and fight, the first step is joining. Join any branch, and work hard. Be the best dang person in your platoon, shop, unit, ship...etc. Let your actions speak for you vs your words. Continue to vote accordingly (pay attention to politics) One day just like every other obstacles we've over come...we will be allowed into combat. But, we have to be smart about it, and that is leave the men alone...do not date men you work with, do not tolerate with any mockery of your gender, and be professional at all times. It is inevitable that women will one day legally fight in combat.

Good info

Very nice site!

Good info

Very nice site!