← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Ragnar
Thread ID: 12044 | Posts: 20 | Started: 2004-01-27
2004-01-27 04:01 | User Profile
(Didn't Phyllis Shlafly say this would happen? Didn't the feminists call her loony for saying it? Just curious...)
[B]Female GIs reporting rapes by U.S. soldiers[/B]
[url]http://fairuse.1accesshost.com/news1/charlotte1.html[/url]
Women say response lacking within military, some even threatened
MILES MOFFEIT AND AMY HERDY
Denver Post
Posted on Sat, Jan. 24, 2004
Female troops serving in Iraq are reporting an insidious enemy in their own camps: fellow American soldiers who sexually assault them.
At least 37 female service members have sought sexual-trauma counseling and other assistance from civilian rape-crisis organizations after returning from war duty in Iraq, Kuwait and other overseas stations, women's assistance and advocacy organizations say.
"We have significant concerns about the military's response to sexual assault in the combat zone," said Christine Hansen, executive director of the Connecticut-based Miles Foundation, which says it has assisted 31 women.
The women, ranging from enlisted soldiers to officers, have reported poor medical treatment, lack of counseling and incomplete criminal investigations by military officials. Some say they were threatened with punishment after reporting assaults.
The Pentagon did not respond to repeated requests for information about the number of sexual assault reports during the conflict. Defense officials would say only that they will not tolerate sexual assault in their ranks.
"Commanders at every level have a duty to take appropriate steps to prevent it, protect victims, and hold those who commit them accountable," a written statement from the Pentagon said.
Members of Congress said they are alarmed by the assault reports, confirming that they have learned of incidents as well. Colorado Sen. Wayne Allard said he intends to raise the issue with the Senate Armed Services Committee. Two Pennsylvania members of Congress, Rep. Joseph Pitts and Sen. Arlen Specter, intervened last month on one rape victim's behalf to bring her home.
Senate leaders pledged last year to investigate the military's handling of rape and domestic-violence cases after media reports of problems including flawed investigations, inadequate victim services and unusual leniency for soldier sex offenders. Congressional hearings were recommended, but none has been scheduled.
2004-01-27 04:10 | User Profile
Ragnar,
That she did. At the same time while I think that this should be investigated to the fullest I wouldn't be surprised if some of these claims are faked based on my experience of being around females in the military. Still, something good may come out of this and that is the deep sixing of the nonsense about women in combat units, or for that matter, in service and support units. They have no business there.
2004-01-27 07:08 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]They have no business there.[/QUOTE]
I agree Sert and that brings to mind the military recruitment ads that Opera is running on their free browser. It's promotes 'Today's Military' with a picture of a couple of collegiate looking black females that looks like it would better fit some kind of feminine hygeine product. Just flat-out laughable. Any nation that seeks to defend itself with its women is a nation that's in a sorry condition if you ask me. 'Course they didn't.
2004-01-27 15:54 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Sertorius]Ragnar,
That she did. At the same time while I think that this should be investigated to the fullest I wouldn't be surprised if some of these claims are faked based on my experience of being around females in the military. Still, something good may come out of this and that is the deep sixing of the nonsense about women in combat units, or for that matter, in service and support units. They have no business there.[/QUOTE]
Sertorius,
Are you talking about women being out of the military entirely?
What about women as nurses, doctors, and other medical personnel? Florence Nightingale and her nurse team were a major factor in reducing casualties in the Crimea War, even though I think that they were not offical members of the army, but when wounded, most men, except homosexuals and mysogynists( of which there are a few on this board), would rather have a female than a male nurse, because they give better care and are prettier to look at.
And another question, if military readiness is a concern, and females bring it down, then why are men allowed to have porn in their barracks and why are prostitutes tolerated around bases and on the field? This is as much of a distraction as if having actual women there in the barracks. If wives are not allowed in the barracks or on the field in a war zone, then why are these women tolerated, either in picture or flesh? And as for prostitution and "field romances", many a man has contracted diseases and even been injured or killed in such close encounters with the enemy, not to mention gving military secrets to "Mata Haris", which would be used against them on the field. This just seems hypocritical to me and if women are a distraction and a problem, then all female distractions and problems need to be elimated, or men court-martialed if they seek them, for when they do they may be endangering their units.
2004-01-27 18:02 | User Profile
Sertorius,
Are you talking about women being out of the military entirely?
That's a fair question. No, not at all.
What about women as nurses, doctors, and other medical personnel? Florence Nightingale and her nurse team were a major factor in reducing casualties in the Crimea War, even though I think that they were not offical members of the army, but when wounded, most men, [u]except homosexuals and mysogynists[/u] (that's the damn truth :lol: )( of which there are a few on this board), would rather have a female than a male nurse, because they give better care and are prettier to look at.
It is positons like that is where I want to see them, knowing this to be true from first hand experience. By "service and support" is meant using women as truck drivers, in maintenance units, and other formations you find immediately behind the front lines. Those units are just as important as combat units and men don't need the distraction of having to deal with the differences in upper body strength or more noble sentiments of trying to protect women who find themselves in harm's way. Neither do women need to be exposed to some of the cruder stuff that some men do. Now, I will acknowledge that there are exceptions, but I have found them to be far and few in between. That is the only objecton that I have on practical grounds on the employment of women. Other than that I have no objections save two and one is political. I dislike the feminists who use this as a form of social engineering and I dislike the people behind the feminists even more who push this for more destructive purposes. i.e., to enfeminate the services. The other one is this. I am a Southerner and my views on this are those of the past.
And another question, if military readiness is a concern, and females bring it down, then why are men allowed to have porn in their barracks and why are prostitutes tolerated around bases and on the field? This is as much of a distraction as if having actual women there in the barracks. If wives are not allowed in the barracks or on the field in a war zone, then why are these women tolerated, either in picture or flesh? And as for prostitution and "field romances", many a man has contracted diseases and even been injured or killed in such close encounters with the enemy, not to mention gving military secrets to "Mata Haris", which would be used against them on the field. This just seems hypocritical to me and if women are a distraction and a problem, then all female distractions and problems need to be elimated, or men court-martialed if they seek them, for when they do they may be endangering their units.
In the case of porn I can speak of the units that I was with and tell you that there wasn't that much around. Furthermore, when it comes to someone putting up a photo of a nude woman in the barracks or for that matter his wall locker it wouldn't be tolerated.
Soldiers who are married live either in on post housing or they live off post. The military provides funds for married personel so this isn't a problem. As for prostitution that is off post and the military doesn't have any control over it. It certainly doesn't encourage it for the reasons you note above. I will go so far to say that in some cases the civilian authorities deliberately overlook it. For them it is a way to get people to come to town and spend money. Folks that are happily married have no need or desire for that matter to see the prostitutes. It is mainly single troops who engage in that and even then it isn't as many as you would think. The "Mata haris" are a problem that will always be with us and that comes from a flawed character I believe.
At one time it used to be a military offense to contract V.D., but that was changed a long time ago when they realized that for fear of punishment the troops wouldn't report this and become and even worse health problem. Unfortunately, one has to deal with human nature here and some people will seek out prostitutes. Some armies have dealt with the problem by having their own bordellos where they can insure the women aren't affected. The U.S. Army doesn't do this at this time, at least as not official policy.
If I haven't address your question in a satisfactory way then please ask more.
2004-01-27 22:25 | User Profile
Sertorious,
I am a Southerner also and are against women serving in the army for the most part except in certain support positions like nurses and other medical support personnel but I am not knowledgable enough about military structure to comment about any other support positions they could be used. Women in combat and support front line positions would weaken units because they are a distraction and could not support their end, no matter how hard they indeed try. Very few women can carry the 100+ lbs backpack that infantrymen carry and are not strong enough to handle many of the weapons that infantrymen carry. If the army wanted the women to be halfway useful, then they would have to give women longer basic training which includes heavy weightlifting to get women in shape to be able to carry the packs. Linda Hamilton, the muscled-up woman in Terminator 2, said that all the bodybuilding that she did for several months did not get her in shape to have enough strength to fire the bazooka (?) in the final scene that pumped holes in the terminator robot. The film crew had to do 15 or more takes because she couldn't hold the gun convincingly because it was so heavy and it took all the strength she could muster to fire it. So how do you think an average woman would fare on the field?
Also another thing about women is the overall masculine mentality of the armed forces. I like to read fiction and non-fiction of all types and this has included first person male accounts of their experiences in the army and on the battlefield. I am naturally an analytical person and enjoyed math, science, and like to discussing politics and could understand the logic of military strategy and in my youth enjoyed tomboyish things , but even so, I can never relate completely to the mentality that these men expressed in these accounts as they talked about their military experiences, particularly when in combat on field.
As for my other comments, I had the wrong impression that these practices were tolerated by the army but I think VD and AIDS should still be a military offense, because some would keep their pants zipped if they were to get a dishourable dicharge or worse ( and I say this about both sexes). About the reporting, aren't troops given regular medical checkups that would detect VD and other problems anyway? How can they hide it? But thanks for your answer and you did address my question satisfactorly.
2004-01-28 11:04 | User Profile
Skemper,
Your view on this is the same as mine. As for fairing out in the field other than those positions that we've described above I would wish to keep it to an absolute minimum. While I have every wish to see women trained to defend themselves I have no desire to ever see then used as combat troops. The feminists and the evil ones behind this can go to the devil for I regard this as the ultimate in barbarism. I would also note that countries like Israel that have tried this discovered that it doesn't work for the reasons already noted. As for a woman lifting weights that brings to mind the East German Olympic team. From a personal point of view I find that distasteful to look at and another example of feminism run amok. I prefer for women to be in shape, but not in that manner.
When I was in we didn't have physicals for V.D. People who contracted that went to the medics and it was handled there. As for courtmartialling them, well, when you consider what the treatment for gonorrhea is you could argue that that is punishment enough. Indeed, I only know of one person that was treated for V.D. If a person gets A.I.D.s he is removed from his unit and discharged. As for under what conditions the discharge is issued I do not know. I would think that if a person got it because of a blood transfusion that it would and should be under honorable conditions. Anything else should be dishonorable. If they really wanted to push it for V.D. they could, but in view of previous problems with this policy have decided that it was more trouble than it was worth. I would also say there is a biological factor involved as well and will leave that at that.
I belive they do test for A.I.D.s in the same manner they do for drug use. I never had an A.I.D.s test so I don't know what is involved. As for routine physicals I can only say that the only time I received those was when I went in and when I was getting out. There weren't any when I was active duty or active reserve.
2004-01-28 14:24 | User Profile
Ragnar,
I think this may be more likely a race problem; rather than a gender problem. How many of these raping soldiers are Afo-Americans? Remember the drill sargents at the proving grounds? I fear many of these perverts would be raping men; if there were no women around. Some say it used to happen in the navy.
I recall reading something about how Isreal stoped having female soldiers; because male soldiers were spending too much time protecting them and not getting the thier job done.
2004-01-28 18:38 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Faust]Ragnar,
I think this may be more likely a race problem; rather than a gender problem...[/QUOTE]
That just might be more right.
Modern use of women in the services was vetted by the Brits in WWII, they had a manpower shortage and used women in auxiliary situations. America followed suit. I won't count what the Soviets did since they were under a non-Western regime at the time.
From what my dad and uncle told me, out in the fleet and even in supply units you simply never saw enough women to bother. When you did it was likely to be message clerks at an admiral's staff, and white guys respected them and left them by themselves.
Truman integrated the armed services after the WAVES and so forth had been installed in the niches they were allowed. By the sixties, when I was in, they basically were allowed a few non-sea job ratings and that was it. They were in no position to run into blacks, mestizos and others because they were sequestered in only a few places where roughnecks didn't go.
The feminists started doing their magic at the wrong time: By the time Reagan was in the third worldization of America's military started. Women in the service weren't a rarity anymore, and they weren't among mostly fellow whites who followed a rough but fairly decent code of behavior.
You know what a recently-discharged army fellow told me? About the time everyone was freaking out about the nastiness against the ladies that took place on Puerto Rican day in New Yark City, he told me that the services have crap like that going on every day. Non-whites view white women as fair game, in uniform or not.
Women in a few positions in a white military, OK. Women nearly everywhere in a largely colored military, [B]NO[/B]!
2004-01-29 01:45 | User Profile
[QUOTE]I recall reading something about how Isreal stoped having female soldiers; because male soldiers were spending too much time protecting them and not getting the thier job done.[/QUOTE]
Another reason that Isreal stopped having female combat soldiers was that when the Arab troops saw a woman fighting on the Israeli lines it made them fight even much more harder because the Arabs consider it to be a great dishonor to be killed by a woman. I do like the idea that Isreali women are trained in home defense and how to handle a weapon and think that it would be a good idea for women here also. If there is any hope of the Confederacy rising again, then women will need to be trained in firearms and home defense. I think if women were trained as such in the first war of Southern Independence, then Sherman's troops would have had a harder time marching thru the South.
2004-01-29 02:07 | User Profile
[QUOTE]Women in a few positions in a white military, OK. Women nearly everywhere in a largely colored military, NO![/QUOTE]
A largely colored military! That thought scares me! With such low intelligence at all levels we would be conquered in no time! Almost any White or Asian army could easily beat them. And when on leave they would be raping every white woman ( or man , for that matter) for miles around. It would be definitely time for the South to rise again!
If blacks were smarter, they would realize that they had it made before integration because most did not do combat and were cooks or in other support. The few that did do combat served in their own units and some special units, like the Tuskegee Airmen, were picked for their high IQ's and so they were able to understand the intrincies of flying and manuvering a plane and working with other aircraft but an aircraft in the hands of most blacks and hispanics will endanger their comrades rather than the enemy and replacement costs of aircraft would go up.
2004-01-29 06:24 | User Profile
"Women in a few positions in a white military, OK. Women nearly everywhere in a largely colored military, NO!"
Sounds reasonable to me. Someone said something on this thread about how once a country gets to the point where it uses women as a major component of its national defense, its in sorry shape. I might extend that a bit and say that such an entity has fallen below the level of a nation-state and has degenerated into simply a very large and powerful gang....
2004-01-29 06:32 | User Profile
"A largely colored military! That thought scares me! With such low intelligence at all levels we would be conquered in no time! Almost any White or Asian army could easily beat them. And when on leave they would be raping every white woman ( or man , for that matter) for miles around. It would be definitely time for the South to rise again!"
How many pretty, 14-year old Iraqi girls do you think there are who, to put it bluntly, can no longer keep their stool from falling out of their rectal cavities, due to the not-so-tender ministrations applied to them by gangs of degenerate Negroes in American uniform? How many of the post-Ba'athist resistance fighters (assuming the veracity of the military's contention that the original resistance were Ba'athist "dead enders"; I remain skeptical on that score) are their brothers trying to exact vengeance? The longer we're over there, the more such resistance the Negroes (and Hispanics, especially those grotesque Puerto Rican savages) will be generating. While we're on the subject of misbehavior by the trousered apes in our military, can you imagine how much stuff is getting stolen from the homes we are searching for guns and the like?
2004-01-29 09:50 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]A largely colored military! That thought scares me! [/QUOTE]
It ought to scare anyone with brains! And demographics assures us it's going to happen, it already is happening.
It's possible we'll have a situation similar to Pharaonic Egypt in its waning days, where you had whites in the elite posts you could not afford to lose (the Western forts, the Horus Road, etc.) Then there was the "medjay" units made up of literally anything (Nubian and Syrian mostly) to hold the rest. And of course pharaohs could use the medjay as cannon fodder if the need arose.
Our own units are heading this way. Whites make up the bulk of the elite units and probably will till the bitter end. From what I have seen the color of most fighter pilots, ship's captains and the nuke sub guys remain dependably white -- even after decades of affirmative action.
BTW, both British and Americans discovered there was a very positive side to having women in the auxiliary units. In the states, bond rallies were more successful when some of the gals in uniform showed up. The Brits used theirs for PR value often as well.
Wars are fought by nations, not armies, and servicewomen bring that point home very well. The uniformed women during WWII, I'm told, were especially effective and were picked carefully. Something else our commander in chief has forgotten.
2004-01-29 12:56 | User Profile
How many pretty, 14-year old Iraqi girls do you think there are who, to put it bluntly, can no longer keep their stool from falling out of their rectal cavities, due to the not-so-tender ministrations applied to them by gangs of degenerate Negroes in American uniform? How many of the post-Ba'athist resistance fighters (assuming the veracity of the military's contention that the original resistance were Ba'athist "dead enders"; I remain skeptical on that score) are their brothers trying to exact vengeance? The longer we're over there, the more such resistance the Negroes (and Hispanics, especially those grotesque Puerto Rican savages) will be generating. While we're on the subject of misbehavior by the trousered apes in our military, can you imagine how much stuff is getting stolen from the homes we are searching for guns and the like?
That is a good point. I wonder if there is a way to find out the percentage of soldiers who have been killed by the resistance who were nonwhite. It makes me think of Kobe Bryant, who should be charged with counts of sodomy and adultery in addition to aggravated rape.
2004-01-29 16:25 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Kevin_O'Keeffe]"A largely colored military! That thought scares me! With such low intelligence at all levels we would be conquered in no time! Almost any White or Asian army could easily beat them. And when on leave they would be raping every white woman ( or man , for that matter) for miles around. It would be definitely time for the South to rise again!"
How many pretty, 14-year old Iraqi girls do you think there are who, to put it bluntly, can no longer keep their stool from falling out of their rectal cavities, due to the not-so-tender ministrations applied to them by gangs of degenerate Negroes in American uniform? While we're on the subject of misbehavior by the trousered apes in our military, can you imagine how much stuff is getting stolen from the homes we are searching for guns and the like?[/QUOTE]
As long as you're asking, I happen to think the number of "raping, pillaging" GI's is few. Very few.
2004-01-30 02:12 | User Profile
"As long as you're asking, I happen to think the number of "raping, pillaging" GI's is few. Very few."
I hope you're right, but I can't help but wonder if you're thinking this is of the wishful variety, so to speak. Are you aware of any actual data on the subject? Does that data have legitimate veracity, or is it just Pentagon propaganda? Such criminal activities ("war crimes") on the part of "our"/Ariel Sharon's soldiers could well light sparks leading to a cataclysmic, nuclear Third World War, at some not-too-distant, future point (much like how 1700 California voters switching their ballots from Woodrow Wilson to Charles Evan Hughes in 1916 probably would have kept us out of World War I and very possibly have thus prevented World War II; big things can come of seemingly much smaller ones, and very frequently do), so they are the last sorts of thing I'd like to see. But my instincts and experiences tell me they are rather likely.
2004-01-30 14:25 | User Profile
I don't have any data to point to, so I can only point to personal experience.
-Your average non-white GI, at least in combat arms, typically has more self-discipline than his counterpart who stays in the 'hood.
-Petty criminals may slip in through the cracks, but felonius thugs don't easily get in.
-These days, troops are closely 'babysat' by their superiors. In other words, the opportunity for the behavior you describe doesn't exist.
-In order to believe that soldiers are raping wholesale, you'd also have believe in a systemic cover-up by the whole organization, that such behavior is treated with a "wink-and-a-nod" by those at all levels
-In the army, the same severe sanctions that keep drug abuse to low levels is more than enough to discourage most would-be rapists in the ranks. The UCMJ is a pretty effective deterrent.
What I've outlined isn't exactly 'wishful thinking'; I prefer to think of it as [I]realistic[/I].
2004-01-30 16:26 | User Profile
[QUOTE=skemper]Sertorious, Linda Hamilton, the muscled-up woman in Terminator 2, said that all the bodybuilding that she did for several months did not get her in shape to have enough strength to fire the bazooka (?) in the final scene that pumped holes in the terminator robot. The film crew had to do 15 or more takes because she couldn't hold the gun convincingly because it was so heavy and it took all the strength she could muster to fire it. So how do you think an average woman would fare on the field?[/QUOTE]
They're morons if they didn't just build an aluminum shell mockup with a flare gun inside. It was an M79?
My feeling on traditionalist issues is that it is important to keep the goal in mind. For reasons of honor, women are excluded from our war zone. Some are in as nurses and as always in the Indo-European tradition, there are exceptions for the handful of exceptional cases across the centuries, but that really is a tiny number of the personnel. If you reason also that more males are born than females in most populations, it makes sense to have good sporting wars with swords and axes to kill off the weaker ones.
Even better, get all the people who are useless and not in shape and send them to the war. Slowly the gene pool begins to brighten from its abyss of form-factor, linear-thought knuckleheads.
2004-01-30 17:45 | User Profile
I think this may be more likely a race problem; rather than a gender problem. How many of these raping soldiers are Afo-Americans?[/QUOTE]
I took this as a given the first time I saw this article. Rape is customary in black societies, just as lynching used to be customary in White socities. :afro: