The Turret Gunner Was a
SheTownhall.com ^| February 8, 2013 | Paul
Greenberg
Posted on Friday, February 08, 2013 11:37:49 AM byKaslin
Martin Dempsey, the Army general who’s now chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, was a division commander when he got to Baghdad in 2003 and
climbed into a Humvee for his first trip off base. “I asked the driver … who
he was (and) where he was from,” the general remembers, “and I slapped the
turret gunner around the leg and I said, ‘Who are you?’ And she leaned down and
said, ‘I’m Amanda.’
“And I said, ‘Ah, OK.’ So female turret gunner protecting division
commander.”
One of the things that makes a good commander is the speed with
which he can adjust to changed conditions, and the general had just been
introduced to another reality of the ever-new U.S. Army.
The general told that story the other day as he stoodnext
to the country’s secretary of defense to formally lift the Army’s ban on women
in combat units. No, not every woman — or man — may be fit for combat, but now
every trooper has a chance to qualify for it. Which is as it should be — at
last.
Gen. Dempsey, it turns out, is a rich source of instructive stories.
Not to mention comments thatapply
to more than their immediate subject. It was during this same news conference
that he discussed the considerable problem of sexual harassment, not to mention
outright abuse and rape, in the service. He traced it to treating women as less
than equal. To quote from his remarks:
“When you have one part of the population that is designated as
warriors and another part that’s designated as something else, I think that
disparity begins to establish a psychology that in some cases led to that
environment. I have to believe the more we can treat people equally, the more
likely they are to treat each other equally.”
When you have one part of the population that serves in the military
and another part that doesn’t, a rift is likely to develop between those who
have defended the country in uniform and those who have never had that
privilege. And it is a privilege. As well as aneducation,
not just an obligation. It’s also a necessity in a democracy. For the divide
between citizen and soldier may only grow greater as the years pass, and develop
into mutual suspicion, even mutual contempt. And divided we fall.
(snip)
A professional army is a great asset — a necessity, as many a
democracy has discovered when it neglected to train one. But a republic needs
citizen-soldiers, too. Without them, democracy is divided at its very core:
between those who defend it and those who are defended.
It is not a healthy division, for the result is a mutual ignorance
that leads to mutual estrangement — between those citizens who have known
military service and those who haven’t. It is a division no democracy can
afford. For the military needs a connection with the citizenry, and the
citizenry with its military. Both benefit, and the country benefits most of all.
Or as Gen. Dempsey noted: “When you have one part of the population
that is designated as warriors and another part that is designated as something
else, I think that disparity begins to establish a psychology…” And it is not
a healthy psychology, for it divides rather than unites. And united we stand.
1
posted on Friday, February 08, 2013
11:37:52 AM by
Kaslin
Oh, if only it burned to be so stupid. By their scorch marks would ye know them.
I have to say, though, that I’m a bit surprised this weekly compendium of nincompoopery hasn’t come to the Freepers’ wandering eye of attention.
You’d think they would recognize that they are wrong all the time.
About the three shootings – 2 among folks who were well trained and practicing their marksmanship and 1 at a location where there were armed guards:
I thought the idea of having firearms was to protect yourself. If you have a weapon no one would dare try to attack you. And if anyone did dare attack you, you would be able to shoot them before they killed you.
In some local Missouri Freeper insanity, local TV runs story last Thursday with headline, “Federal gun control laws could be unenforceable in Missouri.” Seems the MO House has a committee looking at making it against the law for a Federal officer to enforce gun laws in MO.
A commenter pointed out the teeny-weeny constitutional question of Fed trumps State. The commenters then piled on with their own arguments of how the State law would prevail.
My favorite was, “how would this be unconstitutional? exactly what part of congress shall pass no law restricting guns is so hard for you to understand but as usual when debatin libtards. why confuse the topic with facts and the truth.” (Uh, ‘Congress shall pass no law…’ is from the 1st amendment and has nothing to do with the 2nd. Extra points for making a fallicious statement combined with vehement name calling and calling the other ignorant.)
Another goodie was “But if you read the whole article it states that this is a law for Missouri and quote “any federal official trying to enforce gun control laws in Missouri would be guilty of a misdemeanor.” If the State of Missouri passes a “state law” then the Federal Government can’t step in… that’s why we have state governments!!!”
Didn’t these folks ever have to even attend, much less pass, an elementary school civics class?????
Kibitzer – I’m officially changing my name to Earljam.
Tommy
To: earlJam
Promise not to cut and paste posts from FR to your other trolling sites, and I will promise not to copy and paste your very embarrassing posts to the Men’s Health Forum.
😉
204 posted on 12/12/2010 1:11:39 PM PST by Palladin (Stand and fight.)
I am confused about the outpouring of Freeper hate for General Dempsey. I thought they loved the military! That’s who protects us from terrorists, right? Or was that only in the Bush years, before they started letting in the chicks and the queers?
Or should I not expect consistency from the Freeperati? That’s it, isn’t it.
Oh, as far as the O’Keefe thing, I love the Freeper saying “I am sure it was all completely out of context.” Well…yeah, it was. That’s why he got sued. Not so awesome when it’s your guy in trouble, now is it.