BROADCASTS.com

Should women be Green Berets? I’m going to put it right up front, forcing gender integration, is folly.  In fact, it has very little to do if they are capable of passing the qualifications by meeting the physicality of the schoolhouse.  It has everything to do with distracting and degrading the primary function of combat arms – close with and kill the enemy. Every concession made for biological, emotional, or behavioral challenges is a detractor from combat effectiveness. In all likelihood, most of these problems would arise from the men and not the women! There are solid reasons to separate dogs and cats, especially when you need to focus on strategic missions.  So, why would we want to force any detraction?  Why would we ever consider compromising the combat effectiveness of our elite units so that a politically correct agenda and social perception can be reflected in our units?  That rationale defies logic.

But, it is coming.  The Secretary of Defense signed the order, the Generals have all embraced it, and the training pipelines are starting to see candidates.  But you want to know what the men said?  We said it was a terrible idea, we don’t support it.  But never mind that, let's re-write the survey questions and give it to an even smaller sample of individuals who are more inclined to bend to political winds.  And that's exactly what they did (I link both studies below).  Don’t get us wrong, there is a critical and valuable role for women in Special Operations, no one will deny that, and we frequently request and welcome females to complement our missions.  But that isn’t the same as qualifying them to be on the front line, fully integrated members, with tabs and green berets.

I hate to break it to people but there are just some genetic differences that need to be taken into consideration. Most Green Berets are men of average physicality with an exceptional mental capacity to push themselves beyond the limits of their mind and body. The females capable of succeeding at the initial phases of selection and training are no doubt incredible individuals and should be lauded for their efforts and accomplishments, but they are the extreme exception to the rule, they are not the average.  So this whole initiative is another example of trying to normalize and force acceptance of an extreme minority of individuals and beliefs and force it upon the functioning and effective majority.

Sorry, it's not fair, too damn bad.  This push is not rooted in the battlefield's need for capability or proven effectiveness.  Quite the opposite – take a look at the scandal, cost, and detraction from the mission that we have already seen in all branches of service due to integration efforts.  Recently from the Commander of the 18th Airborne Corps, Special forces Colonels and even the CIA director.  What makes anyone think things will be different at the ODA level?

Let's consider for a moment what this says about our society. Achieving the mindset and predisposition to be successful as a Green Beret is partially in how we were raised, and how we raise our boys. Historically there were times where women took to the field of battle, there have been great female commanders and leaders, but these were again the exception.  They were forced by survival and circumstance to take on this role or face the annihilation of their culture or society.  That is not where we are today. Is there a lack of able-bodied men in America?  No. What there is, is a lack of motivation to participate and accept a traditional role of protector/servant, because it might be viewed as toxic masculinity.  I think the whole equality in military roles lowers participation even further. Our generals even said it, if women are allowed in combat then there is a larger pool of potential recruits. 

So if I’m a boy spoiled with video games, recreation, and leisure, why would I go in the army, there are girls and others who will do it for me.  We have voluntary military service, and a segment of our society is using identity politics of gender-equality to force a false narrative that it is somehow ignoble and sexist to not allow women into the ranks of men who volunteer to fight and die in their place. Let's call it what it is – a political agenda driven by special interest groups who have never seen combat and accepted by military leaders who lack the fortitude and candor to challenge the political machine.

To be clear, both D & I believe there are critical roles for women to play in special operations, I’ve served with fantastic and professional female soldiers and will continue to do so.  I will not treat any soldier less than professional or forego the respect they have earned and deserve.  However, to not openly and honestly discuss the issues and the cultural and political motivations behind these issues is also a disservice to our profession and the country we serve.   We hope you hear what we are saying in this discussion.  This is not from a position of sexism or anti-women, its the culmination of experience in SF and an honest assessment of what is needed to sustain and win the current fight and in wars to come.