Making Babies in the US Military

Making Babies in the US Military
A Commentary by J. D. Longstreet
************************************

"The U.S. Military commander in northern Iraq defended on Tuesday a new policy imposing strict penalties, including possible jail time, for troops who become pregnant or get other soldiers pregnant. "In this 22,000-soldier task force, I need every soldier I've got, especially since we are facing a draw down of forces during our mission," Major General Tony Cucolo, who commands U.S. soldiers in northern Iraq, said in a statement. His policy applies only to his command." (Read the entire article HERE.)

It is a "No-No!" You can look but you cannot touch. Well, that rule works about as well today as it did way back when chaperones were in vogue.

See, once again, we are messing with Mother Nature. And it never works! At least, it never works out well.

With all the babies being conceived at the front lines in the two wars in the Middle East, Afghanistan, and Iraq, another of the socialist government's social experiments has failed.

Let me see how plain I can make this: Even a complete fool, a blathering idiot, an imbecile, a Moran, knows -- without a shadow of a doubt -- that if you put young men and young women together in an environment where hormones surge continuously they will find each other and they will copulate. It is Mother Nature's way of insuring the survival of the species.

Everybody KNOWS this instinctively. Except, it would seem, for the feminists among us who deny the existence of natural law. Call it what you will -- when you deny that young men and young women will not find a way to engage in sex ANYWHERE, including the battlefield, then you are denying the existence of such a thing as natural law.

OK. Just so the record is clear. I do not believe there is a role for women in combat, anywhere, anytime, under any circumstances. PERIOD! Women are the sacred "givers of life." Without women the human species would die out -- and quickly. Women should be protected, at all costs, even at the cost of the male's life.

Nature (God, if you please.) created the male and the female differently with different characteristics. The male was made larger, muscular, and more aggressive. The female was made smaller but with the ability to hold within her body a new life which, when fully developed, would emerge as a brand new human being. The female would perpetuate life, she would insure that the human species would survive on this garden planet which was given us as our home.

The point is, if there were no female combat soldiers, the military would not be facing this problem. "Oh," but you say, "There are no American women serving in combat roles in the US Military!" That is pure "bovine scatology!" If you believe that I have a hell of a deal on a bridge in Brooklyn I'd like to talk with you about!

Woman soldiers have been fighting, in combat, in Iraq and Afghanistan right from the start. Their roles have been disguised as truck drivers and security for convoys, helo pilots, tanker pilots, etc, etc. The ruse goes on. They are out there getting shot at and shooting back. And, in my opinion, they ought not be anywhere near the battlefield! There are plenty of jobs for women in the military -- in the rear areas -- completely away from combat. Filling those jobs with women would free up the men, now sitting behind computer monitors, to grab a rifle and a pack and get their dead rear ends to the front and engage the enemy!

Want to know how our politically correct military is handling the situation of so many pregnant soldiers at the front? Take a look at this: "The military's solution, instead, is to promote total abstinence, which let's face it, is entirely unrealistic. Cucolo's policy also prohibits soldiers from having sex with Iraqis or from spending the night with a member of the opposite sex unless married or granted explicit permission. Instead, the military might fare better if they provided reliable access to birth control for soldiers, both male and female."
You may read the entire article HERE.

Back in my day in the US Army we were issued "Pro-Kits" when we received a three-day, or a weekend, pass. It was understood that we were going to have sex with an accommodating female as soon as possible and as often as possible. You could always tell when it was "Pay Day" on the Post without ever glancing at a calendar. The main streets of the Post would suddenly be filled with automobiles, filled to capacity, with women of all descriptions flaunting their wares and assuring us they would be waiting to fulfill our dreams just outside the front gates. And they always were.

Within my first week as a soldier in the US Army my company was marched over to the WAC barracks and we were lectured while standing just outside the wire fence that surrounded that forbidden land. We were told in no uncertain terms that if we were caught on the other side of that wire we would be shot -- period-- end of discussion! You know, I believed them!

I think it is admirable for a young woman to want to serve her country in the US Military. But, I also think her service should be confined to a military occupation that insures her safety far from the killing and dying. She should NEVER be in danger. But then, I am "an old foggie", a believer in chivalry, a man who was reared to respect women, and time has passed me by. So say some.

Forgive me if I see no respect for women by placing them in harm's way on the battlefield -- even if they demand it. The complete idiocy of such a policy says much about a nation's care for its citizens. Placing women in combat positions breaks the foremost rule of Nature, and it will insure the downfall the nation that makes it a practice -- and -- it places the entire human species in danger of extinction. How DUMB is THAT?!

Had those female soldiers not been there to begin with, this problem would never have come up.

Woman in combat is just plain DUMB! And you wonder why America can no longer win a war? Really? I mean, do you REALLY wonder about that?

J. D. Longstreet