Feminism and the Military

Feminism and the Military

Feminism and the Military — A Congressional candidate from Washington State, Ernest Huber, has made the claim that feminism “feminizes” and “weakens” American men and reduces the pool of suitable warriors to defend the country. There are many ways in which his claim is wrong.

The first and most obvious one is that America’s military strength is based, not on the size of its military, but on its technological superiority. There are militaries around the world that are larger than that of United States, but none that are more powerful.

Even if America were to draft every able-bodied person into the army, it would not be able to match the size of militaries that China or India could assemble. And yet if there was a full-scale war now between America and either one of these countries, these counties would be vaporized. The reason for that is that hydrogen bombs and Star Wars technology do the work of any number of men.

Secondly, America is not at a shortage of potential military recruits. There are in fact large populations in America that would provide vast numbers of excellent military recruits, but they are not being presently tapped on a large enough scale. One such population is inner city, which is full of young men who know how to fight and aspire toward toughness and courage but, lacking a proper guidance for such propensities, turn into gangsters rather than soldiers.

Setting up military recruitment in inner city would provide American military with a large number of highly suitable warriors who know quite a lot about how to fight and how to be tough and courageous, while providing the people in inner city a ticket to education, job training, useful skills and a better life. If the military were to tap into this obvious resource, it would have more than enough excellent recruits and would not need to be bothering metrosexual city cultures.

Finally, in feminist cultures themselves, there are plenty of feisty tomboyish women who make as good soldiers as any men. So if there are some men in feminist cultures who are not suitable warrior material, there are enough tomboyish women in feminist cultures to replace them.

Feminism and the Military

So Mr. Huber’s statement is simply wrong. Feminism does nothing to reduce America’s military strength, and there are obvious ways to maintain and enhance this strength. And it is time that the military strategy planners demonstrate strategic intelligence that is required to win wars and apply it, not toward bullying civilian populations, but toward tapping into real and obvious pools of potentially excellent military recruits to maintain the size of its military and increase it if the need to do so were ever to arise.

Something very amazing happened in the last election in Japan, they threw out the old guard, and replaced it with a much more progressive group of politicians. Apparently, no one saw that coming and it shocked everyone. Nevertheless, everything about the new Japanese government is different. This includes their stance on US military bases in their country.

The new Japanese Government wants to re-negotiate the military base and US Presence in Japan. This could change everything and the completely change the balance of power in the region and on that side of the Globe. Personally, I cannot think of a worse thing for the Japanese to do, it’s like shooting one’s self in the foot really. Right now the construction of a new US military base is going on in Japan and the agreement was made with the last group of government politicians, and the US is moving ahead.

Now the new Japanese government wants to change everything, and they may end up upsetting the United States military, and leave themselves vulnerable to other nations that might encroach on their territory. For instance, the Kuril Islands are still in a territorial dispute with Russia. North Korea with nuclear weapons also poses a threat. The encroachment of an ever-growing China could also be problematic. Fishing waters are being challenged too.

The question is; will Japanese renegotiate the old treaty, which would then allow them to have offense weapons in their military. Or does the new Japanese government, along with the population of Japan wish to have the Okinawa area for themselves, taking the US military out of there and then attempt to remain a neutral country in the future, thus, avoiding war? And would such a strategy work at all?

The United Nations may work to Japan’s favor if they wish to have their old military since they have been a peaceful nation since World War II. Still, it puts the US military in a not so good place to keep our allies safer in the region as China continues to grow its military and dominance in the region. This is a very serious issue and not enough people are talking about it. Please consider all this.

Not long ago, I was talking to a high ranking military retired veteran who had gone to the local military base commissary, and stopped in at the base library. He was beside himself and flabbergasted when he learned that the base library was getting rid of all their old books, and contracting with an outside company to run the base library.

They were not selling the old books, they were giving them away, or throwing them in the trash. He rescued as many as he could put in his pickup truck. Okay so, I’d like to explore this problematic event for a moment if I might.
You see, getting rid of all the old history books is actually the same is getting rid of our history.

If those who are serving in our military cannot know of their parent’s and grandparent’s era, or what really happened in World War II, and are forced to read newer history books with second or third hand knowledge, then they aren’t learning history at all. They are learning a mild watered-down version of military history. Further, what’s that famous saying; “those who fail to learn their history, are doomed to repeat it.”

Well, let’s take this one step further then, if you are learning a watered-down version of history, you aren’t actually learning the real history, therefore you are guaranteed to be doomed to repeat the actuality of that past period – do you see my point here? Why on Earth would we get rid of old military history books at the library on any military base? Even the scholars that study history, if they weren’t there, they are once removed from what actually happened. That’s quite unfortunate.

Now realize, I have nothing against the company who has won the contract to service the libraries on base, and I do believe that military base libraries are very important to keep open. I applaud the government and military for saving budget money. But to replace all of those old books with new ones, and to throw them away like that, well to me, that’s just unthinkable. Incidentally, I do have a number of military books myself, and I realize that one day my home may look more like a museum with all of those paper books, in the new era of e-books.

Nevertheless, it seems insane to toss out perfectly good books, just because the libraries are switching over to independent contractors, rather than being run in-house by military librarians. I realize that many of the colleges and universities are also going to contract libraries, and perhaps that’s where the military got the idea, but I can’t say I believe that’s a good way to play it at the University or at our military bases.

We need not be doomed to repeat for failure to study our actual history. This is the greatest nation ever created in human history, let’s not forget our trials and tribulations. Please consider all this and think on it.

Well, it seems to be hot and cold when it comes to the President of Afghanistan. One minute he is asking us for more money, asking us for more assistance, and wanting protection for himself and his family. The next minute he tells us that he would rather support our enemies in Iran than assist us in our fight against terrorism, or if there were ever a war between Pakistan and the United States, that he would definitely side with Pakistan. Okay so let’s talk about this for a moment because there was something interesting recently in the news.

We all know the challenges with the burning of Korans in the military prison in Afghanistan, where Islamic radical prisoners had made notes in the margins of these religious texts on it how to kill Americans, and where in the religious work it stated that it was okay to do such things. Because of these notations those Korans were thrown into an incinerator on the property. Then there was retaliation, and more insurgent and terrorist attacks.

After that, a decorated soldier took it upon himself to deliver street justice, killing many civilians. Then the President Karzi of Afghanistan said that the United States was at the end of its rope, and he wanted us to leave. Perhaps, he’s trying to play both sides in the media because if he sides with the Americans at this time of crisis, he himself will be considered unfit to lead by the people. Never mind the fact that it undermines what we are doing their, and can incite more violence against the United States, rather than defusing the situation.

In fact, from a mass psychology perspective one could say he is instigating further attacks against the United States in Afghanistan and justifying them to anyone who wishes to carry out such a deadly mission. Therefore, the other day I was discussing this with an international diplomatic consultant.

I suggested that perhaps next time Karzai demands that our US military leave Afghanistan we should simply announce to the media that President Karzai will remain unprotected by the US military for one week starting on this date at this time, until this day at that time.

Some might say that would be a crazy notion because President Karzai could be killed by his own people. Indeed, that might happen, but it probably wouldn’t because he would have himself protected by his own group of security people. But he certainly wouldn’t feel very safe during that time, and that would mean, we would have made our point.

In reality he’s not making us very safe by lambasting the US military in the media to the people of Afghanistan. At some point President Karzai needs to decide whose team he is on, and if he isn’t on our team, I don’t want my tax dollar paying for whatever he thinks he’s doing there.

No more games!

Indeed I hope you will please consider all this and think on it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *