Opening Combat To Females

Blackfive  Entire article posted here:

 "Let me start by saying I don't care about wrappers, or who does what to whom how or when (so long as there is consent).  By wrapper, I mean the outward manifestation that is the amazing human body.  What matters to me is if a person can and does do the job, be it serving in the military or any other occupation, and if they are what I consider a good person.  Yes, that order is deliberate, as I know some people that are great at what they do, but frankly are a------s outside of that.  So long as they don't move beyond being "Do-Che's" as Uncle Jimbo has called it, I would use them for their proven abilities and expertise at need. Being able to do the job is what counts.  Right now, our all-volunteer force is -- in my opinion -- the finest fighting force ever to exist.  It is such because of a combination of training, professionalism, and high standards for any number of specialties, from combat to nuclear engineering/technical operations. That said, there are a lot of people of progressive bent that would like to see that force be eliminated, or otherwise degraded.  Those points being given, the Secretary of Defense has ordered -- over some valid objections -- all military occupation specialties to females.  So, I have one basic question for SecDef Carter:  How does this improve the effectiveness and efficiency of the U.S. Armed Forces?After all, that is the bottom line, is it not?  That one question does raise a host of sub-questions for me. While the order states open to those who meet the current standards, how long before the standards are changed to ensure diversity?  After all, many of those current standards are difficult for females (and a large number of males) to meet.  They were set high for a number of reasons, the majority of which come from experience in what is required to physically and mentally meet the demands of that specialty.  If they are to be changed, what will be the driver for that change, reality or social engineering?  The order also appears to come with a dearth of planning for how to implement this effectively, which often means a number of preventable problems.  My question here is if that is considered a bug or a feature?  Will the problems be used to create real solutions designed to improve the situation, and the effectiveness and efficiency of our forces to do their job of bringing death and destruction to our enemies, or will it be used to enact further changes to appease the Social Justice Warrior crowd?  While I agree with Jonn that many years of study were ignored or wasted, was any review or consideration given to examining the operations of countries that have already allowed females to serve in a variety of combat specialties?  While Israel is not alone in this, most have not allowed females into ALL specialties for a variety of reasons.  If these were not examined or considered in deciding to open to all, why not? To reiterate for the regular trolls and other idiots:  I don't care about the wrapper.  I care about competence.  I would love to have detailed answers from the SecDef to my questions, but estimate the chances of that are on par with my winning both the PowerBall and MegaMillion lotteries this week. Now, what are your thoughts on this? " 

 Endquote