Smokescreen on the Potomac: Pentagon and Congress deliberately ignoring $36 million USMC study that shows women cannot survive in the combat arms

By Ray Starmann


The United States of America is in mortal jeopardy and most Americans, tucked away in their beds tonight don’t even understand why or who is responsible for their peril.

Those responsible are not from North Korea, China, Iran, Russia or ISIS. They are Department of Defense bureaucrats, members of Congress and senior leaders in the US military.

The US military is committing suicide. We are in the first stages of beginning a process that is going to decimate the speed, lethality and combat power of the Marines and the US Army combat arms and special operations. The US military is doing this because of policies directed by the White House and authorized by willing lackeys in the Pentagon and in Congress.

A Congress short on military veterans and long on wind and incompetence said nothing as the April 1, 2016, deadline passed for them to review Secretary of Defense Ash Carter’s authorization which allows women to serve in direct ground combat units.

Yet, Congress had a plethora of information presented to them which clearly indicated that women cannot function and survive in US Army and US Marine Corps combat arms and special operations units; aka, infantry, armor, armored cavalry, artillery, the Marine Raiders, NAVY SEALs, Delta Force, the Rangers and the Green Berets.

Let’s be clear; women have served gallantly in harm’s way in all American conflicts and particularly in the recent Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.

But, serving in a transportation unit that comes under fire is not the same as being in a direct ground combat unit with the sole mission of finding, fixing and killing the enemy. Returning fire when your convoy is shot at in Iraq is not the same as being in an armored cavalry unit conducting a movement to contact against an enemy force. Being a firefighter or a police officer is not the same as being a combat infantryman.

Included in the vast array of information available to the Pentagon and the Congress was the $36 million dollar, 9 month long Ground Combat Element Integrated Task Force (GCEITF) Study the Marines conducted in 2014 that pitted all male units against coed units in a myriad of combat tasks that simulated what one faces in the combat arms and special ops.

The study was monitored by neutral researchers from the University of Pittsburgh.

Except for Senator John McCain and Congressman Duncan Hunter, who felt the Pentagon was deliberately dodging the results of the study, not one member of Congress, the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of the Navy, the Secretary of the Army, the former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, the former US Army Chief of Staff and the current US Army Chief of Staff, completely and unequivocally wanted nothing to do with the study and ensured that it was ignored.

In fairness to General Joe Dunford, the current Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, as Commandant of of the Marine Corps, he did request a waiver that would have stopped women from being included in the combat arms and special operations units of the Marines.

Dunford’s waiver wasn’t even considered by Secretary of the Navy, Ray Mabus. Since then, Dunford has hunkered down in his bunker, watching the implosion of the Marine Corps with field glasses.

Leading the charge for women to serve in direct ground combat units in the Pentagon and Congress were Ash Carter, Ray Mabus, former Chairman of the JCS, General Martin Dempsey and retired Air Force officer and A-10 pilot Congresswoman Martha McSally. An Air Force pilot’s knowledge of ground combat operations is zero at best, but she was accepted as an expert on the subject of women in ground combat. Flying a plane at 20,000 feet is not the same as humping a 100 pound ruck for two weeks on a sustained Marine infantry combat operation.

With a small, but powerful group of inexperienced advocates pushing for women in combat, why did the majority of Congress and the Pentagon completely ignore the study, which basically confirmed what everyone already knew and what 2,000 years of recorded military history substantiated?

The following are excerpts from the Marine Corps study, which was included in a 37 page statement presented by Elaine Donnelly, President of the Center for Military Readiness to the Senate Armed Services Committee, chaired by Senator John McCain, on February 2, 2016:

If you click on the link above, you can read the whole 37 page report submitted to Congress. But, here are some important excerpts from it.

All-male task force teams outperformed mixed gender units in 69 percent (92 of 134) of ground combat tasks, particularly in specialties that carried the assault load plus the additional weight of crew served weapons and ammunition. Significant disparities in physical size, strength, endurance, injury rates, an early onset of fatigue that affected marksmanship were scrupulously recorded with scientific monitoring techniques. This research was definitive as possible, short of an actual war.

It is beyond dispute that in gender mixed units, physical deficiencies had negative effects on the unit’s speed and effectiveness in simulated battle tasks, including marching under heavy loads, casualty evacuation and marksmanship while fatigued. In some units, male volunteers compensated for the women’s difficulties by taking over strenuous tasks.

All male squads, teams and crews and gender integrated squads, teams and crews had a noticeable difference in their performance of the basic combat tasks of negotiating obstacles and evacuating casualties.

Female volunteers in the study were considered to be in above average physical condition. The male volunteers were only an average representation of their peers.

Females possess less lean body mass, slighter build that affects stride length and stride frequency as loads increase, less absolute VO2 max production and less power and anaerobic/aerobic capacity than males.

Physical differences were more pronounced in specialties that carried the assault load,, plus the weight of crew served weapons and ammunition.

All male units were faster on hikes, gorge crossings and cliff ascents.

All male units engaged targets faster and scored more hits with crew served weapons than gender integrated units.

Women had greater incidents of stress fractures.

Women suffered a higher rate of injuries during marches with heavy loads.

Women were injured at six times the rate of their male counterparts.

In the 120mm tank loading simulation, a gunnery skills test, participants were asked to lift a simulated round weighing 55 lbs,, 5 times in 35 seconds or less. Less than 1% of the men compared to 19% of the women could not complete the tank loading drill in the allotted time. The failure rates would increase inside a tank.

In the 155 mm Artillery Lift-and-Carry, a test simulating ordnance stowing, volunteers had to pick up a 95 lb. artillery round and carry it 50 meters in under 2 minutes. Noted the report, less than 1% of men, compared to 28.2% of women, could not complete the 155mm artillery round lift and carry in the allotted time.

Less than 1% of men could not negotiate a 7 foot wall, whereas 21% of the women could not.

Marine Corps Brigadier General George Smith wrote in Warfighting that combat power is generated through speed and focus. Speed over time is tempo, the consistent ability to operate quickly. Speed is a weapon.

Obviously, speed is no longer in the Marines’ toolkit of operational skills.

Women in the combat arms and special ops are now going to make the US military high drag and low speed.

Obviously all the facts in the world mean nothing to social engineers like Carter and Ray Mabus, who have called for gender diversity quotas that will order Marine and Army combat arms and special ops units to include up to 35% females in their rosters.

According to the CMR, this is to achieve what General Dempsey called a critical mass. Standards will be validated levels that are gender neutral but lower than before.

Dempsey added that if “a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?

Over time, this would become known as the Dempsey Rule, meaning that a standard too high for women will be deemed too high. These changes would destroy the military.

The facts are obviously being ignored to implement policies based on fantasies and delusions.

Our national defense is now predicated on lies. Sadly, the greatest victims from these monumental and devastating policies will be the people it’s apparently trying to help, women. While women shine in thousands of different jobs in the military, they simply cannot handle the physical hardships that are part of daily life in peacetime and in war in the combat arms and special operations.

This is unabashed insanity, implemented by moral cowards, minions, hard core feminists and leftist lunatics who care more about covering their own derrieres or the fantasy world they inhabit than about the security of the nation they have sworn to defend.

As for the Joint Chiefs and the military’s senior leadership, I wouldn’t follow them into water. I knew 18 year old privates who had more imagination, guts and moral fortitude than the rubber men of Arlington.

This vast social experiment will only end in one way, in disaster on the battlefields of distant lands.

When the flag draped coffins start arriving with American soldiers and Marines who died because they were in a force that was deliberately made weaker, when you are searching for those responsible, look no further than Carter, Mabus, Fanning, Dempsey, Odierno and Milley, names that will be as infamous 100 years from now as Benedict Arnold.

, , ,
22 comments on “Smokescreen on the Potomac: Pentagon and Congress deliberately ignoring $36 million USMC study that shows women cannot survive in the combat arms
  1. My first cousin is a USMC drill seargent.She says even women’s training standards are much lower than they previously were or should be. The men’s has also been lowered to “high school” standards as she puts it. She has been under fire dozens of times. She and her fellow female drill instructors told me at a party that women need to be ready as they can be in case they come under fire. And all male units need to continue so that our country and soldiers remain the best in the world. These are the women training the women marines. They have seen fire. They know these recruits. They were not consulted.

  2. Obama,,,, destroyer of America, emasculator of my corps
    Haul his stinking ass out in chains, Ooh Rah.

  3. Obama’s goal was not to help women or gays but to weaken the American military and America. He has done a great job of it while our worthless congress looks the other way worried only about keeping their jobs. Has congress stopped Obama from emptying Gitmo, firing over 250 top military patriots at the pentagon who opposed his evil, using the IRS to attack christians and patriots, Fast and Furious, Fort Hood, Benghazi, Iran, porous Border, importing Islam, Obama’s government takeover of Fannie Mae and Freddie mac as well as GM and Chrysler, student loans, Obamacare, Veterans dying and homeless while illegals get everything free etc etc etc.Obama is as evil as it gets and i blame congress whom we gave power back to the GOP for doing little to nothing to stop or expose Obama at all.

  4. The discussion of putting women into combat units is correct when the question of relative strength and endurance is mentioned. Weak links in a unit are exactly that and combat doesn’t allow for any weaknesses.

    What isn’t discussed and in my opinion is one of the most critical points is that of “magic”: the realigning of loyalties and priorities within a combat unit because of sexual attraction. Combat units are made up primarily of 18-20 year olds at the prime of their young lives. If you add some women to a unit, there will be consequences as attraction takes place and some develop relationships and others – most – are left out. Loyalties will inevitably be shifted to lovers/partners and jealousies will crack fire team, squads, platoons and companies. Combat requires the absolute trust in the rifleman to your right and your left. Your life and the success of the mission depend on everyone sharing the risks and responsibilities equally. If you add the sexual dynamic to enter the equation, units will be fragmented and vital trust will be lost.

    I spent 17 months in combat in Vietnam and I know that the unit integrity and combat effectiveness would have gone out the window if we had had girls in our unit to compete over, worry about, and take risks. Activists insist that all of this is just a matter of “leadership” but those of you who have survived those years know that nothing will stop the chemistry that will occur no matter what anyone threatens to do.
    Our seniors leadership knows this as well as anyone. We can only hope that they stand up to stop this before we wreck our future combat capabilities with this idiocy.

    • Well said USMCVET. I’ve had those same problems you describe at a special weapons training command. I & my fellow CPO’s spent more time dealing with the problems of staff fraternization than we did with scheduling & updating training. Add the “sensitivity” training of the Clinton years, all knew it was time to retire or face constant bad evals.

    • Amen. You are correct, very few talk about this subject. I know several woman that got pregnant to get out of Iraq because they hated being there. A good friend of mine shared that his entire platoon was put in danger because two decided to wander off for a quickie, the rest thought something bad had happened, thus they had to spend more time in the AO looking for them putting everyone at risk.

      I have seen how a break-up impacted one of the people in a relationship while serving together. This person was depressed, distracted, and were not functioning properly putting everyone else in danger.

      CO’s spend way too much time deciphering he said/she said issues trying to figure out if sexual harassment had actually occurred or if it was some vendetta or flirtation that got out of hand. You take a group of prime 20 year olds and mix in females and there will be problems, it isn’t rocket science.


  5. When I was in the Air Force as a CrewChief on fighters everyone in supervision was a yes-man
    I told myself when I made Master Sgt I could and would change my world for my CrewChiefs and try to better their lives just a little bit. I started saying the word No to my supervisor and my maintenance supervision some no’s were accepted in the tip of the spear units were common sense was accepted but that was overseas were I spent 12 of my life
    But I said no to my Squadron Commander at a production meeting were the DO want to change wings tanks between goes and I told him no I didn’t have the manpower to do that and we do tank swap out on swings and I don’t see it on the flying schedule and we all know ” we live and die by the flying schedule ”
    It’s our bread and butter and there’s no changing it in the middle of the week because it effects scheduling effectiveness and that’s on me as a Pro Super
    But in a test wing at Eglin I got removed from and a yes-man put in place but I got put in charge of the Sq money guess what word came out of my mouth NO !

  6. It appears that US leadership, POTUS, Pentagon, Joint Chiefs, Security Council, Dept of Defense, Supreme Court and Congress all agree on one thing:–

    –that the United [untied] States of America CorporAtion will be disabled, dismantled and dissolved and its people done away with, by whatever means necessary to satisfy globalist objectives.

  7. I was a Marine field artillery battery commander. During one intense three week long training exercise our battery was rehearsing hasty displacement. If you are a cannon- cocker you know that all EMPLACEMENTS are hasty! Anyway, my battery Gunny turned to me and said, “Skipper, can you just imagine what would happen if we had WM’s (women marines) on these gun crews?!?! We’d NEVER make the (time) standard!
    Ah Huh. Tell it to Ray Mabus, Guns. As always you were right on target!
    Oh, but that’s right–it’s not a problem. We’ll just lower the standard. After all, what does it matter if we won’t be as proficient in combat? Its not the Obama girls and Chelsea whose lives will be on the line, is it?

  8. Ignoring sound investigative facts to further a skewed political agenda? Nothing new for these criminals in DC.

    The Leadership is out there. Just none want to put up with the BS that these “feel gooders” force upon the troops. Threatening Senior Enlisted with NJP over refusing to participate in Red Shoe Training & Preggo Field maneuvers gives Senior NCO’s pause & bail out.

    Critical missions will fail because of this social experiment. Most of what we warriors do has ZERO option for failure. When failure happens, body bags get filled (if we can find them).

  9. It is as simple as this. I do not want to think about my 200 lb. husband wounded and needing assistance being brought out of harms way by a 145 lb female, however strong.

  10. “An Air Force pilot’s knowledge of ground combat operations is zero at best, but she was accepted as an expert on the subject of women in ground combat. Flying a plane at 20,000 feet is not the same as humping a 100 pound ruck for two weeks on a sustained Marine infantry combat operation.”

    A-10 pilots provide direct support of ground combat units. They know as much, or more, about it as say Artillery Officers, and they have a much better view of the battlefield. A-10 typically attack at treetop level, and drop ordnance “danger close” if required.

    Your lack of knowledge undercuts your arguments.

    • I know exactly what the mission of the A-10 Warthog is. I’ve also seen them operate up close as they decimated the Tawakalna Division of the Republican Guard on 26 Feb 1991. I also know that unless Martha McSally was an ALO (Air Liaison Officer) assigned to a ground combat unit she never humped a ruck in her life and has no conception about the life of the combat soldier.

    • El Gato

      “A-10 pilots provide direct support of ground combat units. They know as much, or more, about it as say Artillery Officers”

      Absolutely untrue. Artillery officers (such as LTs serving as FSOs) serve directly alongside the Infantry. They go to the field, parachute, march and shoulder backpacks while carrying rifles.

      Air Force pilots do none of the above. Notably, these activities require more physical strength than flying an airplane even “danger close”.
      And btw — that term is used to describe being within the burst radius of ordinance. (It does not refer to from what distance the ordinance is being dropped — as your comment infers).

      To quote you;

      “Your lack of knowledge undercuts your arguments.”

      Former Infantry Officer, United States Army

  11. I agree, about 90% of American women can not qualify. Why? I broke a nail, does this pack make my butt look fat, is my mascara still good? I never had to do that at home.
    I am just being p.c……….

  12. You are absolutely correct: it isn’t rocket science. I’m deeply disappointed in our current senior military leaders that they have just stood by and let these self-destructive changes take place.

    Combat is organized murder, by design. It requires training and talent and focus as part of a team. Nothing will destroy that focus faster than the competition for partners in a unit, which is inevitable if women are involved. I have seen units come apart because of sexual dynamics and I have seen otherwise intelligent men deep-six their careers (and their marriages) over some young woman they served with.

    Even if some few women are found that have the instincts and stamina for killing, putting them in a combat unit will erode unit cohesion and if leaders are involved, call those leaders’ decisions into question when some are put in hazardous duties and others are not.

    Equality is not equivalence and the infantry in combat is not just a “job”.

  13. I agree, women don’t have the upper body strength needed. One decision I made as a woman in the military was to never let my ego get in the way of a fellow military person being killed because I couldn’t do my job. There are plenty of jobs open to women that they can serve proudly in without being the reason someone else doesnt make it through the fight. I never let my ego get in the way and I had a wonderful fulling 22 years. If it hadn’t been for working full time, going to college, and raising two babies, I’d would have stayed 30 years because I miss the flying and esprit de corps.

  14. Have they even thought about the cost of this decision or additional training Corpsman are going to need? The Navy has been experimenting with women on combat ships for 20 years now. It has failed, no ship with women aboard has escaped sexual harassment, sex and rape. As a Hospital Corpsman, IDC I have had to deal with all of these complainants from both sexes. On a Destroyer before women a six month cruise cost medical $3,000 after adding women it went to $11,000 for a cruise. I have had to go back and train in OB/GYN, to be able to diagnose conditions. Let’s not talk about how I have put my career on the line to treat female’s. I personally know the USMC had lowered their standards, when I attended field medical service school, it was hard. Served 4 1/2 years before going blue, and had to repeat school before going to IDC school. Kind and gental, students were given multiple opportunity to pass. Further weakening a already weak military is not the appropriate call.

  15. Thank you for the most articulate report on the most vital matter on our Country’s Plate ex perhaps of nuclear SLBMs 300 km inland from N.K. subs.

    Having two USAF Pilots/FOs in my rifle company in combat in Korea ’53 I have higher respect for the work they directed their controlled aircraft. The now A-10 Warthog is flat out superb, doing its work mostly in the smoke it generated in its first LOW pass. But you are “Right On”, that is about zero training re the work of the grunts.

    You hit the physical side re women. My over 30 missives have been on the problems of SEX, to which we are PLAYING BLIND. Not so the IDF, recently considering opening armor to women: “No.” “Intimate proximity”. That and NO WOMEN IN THE BRIGADES UNTO CLOSE WITH MAIN FORCE ENEMY keeps NOT the pushers from their favorite lie about women in front-line infantry. Are in a Territorial brigade, as LIGHT infantry unto BORDER PATROL.

    F. K . HAGIOS

Comments are closed.


Enjoy this blog? Please spread the word :)