Wednesday, August 01, 2007

Submarine Layers: The Slippery Slope Agenda

In 1995 the Royal Norwegian Navy became the first navy in the world to appoint a female submarine captain.[6] In other venues, the Royal Norwegian Navy came to suspect that environmental factors may have caused several adverse health effects, such as cancer, birth defects of children and cardiovascular diseases. The Royal Norwegian Navy decided in 2001 to start a project of surveillance of the work environment in the whole navy to prevent health hazards.

Are you a current or ex-submariner? Today's submariners' involuntary, sissified stereotype (emphasis added) like it, or not:

Good submariners require sociability, high emotional development, lower aggression levels, compliant physical features (i.e., height, build, etc.), and acute common sense. source

Richard J. Danzig (1944 – ) is an American lawyer from New York City. He received his J.D. degree from Yale Law, and Doctor of Philosophy from Oxford University. After law school, Danzig served as a law clerk to United States Supreme Court Justice Byron White.

Bill Clinton with (Hillary's nodding approval) appointed fellow Rhodes Scholar Danzig the nation's 23rd Secretary of the Navy in November, 1998. Perfect! Not a day's military service among the three of them. (Danzig had been Under Secretary of the Navy during Clinton's first term).

In 1999, Secretary Danzig warned the Naval Submarine League that the service is a "white-male preserve." If submariners don't open diversity, their political support could ebb.

Danzig's predecessor as SecNav was former submariner John H. Dalton. Dalton implemented a Navy policy forbidding negative comments about sailors on maternity leave. (Wonder what gender Dalton had in mind?)

The slippery slope agenda for those pushing female assignments to submarines will be as devasting to defence of our country as rendering the next military draft too expensive (Nancy Pelosi's words) to implement was. Anticipated workplace litigation after decades of precedents assuring women's rights will ensure time-consuming litigation.

In 1981, several male U.S. citizens had filed lawsuit in the case Rostker v. Goldberg, alleging the Military Selective Service Act (MSSA) violated the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment by requiring that men only and not also women register with the Selective Service System. Although the Supreme Court upheld the MSSA, it deferred to our weak-kneed Congress: "the argument for registering women was based on considerations of equity, but Congress was entitled, in the exercise of its constitutional powers, to focus on the question of military need, rather than 'equity.'"[1]

But wait! There's more expensive and destructive agenda for our military, including:

...that the President of the United States give priority to the consideration of the appointment of women as judges of the United States Court of Military Appeals Spring [1980]

...that legislation be established to the effect that a married military woman, regardless of grade, can establish a joint domicile with her husband and shall receive Basic Allowance for Quarters (BAQ) in her own right. In the event the husband is also a member of the Military Services, he shall also receive BAQ in his own right. Fall 1968

...that in so far as permitted by existing statutes, the Secretary of the Navy provide identical standards, including time in grade, for promotions of men and women in the Marine Corps Fall 1979

...that all Services grant 6 weeks post-partum non-chargeable leave Fall 1988

...that plans for future submarine platforms incorporate appropriate berthing and privacy arrangements to accommodate mixed gender crews Fall 1999

The Center for Naval Analysis found that female sailors' "unplanned loss" rate (23 to 25 percent) is more than two-and-a-half times the rate for men (8 to 10 percent). Proportionate loss rates on submarines, combined with surfacings and evacuations made necessary by disciplinary problems, would compromise the stealth mission of the submarine.

Should Hillary Clinton finish the demolition job on our military, if she wins office in 2008?

Of this I am certain. Assignment of women to U.S. military submarines will decimate (not eliminate) recruitment and re-enlistment of red-blooded males to submarines. Our experience will follow the Australian Navy's plight in that respect.



At 02 August, 2007 20:24, Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the feminists and libs are so damn fired up to get women into submarines and other combat roles that were previously male-only, why aren't they screaming about the biggest non-integrated career field in the country? You never hear a peep about it. I'm talking about professional sports - the NFL, the NBA, the NHL, and most especially MLB. Women went out and got their own leagues in some cases, but what about the rest? They don't say anything because they know if they did it would bring out that, yes, there are indeed difference between men and women, and professional sports have so much money the libs could never win in court. So, they go to the military

So, if they can't do major leagues, why does anyone think they could be suitable for a far tougher job - combat.

At 02 August, 2007 20:45, Blogger Vigilis said...

Sonarman, your logic is compelling.

Personally, I disagree with the attempted stereotype that says good submariners possess "high emotional development", whatever that is. Quite the contrary, I have found to a man that good submariners possess steely control of their emotions. I was there when we were sinking uncontollably, I am glad no women or girly men were aboard.

At 06 August, 2007 02:10, Blogger Scott Kohlhaas said...

I'll never understand why the ACLU did'nt contest sss registration based on the 13th amendment!

Would you be willing to spread the word about It's a site dedicated to shattering the myths surrounding the selective slavery system and building mass civil disobedience to stop the draft before it starts.

Our banner on a website, printing and posting the anti-draft flyer or just telling friends would help.


Scott Kohlhaas

PS. When it comes to conscription, an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure!

At 06 August, 2007 12:51, Blogger Vigilis said...

Scott Kohlhaas, I favor national military service - the draft. If called again, I would serve again.

My contempt is for lawyers (who lead one of our major political parties chiefly for their own benefits rather than the good of our nation).

The answer to your question is a flat No.


Post a Comment

<< Home