Friday, August 24, 2007

What's Next: Submarine Road Rage?

Published in April 3, 2000: (CAUTION read the last paragraph before opening) Should the Navy assign servicewomen to submarine duty? Good submariners require sociability, high emotional development, lower aggression levels, compliant physical features (i.e., height, build, etc.), and acute common sense. [empasis mine]


Were the authors of this statement submariners, naval historians, or arrogant liberal-leaning academics? Where the heck did such garbage originate?

Authors: J. Michael Brower is a Vermont writer. His previous assignment was at the Pentagon with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Financial Management and Comptroller), Army Business Practices Directorate. He is currently at the Department of Justice, Immigration, and Naturalization Service. source (sounds like another lawyer to me)
and Elaine Donnelly is President of the Center for Military Readiness, an independent public policy organization that concentrates on military personnel issues.


Responding to a comment by Nimne to his New Submarine Documentary Tonight , Bubblehead stated: ... Regarding female submariners, I remain convinced that the biggest opponents of allowing females as submarine crewmembers are the current submarine wives...


What can the alert midshipwoman above be thinking? Ex-astronette Nowak was accused of pepper spraying her love-triangle rival in an airport parking lot. That certainly leaves doubt about the height status of her emotional development as well as lower aggression level. Nowak has the best defense money can buy and, of course, must be considered innocent pending her trial. No doubt the presumption of innocence is responsible for her retention of commission at O-6 grade (Navy captain).


Conduct unbecoming an officer and a gentleman is an offense subject to court martial defined in the punitive code of the United States Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ)

The elements are: That the accused did or omitted to do certain acts; and
That, in the circumstances, these acts or omissions constituted conduct
unbecoming an officer and gentleman
.[1]


Here “gentleman” is understood to include commissioned officers, cadets,
and
midshipmen, and Officer Candidates, of both sexes. A gentleman is understood to have a duty to avoid dishonest acts, displays of indecency, lawlessness, dealing unfairly, indecorum, injustice, or acts of cruelty.[1]

CAUTION:

Molten Eagle's computer was attacked in connection with accessing the source of the opening quotation (above). And, of course, I have more information regarding the actual attacker. Exercise care.

Labels:

2 Comments:

At 25 August, 2007 14:26, Blogger Boomer Rider said...

April 2000? Which Admistration was that?

 
At 26 August, 2007 13:57, Blogger Vigilis said...

Boomer Rider, your question is really a good one, and has an answer that may suprise most.

The Defense Department Advisory Committee on Women in the Services (DACOWITS) was established in 1951 under President Harry Truman by Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall (a Roosevelt appointee). Since then, DACOWITS has provided every administration with advice and recommendations on recruitment, retention, treatment, employment, integration, and well-being of women in the U.S. Armed Forces.

When a recommendation is made is not as telling (unless perhaps it was requested) as which administrations accepted recommendations that impaired the military's ability to perform its vital job effectively.

We must each be our own judge of those outcomes. Good luck.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

| Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com