Allen West: Here’s why I’m SICK of Obama’s politically correct Army

It appears this simple maxim is lost on the social crusaders — but they’re going ahead and implementing these misguided beliefs and concepts in our armed forces anyway, while they have the opportunity.

As Written By Allen B. West: 

While the world burns, U.S. Army Sergeant Major admits this ‘key’ problem.

At this critical time for our U.S. military, we should not be focusing on social engineering and pet political ideological agendas.

I know, the immediate retort from the progressive socialist left is that we’re winning against ISIS — how peculiar. We’re now bombing ISIS sanctuaries in Libya, if you haven’t noticed. And I’m tired of being told about ISIS no longer being in Ramadi or Fallujah — they weren’t there before we made the foolish decision to conduct a complete withdrawal of our combat ground forces.

Yet, ISIS still maintains solid bases of operations, centers of gravity, in Mosul, Iraq and Raqqa, Syria. Meanwhile, ISIS has spread its cancerous barbarism to far more areas and states. So we’re not “winning” against ISIS, nor are we winning against the global Islamic jihad. If you haven’t seen, the Taliban just claimed responsibility for an ambush of U.S. and European tourists in Afghanistan. My question is, who chooses an active combat zone for a vacay?

The world is in a chaotic and tumultuous state, and what is the U.S. Army Sergeant Major doing?

As reported by The Daily Caller, Sergeant Major of the Army Dan Dailey has urged female non-commissioned officers (NCOs) and officers to apply for combat jobs, as there is a notable lack of females ready to fill those positions.

“Currently, we have over 100 young women across America who have volunteered to join our ranks as cavalry scouts, armor crewmen, fire support specialists and infantrymen,” Dailey, the Army’s head non-commissioned officer, said in a memo Monday, according to Army Times. “… As young soldiers do, they will look for leadership and mentorship from their superiors. Unfortunately, we have not had a sufficient number of serving female soldiers and [non-commissioned officers] volunteer to transfer into these mentorship and leadership roles.” 

For Dailey, the key problem is a lack of females in combat leadership positions. As part of the Army’s plan to integrate women into all-male combat units, the service has decided to move females into leadership positions in those units, so that they can then facilitate more junior females coming in. 

The Army has approved an estimated 22 female officers for the role of second lieutenant in infantry and armor, but those officers will have to pass training first to qualify as infantry officers.

At a time when we’re witnessing the decimation of the U.S. Army, taking it down to pre-World War II levels, a key problem of the Command Sergeant Major of the U.S. Army is the lack of females in combat leadership positions? I would think a key problem would be the growing numbers of deployments for a force that is being depleted. Another concern should be the rules of engagement that restrain our combat troops from engaging the enemy.

A preeminent concern should be “mission creep,” where we’re introducing small numbers of troops into the cauldron of combat, without clear strategic guidance and objectives. We’ve previously shared with you that our troops in Afghanistan are not allowed to engage the Taliban, just because they are Taliban — excuse me, but aren’t these guys the enemy?

Now, the progressive socialists who troll these pages looking for attention will try and make some weak argument about integrating blacks. Sorry folks, but we can go back to Crispus Attucks, the first black combat unit to wear the U.S. uniform was the 54th Massachusetts Regiment who distinguished themselves at Ft. Wagner, South Carolina.

And let me clarify something: we’re not simply talking about women being in combat. Mary Ludwig Hayes, known as “Molly Pitcher,” stepped onto the artillery gun line at the Battle of Monmouth during the Revolutionary War. Anyone deployed into a combat zone is in combat. What’s being discussed here is having female troops in close combat units.

I’m quite sure this is another exhibit that will go in the Barack Obama presidential library. Perhaps it can be next to the beheading of James Foley exhibit? My overarching concern is that this will become an issue of quotas, not standards. And the push will be to meet the numbers, so the White House can have its photo ops…

Speaking of which, where are the first two female graduates of Ranger School? Are the skills in which the American taxpayer invested being put to use? Perhaps they should be in Kurdistan training female fighters on small unit tactics. And why is the U.S. Army “approving” female officers for the role of Second …..

Full Story Continues Here:

While the world burns, U.S. Army Sergeant Major admits this ‘key’ problem – Allen B. West –



Sign up for our daily email and get the stories everyone is talking about.

Leave a Comment

Comment via Facebook

Comment via Disqus

  • stpatwanabe

    The more the Lamestream mediaevil demonizes trump the more I know he’s doing the Right thing. And I like him.

  • frankenbiker

    Personally, the only combat position I think a women should be considered for is sniping. They excel at shooting, have better concentration, eye to hand coordination and their smaller stature makes them harder to spot. I don’t think it’d be a good idea to have a woman serving in a forward operating area where they may have to carry a fallen comrade out. Sniper teams work in two man teams, and generally if one is killed or wounded, so is the other. Its a sad reality, but it is a reality. Of course this is just my opinion, and I’m not spouting facts, just that, OPINION.

    • Beckah

      Although you make good points, I will have to disagree with you. Snipers have to pack a LOT of heavy gear, and for great distance. I won’t even start in about the whole “it’s that time of the month” thing, it would be an “inconvenience” at the VERY LEAST! I support women in the military, I nearly joined myself decades ago, but they DO NOT belong in forward combat positions, they simply are NOT strong enough for the job.

      • frankenbiker

        True enough, however it all depends on the mission as to what gear they have. A ten pound gun and ammo for a quick urban hit is nothing. Covering a convoy route for our troops, or setting a trap for enemies would require being out in the field longer and then yes, the burden should fall to a man.

  • Beckah

    The sooner the Earth has disposed of the “equality in everything” attitude, the better off mankind will be. Is there TRUE inequality? Yes there is; cleaning up politics would be a GREAT place to start; are any of YOUR children treated “equal” to say Chelsea Clinton? The war on equality should be to make this nation a true CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC again and dispose of the “lord and serf” “democracy” it has become!

    Men and women ARE DIFFERENT, and thank GOD they are! Women just DO NOT have the physical strength that men have. Women also have to deal with the “inconvenience” of “that time of the month” that men do not. There are places for women in the military, but forward combat units is NOT one of them; despite training (and maybe even “qualifying” if the standards are the SAME) I seriously doubt a 135 lb. woman could carry a 225 lb. wounded man, and both of their gear out of an engagement area, even factoring in the “adrenaline rush”.