# US Congressman First "Ranger Truther?"



## Marauder06 (Sep 24, 2015)

Yesterday Congressman Steve Russell of Oklahoma sent a letter to the Secretary of the Army John McHugh, demanding that he produce and send to him, all scores (peer evaluations, patrolling scores, spot reports etc.) for the two female Army Officers who graduated from the elite Army’s Ranger School last month. Is Congressman Russell the first Ranger “Truther?”

article


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 24, 2015)

Marauder06 said:


> Yesterday Congressman Steve Russell of Oklahoma sent a letter to the Secretary of the Army John McHugh, demanding that he produce and send to him, all scores (peer evaluations, patrolling scores, spot reports etc.) for the two female Army Officers who graduated from the elite Army’s Ranger School last month. Is Congressman Russell the first Ranger “Truther?”
> 
> article


This wouldn't be necessary if management hadn't become so inept and corrupt in the last 20 years.  

This is an opportunity for the Army to prove all the doubters wrong, it is also an opportunity for all the doubters to be proven correct.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 24, 2015)

The only people that care are people who seem to have very little in the way of a dog in the fight. 

Every guy I know who was involved in any way with these women in RS have told me again and again, these women met the standard. Period. This dude seems like a "truther" to me.


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 24, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> The only people that care are people who seem to have very little in the way of a dog in the fight.
> 
> Every guy I know who was involved in any way with these women in RS have told me again and again, these women met the standard. Period. This dude seems like a "truther" to me.


Then give him the documents and shut all the truthers up.
Why is giving data so painful to liberals? who routinely demand such dats when conservatives are in charge.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 25, 2015)

DA SWO said:


> Then give him the documents and shut all the truthers up.
> Why is giving data so painful to liberals? who routinely demand such dats when conservatives are in charge.



Has anyone said they aren't going to give the documents?


----------



## Gunz (Sep 25, 2015)

As an observation the truthers are staking claims on both sides of the issue: the congressman in the case of Ranger School, the SECNAV in the case of the Marines' gender-integrated infantry experiment. Either way, they don't believe the validity of the results and there must be a conspiracy somewhere.   :wall:


----------



## DA SWO (Sep 25, 2015)

Ocoka One said:


> As an observation the truthers are staking claims on both sides of the issue: the congressman in the case of Ranger School, the SECNAV in the case of the Marines' gender-integrated infantry experiment. Either way, they don't believe the validity of the results and there must be a conspiracy somewhere.   :wall:


Or just a lack of integrity.


----------



## x SF med (Sep 25, 2015)

Sometimes unbiased research is your worst enemy...  it may not support either of the famously polar sides of an argument, but prove a 3rd as yet unseen option/solution/argument.


----------



## AWP (Sep 25, 2015)

I think the dude's a truther but the Army needs to release the records and quickly. Look how long the "birther" controversy dragged on. The longer the Army takes, the more ammo it gives the naysayers. Release their stats along with averages for the class (APFT, road march, etc.)

@Centermass said the standards were met and I believe him. His info where Ranger School is concerned has always been correct.

Ultimately, this wouldn't be an issue if Army leadership were trusted. It has shown a proclivity for making PC decisions. Tattoos, uniforms, cases involving soldiers' actions in Afghanistan and Iraq...does anyone trust the DA? I doubt the rank and file trust their leadership.

This issue is too controversial and much, much larger than Ranger School. The Army should do the right thing and crush this before it goes any further.


----------



## Gunz (Sep 25, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> @Centermass said the standards were met and I believe him. His info where Ranger School is concerned has always been correct.


 
Yeah, I can't picture any Ranger Instructor giving an inch. And I would like to believe that the Marines were equally fastidious in grading the women in their gender-integrated infantry experiment. Obviously we're talking about two very different levels of course intensity and requirements for the female participants.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 25, 2015)

Marauder06 said:


> Yesterday Congressman Steve Russell of Oklahoma sent a letter to the Secretary of the Army John McHugh, demanding that he produce and send to him, all scores (peer evaluations, patrolling scores, spot reports etc.) for the two female Army Officers who graduated from the elite Army’s Ranger School last month. Is Congressman Russell the first Ranger “Truther?”
> 
> article



The Facebook article I just looked at said that Congressman Steve Russell has resigned. It was dated today @ 1745 EST .


----------



## Ranger Psych (Sep 25, 2015)

Freefalling said:


> I think the dude's a truther but the Army needs to release the records and quickly. Look how long the "birther" controversy dragged on. The longer the Army takes, the more ammo it gives the naysayers. Release their stats along with averages for the class (APFT, road march, etc.)
> 
> @Centermass said the standards were met and I believe him. His info where Ranger School is concerned has always been correct.
> 
> ...




I trust the people that have said that they were squared away, but there's also another part of that statement: Verify.   And no, I don't trust, and didn't trust, big Army leadership. Changing things for no fucking reason *ahemBERETCOUGH*, other than built in spite from Vietnam, as an example.   The most major issue is that everywhere else OTHER than Ranger school (so far) they don't have the single standard solution. I sure as FUCK would not want a chick that scored over 80% on her PT test now trying to ruck alongside me. I would say that when I was in I could score that completely drunk but there's an issue with that statement: I run FASTER (and it's a tested/proven fact on Peden field) when intoxicated and at the buzzed but not BLUURGH level.  I would have used it to my advantage, except that I'm pretty sure my PSG/PL+ would have blown enough gaskets to need depot level refitting.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Sep 25, 2015)

Ocoka One said:


> Yeah, I can't picture any Ranger Instructor giving an inch. And I would like to believe that the Marines were equally fastidious in grading the women in their gender-integrated infantry experiment. Obviously we're talking about two very different levels of course intensity and requirements for the female participants.



One thing that I appreciate about this board is that when certain members here say they have knowledge about something, and relay it, I will take it as gospel with much more confidence that I will anything I hear on the news regarding the same topic.  With that said:

- The female Rangers earned their tab
- The women Marines did not hold up

That is it.  Nothing I see on the news, or from some blowhard politician or General (often one in the same) will change how I feel about those two topics until I see someone I respect here, tell me otherwise.


----------



## Centermass (Sep 25, 2015)

Red Flag 1 said:


> The Facebook article I just looked at said that Congressman Steve Russell has resigned. It was dated today @ 1745 EST .



No, he didn't resign. He did however, make a statement on the resignation of John Boehner.

As for Congressman Russell, his assistant, Steve Foley, is spearheading the investigation and collecting any and all information concerning the request.

This whole thing came about as the result of a major dustup that created quite a split amongst those Rangers who believed the standards were met and those who believed there were those RI"s in the department, who knew better, but refused to speak up or come forward, for fear of reprisal that would place themselves in jeopardy or their careers. Enough spoke up that eventually got the attention of the Congressman's office.

Some of the reason lies with the RTB leadership. For instance, Col. Fivecoat's statement. For someone to say on one hand "The standards must be held" and in the same sentence, then goes on and says "The women must pass" wasn't exactly the smartest statement to make during a time such as this. If he had just stated "The standards are and will be maintained" and shut his mouth after that, it would have alleviated any doubt that the man is wishy washy.

The other is the perceived pressure at the highest levels from both Dempsey and Odierno, neither of whom, are tabbed. 

I am not saying their is any merit to this investigation, just passing on points of view from others, Fivecoats observation, being one of mine.

In the end? I don't see much of anything coming out of this, once everything is said and done. I've been wrong before. Guess we'll wait and see.


----------



## Red Flag 1 (Sep 25, 2015)

Centermass said:


> No, he didn't resign. He did however, make a statement on the resignation of John Boehner.
> 
> As for Congressman Russell, his assistant, Steve Foley, is spearheading the investigation and collecting any and all information concerning the request.
> 
> ...



I wasn't able to find any other source that could confirm Russell's resignation. Perhaps a Congressional investigation can find the answer. There are so many ways this is being looked at, and spoken about, it really is troubling.


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Sep 26, 2015)

This story pisses me off in so many ways, and it has NOTHING to do with the allegations that the women got special treatment - what fucking pisses me off is the irresponsibility to print it in the first place:

-  An unnamed General said "one of them will pass"
-  Multiple unnamed sources say "'Pressure was put on trainers' to make sure at least one woman graduated"
-  The Army denied, denied, denied

I could have written this, based only on the B.S. that I've read online -

Fucking politicians - watching shows like House of Cards and Movies like Wag the Dog have made me way too jaded - or not.

First women to pass Ranger School 'were given extra training'


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 26, 2015)

18X's are given extra training in order to do better at SFAS, is it any surprise that women are given extra training to do well at Ranger School? If anything this just shows that the Army willingly allows women to not be trained as well as men in all the other areas, and therefore ID'ed their own shortcomings. I would think it would be irresponsible to not send these women through a physical prep course prior to them attending.

@Ooh-Rah is your tab worth less? Why are you soo pissed?


----------



## Ooh-Rah (Sep 26, 2015)

@TLDR20 -

I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say, or more likely I was not as clear as I had intended.  My frustration about the article is that there is 'nothing' there of any substance in regards to giving the women special treatment (the unnamed General for example who allegedly suggested that one of them will pass).  As I stated in an earlier post within this thread, (three posts up), as far as I'm concerned, the women did it right, the cadre did it right, and unless someone here tells me different, that is good enough for me. 

What the article that People wrote does, is give the conspiracy type folks more ammo to backup their claim that the women were essentially escorted thru Ranger school.  And they make the claims without any actual facts, or known names to back up any of their claims - just conjecture.

Hope I did a better job expressing myself this time around.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 26, 2015)

Ooh-Rah said:


> @TLDR20 -
> 
> I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say, or more likely I was not as clear as I had intended.  My frustration about the article is that there is 'nothing' there of any substance in regards to giving the women special treatment (the unnamed General for example who allegedly suggested that one of them will pass).  As I stated in an earlier post within this thread, (three posts up), as far as I'm concerned, the women did it right, the cadre did it right, and unless someone here tells me different, that is good enough for me.
> 
> ...



Yeah I totally misunderstood you. My bad.


----------



## The Hate Ape (Sep 27, 2015)

Ooh-Rah said:


> @TLDR20
> What the article that People wrote does, is give the conspiracy type folks more ammo to backup their claim that the women were essentially escorted thru Ranger school.  And they make the claims without any actual facts, or known names to back up any of their claims - just conjecture.



Fact: Marine ITB female graduates were escorted
Source: Their instructors
Why: Command enforced (highest level)

People go off the handle because the hype is very real. They aren't conspiracy theorists, they are rightfully worried that our military is being weakened into bitch-assness by political agenda. Its a good thing that someone is there to annoy big-military into producing the data because it acts as an integrity tool. I'd rather use the reigns over the spurrs any day.

My stance is the standard, the current one or a more difficult one for all candidates. I'm relieved to read the two Ranger female candidates met said standards. The rest is for other Rangers to inquire/handle/whatever.


H/A


----------



## surgicalcric (Sep 27, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> 18X's are given extra training in order to do better at SFAS, is it any surprise that women are given extra training to do well at Ranger School?



Apples to Oranges argument Brother.

First off, these two females are not coming in off the street and right into Ranger School after BCT/AIT and BAC. However, SOPC exists to provide 18X's, coming straight in off the streets, training to bring them up to the level that an in-service E4(P) could have attained through taking part in unit level training. It is a leveling of the playing field of sorts.

Secondly, why was the two female candidates attendance to the Pre-Ranger Course (PRC) not sufficient for them to be successful at Ranger School? After all, it is the only formal course available to male candidates to prepare them for Ranger School. And lastly, since there is a course available to prepare all Ranger candidates for Ranger School, why being equal, would the females need to attend yet another course? 

If they are equals, why were they given preferential treatment, consisting of extra training opportunities (pre Pre-Ranger Course) not available to the male candidates, prior Ranger School?


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 27, 2015)

surgicalcric said:


> Apples to Oranges argument Brother.
> 
> First off, these two females are not coming in off the street and right into Ranger School after BCT/AIT and BAC. However, SOPC exists to provide 18X's, coming straight in off the streets, training to bring them up to the level that an in-service E4(P) could have attained through taking part in unit level training. It is a leveling of the playing field of sorts.
> 
> ...



Because females training is not equal in the Army. That is a problem. They are not held to the same standards from enlistment. That is a problem. They should be. But they aren't. So saying, "we will hold you to the same standard, though you have never previously been expected to attain it" seems silly to me. A little PT and nutrition advice seems plenty fair to me.


----------



## AWP (Sep 27, 2015)

One issue this highlights is the Army's poor A&S process for leaders. Take a green-as-grass 2LT. He/ She has gone through a commissioning process (ROTC, Academy, or OCS), then attends a basic course (also chock full of leadership), but still requires a pre-Ranger school before they can even make a run at their tab. Now we're saying women don't receive the same training opportunities as men (true and also equally damning) so they require at least one extra training process before going to the best leadership school in the Army?

The more the Army pushes and screams for equality the more it highlights its tragic inequality. The Army's trying to end inequality without leveling the playing field. It touts Ranger School while basically admitting it doesn't fully prepare leaders. You can send a thousand women through Ranger School but without meaningful change elsewhere they're just trophies, little statues to feel good about on your mantle.


----------



## surgicalcric (Sep 27, 2015)

TLDR20 said:


> Because females training is not equal in the Army. That is a problem. They are not held to the same standards from enlistment. That is a problem. They should be. But they aren't. So saying, "we will hold you to the same standard, though you have never previously been expected to attain it" seems silly to me. A little PT and nutrition advice seems plenty fair to me.



And who is to blame for the double standard...women.


----------



## TLDR20 (Sep 27, 2015)

surgicalcric said:


> And who is to blame for the double standard...women.



I don't know, I think more than just women are to blame.


----------



## racing_kitty (Sep 27, 2015)

surgicalcric said:


> And who is to blame for the double standard...women.



I think that's oversimplifying the answer.  While women are definitely culpable in propagating the double standard, I'm more inclined to ascribe blame to senior leaders of either gender when they were first working to establish what the expectations should be of women who serve.  Instead of telling Bomb Squad Barbie and her ilk to nut the fuck up and meet The Standard, they set a ridiculously low bar for females to rise above.  Humans being humans, they're typically only going to do what is expected of them, and not one iota more, hence what some would call "the soft bigotry of low expectations."  

The females who think "Fuck that shit with a busted football bat, I'mma do one better," are the ones with the right mentality for our respective lines of work, anyway.  If all females were held to The Standard, the exceptional ones would still go one higher, although there would admittedly be fewer of them due to the physiological limitations of the female body.  As it stands now, why in the hell would the average Jane stand up and say "Hey, I want to make my life a lot harder than it already is.  Suuuuuure, I'll meet the male standard."  Physical and ethical sloth is the fault of the females, because true equality didn't suit them.  

Ultimately, this round of the blame game is more like "the chicken or the egg."


----------



## Diamondback 2/2 (Sep 27, 2015)

My personal (very limited) experience with female soldiers, were not the greatest. I do try to keep an open mind as my experiences was not in an lengthy day to day situations. 

While teaching with SARG, most (as in high 90%) were terrible at basic level soldier skills. Example being zero/qualifying with a weapon, if I was on a range late it was generally b/c of a female soldier or an older officer (I'm talking NG-USAR old). Same level of training, more intensive coaching and a lot of calm down its not worth crying over motivational conversations. However, I've also had some really awesome female soldiers who took in the training and performed as well as some of the best males, again few and far between. Another example was integration of female instructor's, we had to train up a lot of them to take over for us. It was a chore and I did get butthurt on some of the bullshit. Like, its time to prep a range, all the sudden females soldier couldn't be found, never carrying their share of the equipment, constant getting out of work b/c they need to square something else away, pay, etc. At the time I was pretty bent about it, but didn't have the rank or position to change it.

Another was my last deployment, we had female soldiers and a lot of support soldier filling roles for the convoy security mission. A lot of the same stuff, can't meet the basic female standards for PT, getting out of PT b/c XYZ bullshit excuses, pretty much a complete lack of wanting to do the job. I can't even count the amount of time wasted b/c of it. That said there were a few, as in two, female soldiers who were locked on and I had no problem working with for that particular mission.

Finally I will state that my experiences with female SRNCO/OFFICERS has been a mixed bag. By the same could be said for the males. However, I cannot recall one single female NCO or Officer, that I said damn, i want to work for her, she has her shit together, good leader, etc.

Now my personal opinions are one standard, meet it, if you do you have the job, if not, see you later, and that's for male or female. As for having a infantry squad with 2-3 female soldiers in it, patrolling the badlands. Probably not based on my past dealing's, they would need to be exactly like the guys, at not bring a bag of issues or a get out of hard work attitude. They're out there, but from my experience, few and far between.

As for Ranger school, no dog in that fight. Outside of a congrats for earning their tab based on the standards RTB required them to meet, whatever they may have been. The dudes next to them would have flipped if they were getting special treatment, especially the ones getting dropped or recycled. So I think it's safe to say they met the same standards as the males in that class. I think the more important issue is the operational training and development of units, effectiveness the same, up or down? Unfortunately, the only way to find out at this point, is to test it and let the cards fall where they may.

My $.02


----------



## Marauder06 (Sep 28, 2015)

The Army's PAO, a general, is engaging in a public flame war with a female journalist who wrote an article in "People" questioning whether standards were altered for the female Rangers.

This probably won't end well for him.


----------



## Brill (Sep 28, 2015)

Marauder06 said:


> The Army's PAO, a general, is engaging in a public flame war with a female journalist who wrote an article in "People" questioning whether standards were altered for the female Rangers.
> 
> This probably won't end well for him.



Holy shit!  I only have a few more weeks to report this to SHARP so I can get an ARCOM before I ETS!!!  Screw you all!  I called dibs first!!!


----------



## SpongeBob*24 (Sep 28, 2015)

Let me know what you did, then I can use this on my NCOER....:-":wall:


----------

