TLDR20
Verified SOF
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2009
- Messages
- 6,297
Women are already going through SOF courses. Some have already passed, others are currently in certain pipelines. Are they full fledged SF/SEAL/Rangers? No...For now.
Females in Ranger School
- Thread starter goon175
- Start date
Women are already going through SOF courses. Some have already passed, others are currently in certain pipelines. Are they full fledged SF/SEAL/Rangers? No...For now.
So, all this reading made me have a dream that 3/75th got a female Batt. C.O. I woke up screaming for you poor Rangers. :)
F.M.
F.M.
Really? I hadn't heard that! Last I had heard a few had tried but none had made it. If they can make it without standards being lowered or anything like that, I don't have any reason to complain or whine.
I just don't see why they aren't starting with IOBC (similar to what the usmc is doing). The CoS says you need the Ranger Tab to move through the ranks in the infantry, but I'm pretty sure Infantry officers have to attend IOBC to be succesful in the Infantry as well...ya know...since thats how they get MOS qualified and all....
Starting with R.S. is like saying "eh, skip BAC and head right up to do MFF - if you can do MFF than we know you'll be able to do static line!"
Starting with R.S. is like saying "eh, skip BAC and head right up to do MFF - if you can do MFF than we know you'll be able to do static line!"
Brother:
This issue of women attending Ranger School isn't about women really wanting to lead Infantry soldiers in combat or really be in the Infantry; it is about promotions. Women feel slighted by being held back from promotion to certain positions because they lack a Tab and having held certain positions - they are interested in career advancement not being a Ranger.
If women, as a whole, thought they were physically equal to men there would be equal efforts to dissolve gender lines in both professional and amateur/collegiate sports. However I really haven't seen a big push to get women into the NFL or the NBA or powerlifting, etc... When women are competing equally in arenas where lives and national security aren't hanging in the balance I will reconsider...
Crip
I absolutely agree with you, I was just using the CoS's argument against him. His reasoning makes no sense, and we all see it for what it actually is.
Although I suspect it goes higher than the CoS.
Scotth
Verified Military
Spot on. If people don't want women in Ranger school remove the promotion aspect from attending the school. If you removed the promotion aspect you would probably remove half the males attendees as well. Same with jump school.
Firstly this school should be restricted to Infantry branch / Infantry MOSs only. Which as well would eliminate support MOS personnel from an Infantry small unit tactic skills course. Secondly I don't feel this is or ever was an officer leadership course. As a former Infantry Squad leader and Infantry platoon Sergeant it has always been extremely frustrating process to get slots for this course for our Infantry NCOs and enlisted personnel. Our young new boot Lt.s and O staff slugs always got first shot. The slots were always held in the Battalion. Everybody wants the tab for career enhancement but don't want to be in the Infantry...Now they want to muddy the waters with further political intrigue. Thirdly the Army provides solid training for all personnel being deployed currently relative to weapons, tactics, convoy operation and a long list of basic combat skills. Why do any support slugs even need to be in this course taking up valuable slots is beyond me. I can guarantee if you took the tab away and only made a notation in the SRB / Personnel file the demand would drop greatly and immediately. I will say this it was nice to see my Platoon Leader recycle three times as well as peered. He came back a new man, ego broken and 50 pounds less ass. He even started listening to the squad leaders... Just my 2 cents.
While I'm sure I'm preaching to the choir here, I dislike the entire idea of any school, Ranger or otherwise, being a career tick in the box. It should be something that compliments the warrior/leadership skills of the individual and be a source of pride for themselves and their unit for completing a tough course rather than "I gotta do this to get promoted". I agree with Scotth, remove the promotion aspect.
It may have used to be hard to get into, but over the last few years they are taking any infantryman they can get their hands on. They even made it so that anyone who attends ALC/SLC has the chance to go afterwards - and the unit doesn't even have to pay. When I went to ALC last summer, I would say less than 10% of the class actually jumped at the opportunity, everyone else just rolled their eyes and talked about how they had a CIB what do they need to go walk around the woods for.
The badge collectors working on the tower of power... We would have loved such an opportunity. This course should be absolute mandate for all Squad leaders.
Considering that SL/PSG/PL positions were V coded in the Stryker Bn I was in.... it's supposed to be.
Brill
SOF Support
As an MI support slug in a SF unit, I strongly disagree. I believe RS will enable me to be a better leader and integrate more effectively in an ODA. I plan on going back after this deployment.
Brill
SOF Support
As an MI support slug in a SF unit, I strongly disagree. I believe RS will enable me to be a better leader and integrate more effectively in an ODA. I plan on going back after this deployment.
Well we disagree, respectfully
If the Army did a better job of building leaders, properly assessing, selecting, and training them then Ranger School would not need to exist. If the bulk of the course focused on learning new skills it would be one thing, but to make it a leadership course with major career implications is garbage. RS essentially invalidates the Army's methods for raising generations of combat leadership.
Since it is a leadership course and everyone in the Army is now a "warrior" then let anyone of any MOS who can meet the posted standards attend the course. How many 11 series were denied a school date due to a support MOS (which I consider to be just about every other MOS in the Army) taking his spot? How many 11 series NCOs and O's will never even attempt the course?
Ranger School exists because the Army is incapable of properly creating combat leaders.
Since it is a leadership course and everyone in the Army is now a "warrior" then let anyone of any MOS who can meet the posted standards attend the course. How many 11 series were denied a school date due to a support MOS (which I consider to be just about every other MOS in the Army) taking his spot? How many 11 series NCOs and O's will never even attempt the course?
Ranger School exists because the Army is incapable of properly creating combat leaders.
I fully agree with this statement above; "the Army is incapable of properly creating combat leaders." But they do one hellavu job of making managers, highly sensitive folks and treating everyone in accordance to a cohesive non-hostile work environment. ,
I believe and I'm convinced & know many slots never reached the grunt level guys and many are denied slots due to other MOSs filling those slots in the school house. I also know for a fact we had many support guys in the HQ taking slots that should have gone to the grunts. My knowledge is from 2002-1991. Perhaps that has changed but the Army needs to study the Marine corps model more closely and stop trying to be so PC. My opinion of course, what little that is worth. If RS is the model of combat leadership then there is a huge problem. Considering the small percentage of personnel attending these courses annually (approx. 1000 successful students Army wide per year from all services to include foreign students) this doesn't seem to be an effective tool based on the stated objective above. Also consider the fact that many of these folks will get out of service within a short period of time (2-3 years after completion). Hence my support of restricting this course to combat arms. This further validates and lends credence to not allowing females into the course. Unless of course they can and are accepted to combat arms MOSs.
;)
http://www.Ranger.org/Resources/Documents/Ranger website brief.pdf
With deepest respect
I believe and I'm convinced & know many slots never reached the grunt level guys and many are denied slots due to other MOSs filling those slots in the school house. I also know for a fact we had many support guys in the HQ taking slots that should have gone to the grunts. My knowledge is from 2002-1991. Perhaps that has changed but the Army needs to study the Marine corps model more closely and stop trying to be so PC. My opinion of course, what little that is worth. If RS is the model of combat leadership then there is a huge problem. Considering the small percentage of personnel attending these courses annually (approx. 1000 successful students Army wide per year from all services to include foreign students) this doesn't seem to be an effective tool based on the stated objective above. Also consider the fact that many of these folks will get out of service within a short period of time (2-3 years after completion). Hence my support of restricting this course to combat arms. This further validates and lends credence to not allowing females into the course. Unless of course they can and are accepted to combat arms MOSs.
;)Personnel End Strength US Army - July 2010 -
1,375,600
"Ranger school cadre mission; Conduct Ranger and Reconnaissance and Surveillance Leader Courses to further develop the combat arms skills of Officer and Enlisted volunteers eligible for assignment to units whose primary mission is to engage in the close-combat, direct fire battle. Produce as many Ranger and RSLC leaders as possible within standards."http://www.Ranger.org/Resources/Documents/Ranger website brief.pdf
With deepest respect
Your not really doing a good job of selling a future in the Army to me, NEVER be a recruiter, just a helpful suggestion lol! Though personally, I prefer the ones who are honest and will tell you how things are, so maybe you should go recruiter
Crip....once again hit the nail on the head. I'll put a slightly different way though....how many women did you guys see get drafted by the NFL last month......0 that's how many......women do not complete against or alongside men in any professional sport!
DA Form 705.....you will see 2 different standards....another name for 2 is double.....these standards are lower from when I joined the service in 1992....In units I have been a member of, if you didn't max your pushups and situps at 82 and 92 respectfully you were given a "hard time". The 2 mile run we got a little lee-way on for genetics...had some short guys around!
DA Form 705.....you will see 2 different standards....another name for 2 is double.....these standards are lower from when I joined the service in 1992....In units I have been a member of, if you didn't max your pushups and situps at 82 and 92 respectfully you were given a "hard time". The 2 mile run we got a little lee-way on for genetics...had some short guys around!
