I don't know whether they did or not. I'll defer to others to answer that. Either way, a few weeks of specialized training doesn't make up for months and potentially years of learning non-tangible things e.g. how to properly pack your rucksack, foot care, field craft, etc.
Women in Combat Arms/ SOF Discussion
- Thread starter AWP
- Start date
I don't know whether they did or not. I'll defer to others to answer that. Either way, a few weeks of specialized training doesn't make up for months and potentially years of learning non-tangible things e.g. how to properly pack your rucksack, foot care, field craft, etc.
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
I couldn't recall the amount of times people have asked me for a "quick" tracking course, or how to operate in the bush as a grunt. Sure I can give you the basics in a couple of hours, but that's like demonstrating to a baby that to walk/run/sprint all one needs to do is place one foot in front of another. There you go, now go and win a gold medal at the Olympics tomorrow!
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
I'm sure it is no comfort, but we see this on the tech side as well. "Radar tracks planes, but what does that mean to us?" "So you have radios and they do what?" "I have about 10 minutes, so what does your shop do?" "You can copy a switch in 10 minutes, why is it taking hours?"
Did any of us learn to tie our shows in 5 minutes? What makes us think that years later our adult brains can learn complex tasks in the same time?
It's literally the easiest PT test in the Army. You're expected to do better than what's required there, in fucking 11x OSUT.
Florida173
SOF Support
The imagine part is a suggestion, not some sort of hardline belief. You are misplacing my discussion for some invite to argue BS. I thought something was mentioned in a previous page that these women had a lot more prep than their male counterparts.
What you are suggesting is that only infantrymen do well at the course? And it was in fact PT that did most of them in, not anything involving their platoon leadership experience. These women all passed RTAC.
Last edited:
Slow your roll there stud.... and you need to read some of the other articles, all of the women made it through RAP, they failed in Darby, they had the PT test done and passed, they failed in the field problems. You tossed out the unsubstantiated phrasing after "I imagine..." in an earlier post. Actually, they all got put through an extensive, and extended Pre -Ranger course, were given recuperation time and then started the school proper.
Florida173
SOF Support
I did indeed read the some of the articles which is why I was suggesting that they got as you helped substantiate, "extensive, and extended Pre-Ranger course..."
TLDR20 is saying that it is the lack of platoon leadership experience that failed the women, but we have to look at all the women who were allowed to attempt ranger school and how they failed out, and if we add women who failed out of RTAC, it is PT that failed them. You can't just speak about the eight that made it to Darby.
Last edited:
While "Platoon Leadership" is a graded phase during the course, it is an "Administrative Position" for which any of the students while "In the rear with the gear" during RAP and Darby, can receive SPOT reports for. Patrols during Darby are first "Cadre Led" and then, done at the Squad level. Platoon level OR's are not done until later, not at Darby or Benning.
What they are primarily graded on are the 5 Principles - Planning, Reconnaissance, Control, Security and Common Sense. at the Squad level + It can also be subjective - to the advantage of the student. In other words, if more than one of these were violated or did not meet the standards, the RI can also take the entire picture into consideration and ask "Could this individual still have completed their mission successfully, with no or minimal casualties?" And if that is the case, if the RI does pass them, it's usually followed with a lengthy and detailed narrative explanation as to the reason "Why".
And to keep it on par, a whole lot of others, haven't had that much in the way of "Platoon Leadership" either.
What they are primarily graded on are the 5 Principles - Planning, Reconnaissance, Control, Security and Common Sense. at the Squad level + It can also be subjective - to the advantage of the student. In other words, if more than one of these were violated or did not meet the standards, the RI can also take the entire picture into consideration and ask "Could this individual still have completed their mission successfully, with no or minimal casualties?" And if that is the case, if the RI does pass them, it's usually followed with a lengthy and detailed narrative explanation as to the reason "Why".
And to keep it on par, a whole lot of others, haven't had that much in the way of "Platoon Leadership" either.
Last edited:
Update:
It’s not official, and they could still step on their… uh, make a serious error, but as of Thursday night it was highly probable that the three female officers remaining in Ranger School are going to pass the Camp Darby subphase of the school and move on to the second phase in the mountains at Dahlonega, Georgia. The two lieutenants and one major have finally passed the phase, after three attempts (and a considerable rest-up before their third shot). Last week, they passed the RAP Week phase (for each of them, a second time) without drama or difficulty.
On their third attempt at Camp Darby, the three women all passed one patrol. None has passed two. None has failed more than one (one or possibly two has only been graded once). With them “tabbed out” on patrols — at least as far as Darby is concerned — the course managers stopped assigning them to graded positions. This is often, but not always, done for men. The graded positions on the last couple days of the phase are going to the guys who need a Darby patrol pass to avoid recycle or dismissal, not to students who have demonstrated that they can lead a patrol — male or female alike.
None of the three women is in trouble on spot reports (negative spot reports can lead to phase and even course failure). Moreover, the instructors and observer/advisers think that these Ranger candidates are unlikely to have any trouble with peer reports, the last academic hurdle to completing the phase. Unless one of the women is injured, she will complete the phase.
There is no graduation. Instead, the soldiers get a few hours’ break — most of which will be spent chasing down equipment for the next phase — and then are transported to the Mountain Ranger Camp, a rustic hillside setting that they will spend little time in. Instead, they’ll be outdoors, doing some crude mountaineering (knot tying, rappelling, intro to technical climbing, etc.) and then running heavier and longer patrols. In the mountains they will have long movements and very difficult terrain. They will walk the contour of steep hills and struggle through tangled clearcuts at night.
Unless things have changed drastically, and weather and equipment permitting, airborne-qualified candidates will jump into a small DZ at mountain camp, and non-airborne candidates will be bused to the camp. The jumpers get five hours’ sleep before the jump for safety reasons (the legs do all guard duties). This five hours is the longest sleep a Ranger candidate can count on in the remainder of the course, at least until the next jump (probably into the culminating Florida phase).
So far, the Ranger Instructors are confident that the women have met the same standards as the men, with the single exception that Col. Fivecoat, the RTB commander, has been easier on them on recycles. Even then, they have not had treatment that is outside the range of what men have had.
Has there been… pressure? Depends on how you define it. The RIs are generally Ranger, infantry or SOF combat vets, so their idea of “pressure” doesn’t include being bossed around. Fivecoat is committed to the success of women in Ranger School, and he goes around telling folks that “the women must pass,” but he also says, “the standard must be held.” In his mind there is no contradiction. The RIs have done a pretty good job insulating the students from the looky-loos and media and giving them as normal a Ranger School experience as they can.
Tomorrow we should have the official word.
Source
It’s not official, and they could still step on their… uh, make a serious error, but as of Thursday night it was highly probable that the three female officers remaining in Ranger School are going to pass the Camp Darby subphase of the school and move on to the second phase in the mountains at Dahlonega, Georgia. The two lieutenants and one major have finally passed the phase, after three attempts (and a considerable rest-up before their third shot). Last week, they passed the RAP Week phase (for each of them, a second time) without drama or difficulty.
On their third attempt at Camp Darby, the three women all passed one patrol. None has passed two. None has failed more than one (one or possibly two has only been graded once). With them “tabbed out” on patrols — at least as far as Darby is concerned — the course managers stopped assigning them to graded positions. This is often, but not always, done for men. The graded positions on the last couple days of the phase are going to the guys who need a Darby patrol pass to avoid recycle or dismissal, not to students who have demonstrated that they can lead a patrol — male or female alike.
None of the three women is in trouble on spot reports (negative spot reports can lead to phase and even course failure). Moreover, the instructors and observer/advisers think that these Ranger candidates are unlikely to have any trouble with peer reports, the last academic hurdle to completing the phase. Unless one of the women is injured, she will complete the phase.
There is no graduation. Instead, the soldiers get a few hours’ break — most of which will be spent chasing down equipment for the next phase — and then are transported to the Mountain Ranger Camp, a rustic hillside setting that they will spend little time in. Instead, they’ll be outdoors, doing some crude mountaineering (knot tying, rappelling, intro to technical climbing, etc.) and then running heavier and longer patrols. In the mountains they will have long movements and very difficult terrain. They will walk the contour of steep hills and struggle through tangled clearcuts at night.
Unless things have changed drastically, and weather and equipment permitting, airborne-qualified candidates will jump into a small DZ at mountain camp, and non-airborne candidates will be bused to the camp. The jumpers get five hours’ sleep before the jump for safety reasons (the legs do all guard duties). This five hours is the longest sleep a Ranger candidate can count on in the remainder of the course, at least until the next jump (probably into the culminating Florida phase).
So far, the Ranger Instructors are confident that the women have met the same standards as the men, with the single exception that Col. Fivecoat, the RTB commander, has been easier on them on recycles. Even then, they have not had treatment that is outside the range of what men have had.
Has there been… pressure? Depends on how you define it. The RIs are generally Ranger, infantry or SOF combat vets, so their idea of “pressure” doesn’t include being bossed around. Fivecoat is committed to the success of women in Ranger School, and he goes around telling folks that “the women must pass,” but he also says, “the standard must be held.” In his mind there is no contradiction. The RIs have done a pretty good job insulating the students from the looky-loos and media and giving them as normal a Ranger School experience as they can.
Tomorrow we should have the official word.
Source
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,944
Thank you for addressing this, it is a question I had been wanting to ask after the last Darby phase, but could not come up with a way to write it that did not sound insulting to the Rangers.
Last edited:
Ranger School update: Two of the female candidates passed the Mountain Phase at Camp Frank D. Merrill in Dahlonega, GA . One recycled for patrols.
60 men and 1 woman will be recycled, or given a second attempt at the next Mountain Phase of Ranger School, which starts on Saturday, August 8, 2015.
60 men and 1 woman will be recycled, or given a second attempt at the next Mountain Phase of Ranger School, which starts on Saturday, August 8, 2015.
- Joined
- Sep 12, 2012
- Messages
- 12,944
I know it's a British site, but I have to hope these women "HATE" begin referred in anyway to that stupid movie.
Curious from those who may know, how accurate the article is from them being "days" from graduation -
Two women advance to final phase of U.S. Army's Ranger School
Curious from those who may know, how accurate the article is from them being "days" from graduation -
Two women advance to final phase of U.S. Army's Ranger School
pardus
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 7, 2006
- Messages
- 10,534
If you go off statistics, they should pass at this point.... but then as said before, juice vs squeeze. Keep the fact that yes, one or two in 200 could pass hooah high, in your back pocket of "SecDef Global Gloves-Off War CONOP" or go "hey, lets just fire off EVERY female in the Army, which totals approximately 74k, at Infantry and Infantry schools when the most recent statistics show that through an extended pipeline of preperation and training that exceeds what we've been doing for men up until this point.... we'd get 738 qualified graduates out of one of the premier leadership schools within the Army."
These women, should they graduate, should be the ones speaking out provided they can do so without focusing on their obvious "gender bias" with regards to the realities of females in an infantry occupation. What many women who are pressing for "equality in the ranks" don't understand is that in the Infantry, true equality is reached... or as close to it as you can get.
The ruck packing list is the same.
The squad equipment is the same and gets carried by the same duty positions.
Some people carrier heavier weapons, and get those weapons and duty positions either as luck of the draw or as a rite of passage/reward for seniority and ability.
The distances are same for the squad and platoon.
The speed of assault and securing of the objective needs to maintain the same timeframe regardless if an innie or an outie is on the team.
There could be contention that due to a large portion of the men BEING Infantry, they to some extent live-eat-breathe these operations/briefings/techniques where they're less likely applied in such "force" outside of the realm of the blue cord... but if I recall correctly, at least in direct training and/or time in service, the majority of these individuals well exceed the usual time in service for a Ranger school attendee as well as exceeded the train-up length of what some Best Ranger teams get for that grueling competition...
I think that there's plenty of generally "gender neutral" positions in the military where capability falls more under dexterity and prowess rather than relying heavily on physical capability. Those duty positions, like tank crew and other stuff like that where the brunt of the burden isn't on the back but instead on the brain, is where equality lies. Where it's on the back? Apples to Apples, the median average IN SERVICE NOW of Infantrymen still performs above the same average for females across the board physically... and that physical component will not go away. You still have to assault the cliffs and mountains while carrying the kit to sustain you on the objective, and while you can lighten that load.... a longer and more intensively required logisitical train puts those that are less prepared for contact with the enemy in a larger hazard factor zone due to having to keep the front doing the things the front does.
Simple fact is, it takes more resources and manpower put in greater than normal harms way if a unit needs resupply every 24 vs 72 hours, or every 72 vs every week. That's more helos or vehicles getting wear and tear, more hazard for the entire elements having to traverse terrain by land or air (or sea, but resup by sea still ends up having an air/land component as I'm sure the Marines will attest to).
Are some women capable of doing it? I have no doubt. My contention is that as we have seen thus far, the component of those willing to undertake the task right now currently has a tenative sub-1% pass rate right now. That's not really going to truly add much capability or manpower resource to the force... which is what we truly should be considering as the whole point of these exercises. What makes the military a more capable and lethal fighting force.
These women, should they graduate, should be the ones speaking out provided they can do so without focusing on their obvious "gender bias" with regards to the realities of females in an infantry occupation. What many women who are pressing for "equality in the ranks" don't understand is that in the Infantry, true equality is reached... or as close to it as you can get.
The ruck packing list is the same.
The squad equipment is the same and gets carried by the same duty positions.
Some people carrier heavier weapons, and get those weapons and duty positions either as luck of the draw or as a rite of passage/reward for seniority and ability.
The distances are same for the squad and platoon.
The speed of assault and securing of the objective needs to maintain the same timeframe regardless if an innie or an outie is on the team.
There could be contention that due to a large portion of the men BEING Infantry, they to some extent live-eat-breathe these operations/briefings/techniques where they're less likely applied in such "force" outside of the realm of the blue cord... but if I recall correctly, at least in direct training and/or time in service, the majority of these individuals well exceed the usual time in service for a Ranger school attendee as well as exceeded the train-up length of what some Best Ranger teams get for that grueling competition...
I think that there's plenty of generally "gender neutral" positions in the military where capability falls more under dexterity and prowess rather than relying heavily on physical capability. Those duty positions, like tank crew and other stuff like that where the brunt of the burden isn't on the back but instead on the brain, is where equality lies. Where it's on the back? Apples to Apples, the median average IN SERVICE NOW of Infantrymen still performs above the same average for females across the board physically... and that physical component will not go away. You still have to assault the cliffs and mountains while carrying the kit to sustain you on the objective, and while you can lighten that load.... a longer and more intensively required logisitical train puts those that are less prepared for contact with the enemy in a larger hazard factor zone due to having to keep the front doing the things the front does.
Simple fact is, it takes more resources and manpower put in greater than normal harms way if a unit needs resupply every 24 vs 72 hours, or every 72 vs every week. That's more helos or vehicles getting wear and tear, more hazard for the entire elements having to traverse terrain by land or air (or sea, but resup by sea still ends up having an air/land component as I'm sure the Marines will attest to).
Are some women capable of doing it? I have no doubt. My contention is that as we have seen thus far, the component of those willing to undertake the task right now currently has a tenative sub-1% pass rate right now. That's not really going to truly add much capability or manpower resource to the force... which is what we truly should be considering as the whole point of these exercises. What makes the military a more capable and lethal fighting force.
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2009
- Messages
- 4,304
2 women graduate Ranger school.
History made: Army Ranger School to graduate its first female students ever
History made: Army Ranger School to graduate its first female students ever
Congrats to those that made it.
WASHINGTON — Two female soldiers will graduate from the Army’s legendary Ranger School this week, the first women to complete the course since it was opened to them on an experimental basis this year, the U.S. Army said Monday evening.
The two were part of a group of 19 female soldiers who passed a rigorous screening process to begin the physically demanding course that had been closed to women since it opened more than six decades ago.
The graduation on Friday will mark a key milestone on the military’s ongoing efforts to open front-line combat units to women. The military services have pledged to do so without compromising standards.
Students in the grueling two-month course are required to survive on little food and sleep despite demanding physical activity, including carrying more than 100 pounds of gear through mountains and swamps. It is considered the Army’s most physically challenging course.
.oembed-asset-link { background: #fff; border-bottom: 1px solid #e1e1e1; } .oembed-link-anchor { display: block; clear: both; } .oembed-link-thumbnail{ float: left; padding: 14px; } .oembed-link-thumbnail img { max-width: 78px; max-height: 60px; display: block; } p.oembed-link-title { font-size: 75%; color: #009BFF; margin: 0 14px; padding-top: 12px; font-weight:normal; text-align: left; line-height: 120%; } p.oembed-link-desc { font-size: 100%; color: #666; font-weight: normal; margin: 0 14px 14px 14px; font-family: 'Futura Today Light'; text-align: left; line-height: 120%; }
USA TODAY
Army Ranger School tests if women are up to grueling challenge
The women started the regimen in April, but like many men they were required to retake a phase of the course if they didn’t pass on the first go.
Graduates get to wear the coveted Ranger tab, which signifies their completion of the Army’s premier small unit leadership course for the infantry and other front-line troops.
"Each Ranger School graduate has shown the physical and mental toughness to successfully lead organizations at any level," Army Secretary John McHugh said in a statement. "This course has proven that every soldier, regardless of gender, can achieve his or her full potential."
But the women will not be able to join the infantry or other so-called ground combat jobs, including the Ranger regiment, which remain closed to women, at least through this year.
Opening the course to women is part of an assessment that all services have been ordered to undertake to determine how best to open the infantry, special forces and other ground combat jobs by next year. The Pentagon has ordered that all occupations be open to women after this year.
The services can request a waiver from some jobs, but would need to provide an extensive justification for doing so.
The military services have been steadily opening jobs to women over recent years, but the infantry and special operations fields are the most physically demanding and require that troops live close together in often primitive field conditions.
"I promise you that the one thing we will not compromise on is standards," Gen. Martin Dempsey told a group of U.S. servicemen in Baghdad recently.
First female soldiers to graduate from Army Ranger School
WASHINGTON — Two female soldiers will graduate from the Army’s legendary Ranger School this week, the first women to complete the course since it was opened to them on an experimental basis this year, the U.S. Army said Monday evening.
The two were part of a group of 19 female soldiers who passed a rigorous screening process to begin the physically demanding course that had been closed to women since it opened more than six decades ago.
The graduation on Friday will mark a key milestone on the military’s ongoing efforts to open front-line combat units to women. The military services have pledged to do so without compromising standards.
Students in the grueling two-month course are required to survive on little food and sleep despite demanding physical activity, including carrying more than 100 pounds of gear through mountains and swamps. It is considered the Army’s most physically challenging course.
.oembed-asset-link { background: #fff; border-bottom: 1px solid #e1e1e1; } .oembed-link-anchor { display: block; clear: both; } .oembed-link-thumbnail{ float: left; padding: 14px; } .oembed-link-thumbnail img { max-width: 78px; max-height: 60px; display: block; } p.oembed-link-title { font-size: 75%; color: #009BFF; margin: 0 14px; padding-top: 12px; font-weight:normal; text-align: left; line-height: 120%; } p.oembed-link-desc { font-size: 100%; color: #666; font-weight: normal; margin: 0 14px 14px 14px; font-family: 'Futura Today Light'; text-align: left; line-height: 120%; }
USA TODAY
Army Ranger School tests if women are up to grueling challenge
The women started the regimen in April, but like many men they were required to retake a phase of the course if they didn’t pass on the first go.
Graduates get to wear the coveted Ranger tab, which signifies their completion of the Army’s premier small unit leadership course for the infantry and other front-line troops.
"Each Ranger School graduate has shown the physical and mental toughness to successfully lead organizations at any level," Army Secretary John McHugh said in a statement. "This course has proven that every soldier, regardless of gender, can achieve his or her full potential."
But the women will not be able to join the infantry or other so-called ground combat jobs, including the Ranger regiment, which remain closed to women, at least through this year.
Opening the course to women is part of an assessment that all services have been ordered to undertake to determine how best to open the infantry, special forces and other ground combat jobs by next year. The Pentagon has ordered that all occupations be open to women after this year.
The services can request a waiver from some jobs, but would need to provide an extensive justification for doing so.
The military services have been steadily opening jobs to women over recent years, but the infantry and special operations fields are the most physically demanding and require that troops live close together in often primitive field conditions.
"I promise you that the one thing we will not compromise on is standards," Gen. Martin Dempsey told a group of U.S. servicemen in Baghdad recently.
First female soldiers to graduate from Army Ranger School
This should get interesting now...
President Plans To Attend Ranger School Ceremony; This Guarantees First Women Will Graduate
Time to Welcome a New Era of Rangers
President Plans To Attend Ranger School Ceremony; This Guarantees First Women Will Graduate
Time to Welcome a New Era of Rangers
Last edited:
The military combat capability concern isn’t about a difference between men and women, masculinity and femininity. Neither is it about leading all levels of organizations in a peacetime military.
Each level of combat unit organization requires a different quality of leading. There is a demarcation between enlisted and NCO for the same reasons as there is a demarcation between Company Grade Officer, Field Grade Officer and Flag Officer. Unfortunately the demarcations between the three commissioned officer command grades of Company, Field, and Flag also comes with different size of organization being tactically led in the fight to win as well as a larger scope from tactical leading the smaller tactical unit with command in an immediate area to strategically lead larger numbers of tactical units in a larger area of operations to dominate and control.
The Korean War and subsequently the South East Asia conflicts, to a lesser degree, demonstrated beyond question being designated (appointed) leader in the peacetime military is less demanding than obtaining and sustaining unit integrity in the face of the enemy or in extraordinary demands to march significant distances under harsh conditions to reinforce and strengthen sieged positions.
Anybody can make it through a demanding inconvenient 61-day course that has train-up prerequisites (course prerequisites are needed necessity), the problem is readiness and availability of the individual to be utilized after getting this training. It is here there is much similarity to obtaining and sustaining adequate or sufficient quality or level of physical fitness to be there fighting. In this regard the 1947 FM 21-20, Physical Training concisely and precisely identified that although individuals can be trained up to needed levels of physical fitness within 10-15 weeks, keeping individuals at this level of fitness is difficult when most individuals lack the willingness to sustain their physical fitness. The same is true pertinent to having and sustaining willingness to command and lead troops in action.
The purpose of the Ranger School was never to train elite infantry soldiers to fight or to be commandos, raiders or marauders but to develop through training simulations the mental agility to employ already possessed infantry competencies and needed level of physical fitness (course prerequisites). Thus the successfully completing the courseis not about being the roughest, toughest, meanest bastard or bitch in the unit, but about having competence in having sufficient situational awareness and mental, emotional, cognitive wherewithal to not only understand the tactical situation but to also lead others in the engaging in activities to successfully overcome becoming a rout, defeat, surrender, or complete decimation of the unit.
In this regard career has operational capability significance due to career cannot be separated from individual be both available and ready to competently perform “ALL” duties of the military occupation.
Both the Korean War and the Southeast Asia conflicts found military with too many officers and NCOs being both reluctant to lead others into combat and lacking adequate/sufficient level of combat fitness to be in combat. This is the reason why the US Army Ranger School was created in 1952; this is the operational capability why the pass/fail human performance standards shouldn’t be diluted for career opportunity diversity purposes. When purpose of Ranger School gets diverted or transformed to favoring being more promotable regardless of awarded MOS and without respect to developing competent capability and willingness to lead others in action then there will no longer be an operational capability need for the Ranger School to exist.
Each level of combat unit organization requires a different quality of leading. There is a demarcation between enlisted and NCO for the same reasons as there is a demarcation between Company Grade Officer, Field Grade Officer and Flag Officer. Unfortunately the demarcations between the three commissioned officer command grades of Company, Field, and Flag also comes with different size of organization being tactically led in the fight to win as well as a larger scope from tactical leading the smaller tactical unit with command in an immediate area to strategically lead larger numbers of tactical units in a larger area of operations to dominate and control.
The Korean War and subsequently the South East Asia conflicts, to a lesser degree, demonstrated beyond question being designated (appointed) leader in the peacetime military is less demanding than obtaining and sustaining unit integrity in the face of the enemy or in extraordinary demands to march significant distances under harsh conditions to reinforce and strengthen sieged positions.
Anybody can make it through a demanding inconvenient 61-day course that has train-up prerequisites (course prerequisites are needed necessity), the problem is readiness and availability of the individual to be utilized after getting this training. It is here there is much similarity to obtaining and sustaining adequate or sufficient quality or level of physical fitness to be there fighting. In this regard the 1947 FM 21-20, Physical Training concisely and precisely identified that although individuals can be trained up to needed levels of physical fitness within 10-15 weeks, keeping individuals at this level of fitness is difficult when most individuals lack the willingness to sustain their physical fitness. The same is true pertinent to having and sustaining willingness to command and lead troops in action.
The purpose of the Ranger School was never to train elite infantry soldiers to fight or to be commandos, raiders or marauders but to develop through training simulations the mental agility to employ already possessed infantry competencies and needed level of physical fitness (course prerequisites). Thus the successfully completing the courseis not about being the roughest, toughest, meanest bastard or bitch in the unit, but about having competence in having sufficient situational awareness and mental, emotional, cognitive wherewithal to not only understand the tactical situation but to also lead others in the engaging in activities to successfully overcome becoming a rout, defeat, surrender, or complete decimation of the unit.
In this regard career has operational capability significance due to career cannot be separated from individual be both available and ready to competently perform “ALL” duties of the military occupation.
Both the Korean War and the Southeast Asia conflicts found military with too many officers and NCOs being both reluctant to lead others into combat and lacking adequate/sufficient level of combat fitness to be in combat. This is the reason why the US Army Ranger School was created in 1952; this is the operational capability why the pass/fail human performance standards shouldn’t be diluted for career opportunity diversity purposes. When purpose of Ranger School gets diverted or transformed to favoring being more promotable regardless of awarded MOS and without respect to developing competent capability and willingness to lead others in action then there will no longer be an operational capability need for the Ranger School to exist.
Duffle blog knocked this one out of the park, the context of this article is epic. I still question whether this is really sarcasm...
Out-Of-Standards NCO: 'Female Rangers A Disgrace'
Out-Of-Standards NCO: 'Female Rangers A Disgrace'
Similar threads
