Tag Archives: Veterans
On Thursday, April 17th in Raleigh, Governor Pat McCrory announced an initiative to provide in-state tuition to veterans living in North Carolina, regardless of their state of residence. This is big news for North Carolina’s huge military and veteran populations. Yet the Star News doesn’t seem to think it worth covering.
The initiative was announced at the NC Women Veterans Summit & Expo, the first event of its kind for the state, yet this too has been markedly absent from the Star News’ pages. The tuition program, which is being proposed in the FY15 budget, will help young service members to further their education at a significantly reduced cost. This in turn enhances their employment prospects and encourages them to stay and join the work force or start a business in our beautiful state. Why would the editors at the Star “News” go out of their way to ignore such a huge tuition program announcement and keep this very newsworthy story from their readers? The silence is deafening, and it is a slap in the face to NC’s veterans.
I was there. Yes, in Iraq, but also at an event that just about every media outlet in the state deemed newsworthy, except ours.
Shame over the disgraceful treatment of Veterans during and after Vietnam resulted in a societal shift by the general population in how it treats its men women in uniform over the last forty years. Regardless of individual views on war and the military, the majority of our culture respects and wants to help those who volunteered to defend us against all enemies both foreign and domestic. Not so on Capitol Hill. The administration and our politicians are determined to put illegal aliens above Veterans, time and time again; rewarding those who take from America and break her laws and punishing those who work and sacrifice to protect her.
During the September government shutdown the Obama administration had privately owned and operated war memorials shut down, barricaded and staffed with law enforcement to bar Veterans. And who could forget Nancy Pelosi speaking at an illegal immigration rally facilitated by the erstwhile shutdown government, while 90-year-old WWII veterans in wheelchairs were threatened with arrest for visiting their memorials. As House Republicans passed bill after bill to fund all aspects of government except Obamacare, Senate Democrats kept the government shut down for political theater, and continued to target and punish Veterans.
After passing military Sequestration (while non-essentials like the National Endowment for the Arts remain fully funded), Veterans have been struck yet another undeserved blow by politicians on both Left and (supposedly) Right. The budget “deal” passed this week not only fattens government with vastly increased spending and economy-killing tax hikes – the opposite of what we should be doing – it does so at the expense of those who dedicated their best years to a military career. Military pensions and retirement benefits are on the chopping block, cutting $6 billion over ten years. Even disabled retirees are not exempt from pension cuts, and item Paul Ryan knew about two days before the bill was passed but did nothing to fix. An amendment proposed by Jeff Sessions to correct this grievous “mistake” was blocked by Democrats because it would recoup the money lost from fraud by requiring applicants for particular child tax credits to submit their social security numbers. Far be it from Democrats and many Republicans to enforce American law and refuse government benefits to illegal immigrants.
Leave it to the crooks in Washington to pass a deal no one wants that increases spending, further damages the economy, and sticks it to our dedicated military while indulging illegal immigrants. Whatever Paul Ryan was thinking before the budget passed, he should now be thinking about what he wants to do once we kick him out of office. With Republicans like this, who needs Democrats?
Earlier this month the Examiner published an article: More than 100 North Carolinians have been killed by illegal aliens. As Obama rekindles a fresh push for Amnesty and as Veterans’ Day approaches, I would like to highlight the stories of veterans killed by illegal aliens. Because our government refuses to enforce current immigration law and refuses to protect and seal our borders, these individuals who served their country with honor were killed by criminals who never should have been in the country. The Amnesty pushers are telling you these criminals just came here for a better life. Were these murders just good, hard-working folks like you and me? Hardly.
It is a tragedy when anyone becomes the victim of violent crime. It is all the more shameful when the criminal is an illegal alien flying under the radar and given cover by the government. These American veterans who were killed volunteered to protect the rest of us from all enemies foreign and domestic. They signed a blank check valued up to and including their lives to keep that oath, but they were not killed in the line of duty on the battlefield. They were shamefully murdered in the streets of North Carolina.
Mike Stowe enlisted in the Air Force after high school and served for seven years. After his service, he and his wife Stacy moved to Cary, NC. In 2004, with Stacy pregnant with their second child, Mike was killed in a hit-and-run car accident by an illegal alien, Chikele Gideon, who was already known to immigration officials. Gideon had been arrested in 2002 for overstaying his visa, and in 2003 was ordered to leave the country by a judge in Atlanta, but didn’t comply.
Harold Mills was an accountant for 24 years after serving with honor in the Navy. He was a devout member of his church, and the 75-year-old was riding his bicycle when he was killed in a hit-and-run by an illegal alien who was speeding and fled the scene.
Calvin Raines was a veteran of Korea who served six years in the Army. A huge NASCAR fan, he was known as a patriot through-and-through, and was loved by everyone who knew him. He was killed in a head-on collision when illegal alien Manuel Andres-Bomaye, who was driving with two others, crossed the center line, killing everyone involved.
Craig Morris was a retired veteran who had served nearly thirty years in the Marine Corps, including a tour in the Gulf War and two tours in Iraq. He had a wife and four children and trained soldiers in Special Operations. He was fatally shot by illegal alien Francisco Echeverria after trying to stop a fight. His murderer followed him in a car and gunned him down in the street.
Unnecessary deaths. Devastated families.
“There is a double-layer of grief for these families,” says Maureen Wilson, the state director of North Carolinians For Immigration Reform and Enforcement (NCFIRE). “The first is the actual death and loss of a family member. The second is the failure of the U.S. government to secure our own borders, a mismanaged immigration program, and general leniency after initial crimes have been committed by those in the country illegally, all while these citizens were serving their country.”
None of these veterans had to die this way. These crimes were not simply caused by the individual acts, they were facilitated by politicians unconcerned with their primary duties: law enforcement and citizen safety. Had the government simply enforced the current immigration and deportation laws, these killers would not have been present in North Carolina to commit these crimes. Had NC politicians not provided the welcome mat of drivers licenses to illegals, most would not have been on the road. Hundreds of crimes at the hands of illegal immigrants are committed monthly in North Carolina alone. They taking jobs from citizens, they are driving drunk, committing manslaughter and murder, and as one recent article horrifically points out, they are raping their way through North Carolina’s children.
Enforcing our laws protects everyone – citizens and non-citizens alike. The lives of these veterans matter, as do the lives of every victim hurt by illegals. Yet Amnesty-hungry politicians studiously ignore the victims of these crimes. For the Democrats, the votes they will get once Amnesty is passed are more important than the suffering of innocent civilians at the hands of illegal alien criminals. For cheap-labor-loving Republicans, the money they save not paying Americans an honest wage is more important. Politicians on both sides of the isle need to be held to account. They, too, took the oath to defend and protect the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. In pushing for Amnesty and a path to citizenship, they are not only shirking their oath of office and their duty, they are needlessly putting citizens at risk.
Letter to the Editor submitted to the Star News, the Brunswick Beacon and the State Port Pilot.
The bipartisan majority of Americans want Obamacare stopped, and the House is trying to do just that, yet Democrats won’t fund government without it. Nor will they budge as the House proposes bills to fund other essential government functions in the meantime. The fact that Obama went out of his way to close privately owned and operated war memorials shows his pettiness. The Democrats’ refusal to grant exemption to 200 child cancer patients participating in vital R&D shows their heartless indifference. They won’t budge on making taxpayers subsidize their healthcare and giving exemptions to Big Business. Every day of the shutdown reveals their true elitist colors. Michelle’s boogie website is up while Amber Alert is down. 90-year-old veterans are threatened with arrest for visiting their memorials by otherwise absent staff. This is not the party of compassion, it is the party of tyranny. True to their roots, Democrats are still the party of slavery and Obamacare the newest form. They are totally out of touch with the American people, the ones that Obamacare hurts most of all and who are stuck paying the bill. The people have been raising their voices against Obamacare, and the Democrats’ refusal to negotiate with the House is a refusal to listen to the people, on both sides of the isle, who hired them. We are citizens, not peasants living under feudalism, slaving for nobles and begging them for favor. Thank you to those reps holding the line against the party of slavery.
In continuing the discussion of opening combat roles to women, we have the argument that women are already there, deploying and fighting in hot zones. This is true, and it gives us a record of the problems we are already experiencing as a result.
Wasted: Valuable Time, Training, and Resources
I talk about several of the female-only issues for which extra accommodations have to be made in my previous article. We are not equal except in our rights under our Constitutional Law. Nature has no regard for equality, and each one of us is born uniquely different from each other. We are diverse and dissimilar in our talents, physical aspects, intellect and emotions, and the sexes are inherently different. We know, for example, that women are much more prone to certain types of infections. For a woman on patrol, setting up an ambush, or, as the infantry do, living in abandoned buildings with no running water and sleeping in close quarters, hygiene is a constant problem. A urinary tract infection can quickly become a kidney infection (debilitating in itself) and then kidney failure if left unchecked. Suddenly a woman needs to be evacuated for a problem that has nothing to do with combat and to which men are not susceptible.
Then there’s pregnancy. Margaret Wente writes, “One study of a brigade operating in Iraq found that female soldiers were evacuated at three times the rate of male soldiers – and that 74 percent of them were evacuated for pregnancy-related issues.”
Women leaving the combat zone three times as much as men! And mostly due to shacking up and getting pregnant. It costs something like a million dollars per individual to get trained through bootcamp and additionally to be made ready for deployment. Those are taxpayer dollars spent on someone who has to turn around and leave the combat zone to have a baby (for which our tax dollars also pay), having nothing to do with combat.
Changing Our Best Instincts: Protecting Women, Mothering Children
We know that rape is a tool of torture for the already savage enemy we’re fighting. In one TV interview a woman suggested that if women are willing to take that risk, we should let them. She also absurdly claimed that men are raped as much as women when captured, which is patently false. But the idea that men shouldn’t worry any more about women in battle goes against the very best primal male instinct. In every country from Canada to Israel where women are in combat (and in American units where women are in theater), the men will tell you they are more protective of the women. It’s different from men’s protection of each other, and it distracts from mission completion. The pro-WICs would have men thwart this wonderful and thoroughly ingrained instinct. A world in which men don’t feel a strong need to protect women when they’re in the most dangerous and hostile of environments would be a nightmare. We would rightly call those men brutes.
We’re also thwarting mothers’ nurturing instincts. Women are already training to kill and leaving their children in order to deploy, even when they are the sole caregiver (turning care over namely to grandparents). This sets a bad precedent and hurts children. There will always be war, and it’s bad enough for fathers to leave their children to fight necessarily, but to allow mothers to choose this path over motherhood is bad for everyone. There are many noble capacities in which women with children can fight for this country, such as administrative jobs stateside. We don’t need to deploy mothers to battle, we shouldn’t.
A small handful of high-ranking females have instigated this policy change in order to advance their own careers. In this interview, Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine Captain, complains about women not being able to promote to certain ranks, claims that women aren’t getting proper recognition for action in combat (a claim also made here), and that it’s harder for them to get combat-injury-related benefits from the VA. Regarding the latter, I know females who are receiving combat-injury-related benefits, so if there are some who are not receiving them but should, the bureaucratic, inefficient, fraud-riddled VA should be confronted. Administrative changes could certainly be considered to take care of veterans as we should – regardless of sex – for injuries sustained in battle thus far. As for recognition of action, this is also a bureaucratic aspect that can be addressed through the chain of command without changing the policies on women in combat units. And finally as to rank, cry me a river. The military is about preparing for an executing war, not advancing your career at the cost of readiness for war.
The careerists are also on the hook for the double standard that we currently have for the sexes, which inherently lowers the standards overall. Even if one standard is imposed, it’s likely it will be an overall lower standard. As the Center for Military Readiness points out, “The same advocates who demand ‘equal opportunities’ in combat are the first to demand unequal, gender-normed standards to make it ‘fair.’” Enormous pressure from Washington is already on the military brass to fill quotas of race and sex, and the higher they get, the more politically motivated the brass’ decisions. Whereas imposing one higher standard would in fact result in fewer women serving in these roles, the political pressure to prove diversity will result in more unqualified women (and men) attaining positions for which men are more qualified. But go against the diversity status quo dictated by Washington and you can kiss your rank and career goodbye. The purges have already begun.
The word discriminate has several meanings, including “to distinguish particular features, to be discerning; showing insight and understanding,” and its synonyms are “wise, perceptive, prudent.” We should absolutely be discriminating in our criteria for war preparation, and the lives of our men in uniform depend on us taking an honest, discerning look at who adds to military readiness and who detracts from it. We should absolutely not open the combat units to the myriad problems we face already with women deploying to the theatre of war.
This is part 2 in a series.
Read Part 1: The Problem(s) of Women in Combat
Part 2: Careerists V. Mother Nature
Read Part 3: Women in Combat Units Vs. the Military’s Sexual Assault Problem
Read Part 4: Let the Men Be Heroes, Because They Are
The Globe & Mail: Women in Combat: Let’s Get Real
National Geographic : 8 Other Nations That Send Women to Combat
Center for Military Readiness: Seven Reasons Why Women-in-Combat Diversity Will Degrade Tough Training Standards
The Washington Post: Most Americans back women in combat roles, poll says
It’s not all about qualification. I’m speaking as a female Marine Iraq war vet who did serve in the combat zone doing entry checkpoint duty in Fallujah, and we worked with the grunts daily for that time. All the branches still have different standards for females and males. Why? Because most women wouldn’t even qualify to be in the military if they didn’t. Men and women are different, but those pushing women into combat don’t want to admit that truth. They huff and puff about how women can do whatever men can do, but it just ain’t so. We’re built differently, and it doesn’t matter that one particular woman could best one particular man. The best woman is still no match for the best man, and most of the men she’d be fireman-carrying off the battlefield will be at least 100lbs heavier than she with their gear on.
Women are often great shooters but can’t run in 50-80lbs of gear as long, hard or fast as men. Military training is hard enough on men’s bodies, it’s harder on women’s. And until women stop menstruating there will always be an uphill battle for staying level and strong at all times. No one wants to talk about the fact that in the days before a woman’s cycle she loses half her strength, to say nothing of the emotional ups and downs that affect judgment. And how would you like fighting through PMS symptoms while clearing a town or going through a firefight? Then there are the logistics of making all the accommodations for women in the field, from stopping the convoy to pee or because her cycle started to stripping down to get hosed off after having to go into combat with full MOP gear when there’s a biological threat.
This is to say nothing of unit cohesion which is imperative and paramount, especially in the combat fields. When preparing for battle, the last thing on your mind should be sex, but you put men and women in close quarters together and human nature is what it is (this is also why the repeal of DADT is so damaging). It doesn’t matter what the rules are. The Navy proved that when they started allowing women on ship. What happened? They were having sex and getting pregnant, ruining unit cohesion not to mention derailing the operations because they’d have to change course to get them off ship.
When I deployed we’d hardly been in country a few weeks before one of our females had to be sent home because she’d gotten pregnant (nice waste of training not to mention tax-payer money for training). That’s your military readiness? Our enemies are laughing – Thanks for giving us another vulnerability, USA!
Then there are relationships. Whether it’s a consensual relationship, unwanted advances or sexual assault, they all destroy unit cohesion. No one is talking about the physical and emotional stuff that goes along with men and women together. A good relationship can foment jealousy and the perception of favoritism. A relationship goes sour and suddenly one loses faith in the very person that may need to drag one off the field of battle. A sexual assault happens and a woman not only loses faith in her fellows, but may fear them. A vindictive man paints a woman as easy and she loses the respect of her peers. A vindictive woman wants to destroy a man’s career with a false accusation (yes, folks, this happens too), and it’s poison to the unit. All this happens before the fighting even begins.
Yet another little-discussed issue is that some female military are leaving their kids behind to advance their careers by deploying. I know of one divorced Marine left her two sons, one of them autistic, with the grandparents to care for while she deployed. She was wounded on base, not on the front lines, and is a purple heart recipient. What if she’d been killed, leaving behind her special needs child? Glory was more important than motherhood. Another case in my own unit was a married female who became angry when they wouldn’t let both her and her husband deploy at the same time. Career advancement was the greater concern.
I understand the will to fight. I joined the Marines in the hopes of deploying because I believe that fighting jihadists is right and I care about the women and children in Islamic countries where they are denied their rights, subjugated, mutilated, and murdered with impunity, where children are molested and raped with impunity, not to mention defending our own freedom against these hate-filled terrorists who want to destroy freedom-loving countries like America. Joining the Marines was one of the best things I’ve ever done in my life and I’m glad I got to deploy. It not only allowed me to witness the war, but to witness the problems with women in combat.
Women have many wonderful strengths and there is certainly a lot of work for women to do in the military. But all the problems that come with men and women working together are compounded in the war zone, destroying the cohesion necessary to fight bloody, hellish war. We are at war, and if we want to win, we have to separate the wheat from the chaff and the top priority should be military readiness and WINNING wars, not political correctness and artificially imposed “equality” on the military.
This is part 1 in a series.
Part 1: The Problem(s) of Women in Combat
Read Part 2: Careerists V. Mother Nature
Read Part 3: Women in Combat Units Vs. the Military’s Sexual Assault Problem
Read Part 4: Let the Men Be Heroes, Because They Are