 By all accounts the government and economy of Ukraine are corrupt. That they were still so ill-prepared for this onslaught after 30 years of independence and being spanked by the Russians in 2014 supports the claim. But it is the nature of human war that strength seeks weakness and that if the weak is to survive, it must become strong. It should not be noteworthy that women and children are fleeing the war zone in Ukraine and that men 18-60 are being required to stay and defend their country in this desperate hour. This paradigm is as old as time and may be encapsulated in the image of the wife standing behind her husband in the face of a mugger. Both men and women get it. Likewise since the beginning of time any given people survive or conquer by the strength of one particular demographic group; strong and martial men in their 20’s and 30’s. This holds true even in this age of so called push-button warfare as we are seeing on the battlefields of Ukraine. War always degenerates into rage, suffering, and chaos (at least for the one losing) and it is this demographic that far and away can best serve up and take the pain. It is the nature of things. Exceptions are just that. But it is one thing for a people to be ill-prepared for war and be forced to react in desperation. It is altogether a different thing for a people to with forethought plan to be ill-prepared. Which is what we are doing in our country. The ongoing feminisation of the US military via the woke-driven institutionalisation of women in combat is fundamentally weakening our combat effectiveness but far more ominously our fighting culture. We can rest assured that we will not forever possess military supremacy and just like Ukrainians today, it will one day hit the fan and we will find ourselves on our heels, and pushing buttons just wont do the trick. Mark Atkins is the author of Women in Combat: Feminism Goes to War (Shotwell Publishing, 2019). This piece was published on Look Away on March 9, 2022.
4 Comments
William Smith
3/26/2022 06:42:37 am
I served as an Army Chaplain, and went on two trips to Iraq in the mid-2000's (a venture, I've since come to see, as having little to nothing to do with a legitimate defense of home, kith and kin - but that's another issue for another time!). Ever an instinctual conservative, I was never in favour of women in the combat arms, at least. But those two tours solidified my opposition to women being anywhere near the conflict. While there are pragmatic reasons aplenty, as you have cited here, more fundamental even is God's purposes and ends (the fancy term is telos, I guess) for each of the sexes. And, as Dr. Wilson has often stated, a nation sending its women to war isn't worth defending!
Mark Atkins
3/28/2022 08:59:00 am
Good thoughts Mr Smith. Institutionalising women in combat is wrong on every level. It is the stupidest idea in the history of the world. Or maybe second only to allowing men who are pretending to be women to participate in women's sport.
Bill Hill
4/1/2022 04:45:26 pm
I’d say your first instinct was right. Women in combat is the stupidest idea on record, unless it is a certain group of women that you want to gift to your enemy as spear brides.
Anthony Powell
3/29/2022 08:59:13 am
The Selective Service ‘tweeted’ recently that ‘in the event of a draft, they would be partnering with FEMA, to provide service opportunities for conscientious objectors. Sounds like they’re getting ready to bring the draft back. I have some news for them: my sons will neither be going to Europe to save Zelensky’s butt, nor will they be slaves in FEMA ‘service’. It’s time we brought back extensive use of the word ‘NO!’ You can read about it at today’s Lewrockwell.com. Leave a Reply. |