This AP article from Wednesday describes new, heavy handed and unrealistic regulations on the combat-related roles women in the military may fill that are moving through the House on party line votes and above the objections of senior military leadership. John McHugh (R-NY) and Duncan Hunter (R-CA) want to bar female soldiers from combat-support positions.
Suffice to say, this is madness.
For one, it's a slap in the face to the professionalism of all women who serve in the armed forces, especially in that it applies to jobs women are already serving in
quite capably
It also stands to cause disruptions to morale and the operational ability of military units; one imagines the policy preventing female veterans of Iraq from being reassigned to units that could use their experience.
And perhaps McHugh and Hunter don't keep up with the (non-Fox) news, but both the Army and Marines are having serious, serious difficulty in meeting recruiting quotas; this comes at the same time as tales of illegal and overly agressive recruting tactics are making headlines (for example, the Army will halt all recruiting for one day next Friday to re-train recruiters on what is and isn't proper in carrying out their increasingly difficult task).
So one wonders why, at a time like this, would Republicans in Congress be attempting to pass these restrictions? The only answer I can come up with is that such a move would appease people like Elaine Donnelly and the Center for Military Readiness. Donnelly is a right-wing activist who's made a career giving snarky quotes to NewsMax and the Washington Times about the capabilities of women in the armed forces (and don't get her started on the hedonistic liberalism that is "don't ask, don't tell").
It seems to me such a move demonstrates the utter unseriousness of the GOP both with respect to women and national defense. We knew already just how far they want to go in rolling back women's rights, in reproduction, in marriage, and in the workplace. It's not surprising these views extend to the military, though one has to admire the cravenness of GOP for finding a "solution" to a problem that doesn't even exist.
But this is, most of all, an action that subverts the ability of the military to defend our nation to a right-wing political correctness that Republicans are shoving in all aspects of public life, from long-term care hospices to field hospitals (see also the recent trouble at the Air Force Academy regarding the crazy liberal notion that teaching fundamentalist Christianity isn't the most important thing to be done there). If these restrictions are enacted, they will harm the military and make both recruiting and winning wars that much harder. But for the GOP, the defense of America and military professionalism are less important than kicking women for the sake of an extremist agenda.
I should add that blueohio had an excellent diary
on the subject on Thursday.