“WASHINGTON — Ten women who were commissioned Army officers in the spring graduated from the initial infantry training course Wednesday, becoming the Army’s first female infantry lieutenants. The women were among 166 soldiers to complete the Infantry Officer Basic Leadership Course at Fort Benning in Georgia, a 17-week class that provides new officers the basic skills to lead a rifle platoon into combat, said Army Lt. Col. Matthew W. Weber, the commander of the unit that oversees the course. Officers are commissioned through ROTC, Officer Candidate School or the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, N.Y.”
“The infantry officer course is a “critical step” toward leading a rifle platoon, but the soldiers who graduated the Army’s first gender-integrated infantry class Wednesday will not join a combat unit for nearly a year, Weber said. They will attend additional courses to prepare them to serve in the traditionally all-male infantry. Those classes include the famously grueling Ranger School, Airborne School, Stryker Leaders Course and Mechanized Leaders Course, Weber said. Eventually they’ll become platoon leaders at Fort Hood in Texas or Fort Bragg in North Carolina.”
“This, the training of an infantry lieutenant, is a process until they step into a rifle platoon,” Weber said. “This is but the very first step in the process.” Stars and Stripes
———————
I just don’t see how this is going to work… other than as an equal opportunity sideshow act. Even a superbly qualified female infantry platoon leader will still be an object of rare curiosity. I’m all for equal opportunity in employment, but being an infantry leader at the platoon level is not a job. It’s a sacred and deadly profession, a calling, a vocation. I could see qualified female officers and soldiers on an infantry battalion staff or in the headquarters company, but I’d rather not. I guess I’m just not a “modern man.”
The military education system has changed since my day. Many in my Infantry Officer Basic Course (IOBC) went straight from graduation to their first infantry platoon. During the last three weeks of my IOBC, we were tracked into light infantry or mech infantry training. In the light track, we did a week of patrolling (Ranger Week), advanced demolitions, defending from and attacking armor, MOBA (military operations in built-up areas) and airmobile operations. The mech guys took their coolers and duffle bags to the field and rode around in M-113s. They said us light guys were anachronisms and would be extinct in a year or so.
According to the article, no infantry officer goes straight to their first platoon after the Infantry Officer Basic Leadership Course. Do they have to go through the Ranger Course? If so, that would be a major change. I’d appreciate an update on infantry officer training in today’s Army.
During the last week in my IOBC we were told there were a lot of openings in the upcoming Ranger Course and we were welcome to try out for it. I figured there’d be no snakes or gators to contend with as a Winter Ranger, so I and many of my buddies said, “Why not?” We were given the PT and swim test the next day and processed into the Ranger training company the afternoon of our graduation from IOBC. I remember us making a game out of giving the Ranger sergeants a ration of crap about us being big time officers now and the sergeants telling us that they’ll remember us come Monday morning. We all got a kick out of it and those sergeants clearly did remember us come Monday morning.
While looking for an online version of this article, I found another taste of the modern Army.
———————
“WASHINGTON — Two female Army officers have been approved for initial Special Forces training, the first step in the long process to earn the coveted Green Beret, an Army spokeswoman said Monday.
The women are the first female soldiers to be accepted into the Special Forces Assessment and Selection and could report to the three-week program at Fort Bragg, North Carolina as early as October, said Maj. Melody Faulkenberry, a spokeswoman for the Army’s John F. Kennedy Special Warfare Center.” Stars and Stripes
———————
I don’t blame them for trying. To aspire to “earn the coveted Green Beret” is a worthy endeavor. But again, I just can’t see how a female ODA commander would work. I certainly don’t see it as an enhancement of Special Forces capabilities.
I do remember when I saw, actually heard, the first female member in 10th SFG(A). We were standing on the tarmac going through the manifest call for a night jump at Fort Devens. As our last names were called, we’d respond with a resounding “Here.” All of a sudden, we heard a high pitched “Here” and we all turned around. It was our first female rigger. I heard someone mutter, “When the hell did that happen?”
It appears the Special Forces Assessment and Selection (A&S) is now a prerequisite for attending the actual SFOQC. That didn’t exist when I went through. We applied, took a physical and, if accepted, showed up at the JFKSWC to take the PT and swim test on day one. I was surprised that half our class was weeded out by that test. From what I’ve seen, that A&S is extremely physical, much more so that the PT and swim test. There’s a very good chance that these aspiring female Green Berets will not make through A&S. That’s what’s happening at the Basic School at Quantico.
TTG
http://www.stripes.com/news/2-female-officers-get-a-shot-at-the-army-s-green-beret-1.420836
OMB
"an increasing larger part of the burden of all this combat etc. is now being done by mercenaries" This is actually BS. Show me where the "mercenaries" are in the US defense establishment. Show me. Logistics contractors? Maintenance contractors? OK, but show me the fighters and don't count the state Department's hired bodyguards. Show me! pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 07:30 AM
Lars wrote: " I am sure there will be some soldiers who will face enemies up close, but I suspect there will be less and less of that". You realize the bet you are making, right?
Posted by: jonst | 07 November 2016 at 07:46 AM
OMB
Anyone who thinks there is not a big problem of the type you mention about women and heavy manual labor has never tried to put up a wet GP medium tent. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 07:48 AM
OMB
I was VN for two 12 month tours and three TDYs that amounted to another tour. I don't remember that the legendary high death rate among infantry lieutenants commanding platoons of riflemen was anything like as high as the legend would indicate it should have been. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 07:53 AM
As soon as I read OMB I knew that was coming. I admire your restraint, sir.
Posted by: Bill H | 07 November 2016 at 08:37 AM
In the snow.
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | 07 November 2016 at 09:04 AM
Maybe you were lucky. I lost 3 friends there all of whom died fairly quickly once in combat. All were OCS graduates and particularly gung ho. Good guys all and a sad loss.
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | 07 November 2016 at 09:16 AM
there are very specific requirements for women soldiers uniforms.
I wondered about that. Pretty waist tailored stuff it seems. Taking a closer look at the image, I wondered if the general fashion during the last decades influenced female uniforms in the military.
Assuming this general fashion has influenced uniforms, I agree with Pat the only way out for the lady in the image would have been to choose the next bigger size in both jacket and trousers:
Pat: It seems to me that the woman in the photo could have gotten a uniform jacket big enough to cover her ass.
Maybe not. Maybe the only factor for length is size?
I recall my particularly tough 2nd wife who was 4'10.5" and 95 pounds yet was possibly the toughest officer I have ever experienced. When she walks in a room for a meeting nobody notices how short she is.
you never fail to surprise me, MB
Posted by: LeaNder | 07 November 2016 at 09:34 AM
I think the current footprint of whatever Blackwater is called now (Academi??) is pretty large. But you are correct, a lot of positions are "support" in nature. But, take a closer look at security jobs which used to be done by soldiers and is now done by contractors so that would be your State Department bodyguards. I don't know how that might be categorized otherwise. They carry weapons and shoot people so that sounds like combat to me. If I recall reading recently there are something like 5,000 of them in Afghanistan. But, I must accept what you say as I haven't been deployed anywhere since 1999 except projects as a civilian scientist in non-combat (yet risky) projects in fun places like Peru, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Kazakhstan. Kidnapping for ransom was the highest risk although I was lucky and never had to go through it although co-workers did. Nothing like getting a pre-deployment security briefing telling me I was on my own.
I was just recalling rumors that 250 or so Academi contractors (probably less but at least 60 were identified) were killed in action in Ukraine as well, so there are things like that going on. That was based on advertising for contractors and reports from the DPR about Americans killed in that conflict. I don't think they were support personnel. Who they work for is a larger question and it could even be they aren't directly supporting the US (although I doubt it). CIA now has a military force of their own and I believe they are comprised of mainly contractors. The numbers in the SAG are impossible to determine but it sounds somewhat large. Does this qualify as combat forces? I don't think the Geneva Convention covers contractors so it is a sticky subject.
However, I have some friends who got into contracting work mostly in medical support roles so only know from them what they told me plus whatever my veterinarian buddies some of whom have had up to 15 deployments now. Guard dogs must be maintained by veterinarians which is a very small corps with high turnover. They get short rotations back home and then get deployed again fairly quickly.
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | 07 November 2016 at 09:35 AM
The Canadian Military has been fully integrated for years. Our experience is that female combat arms officers are extremely motivated individuals. This high level of motivation makes them ideal for employment on jobs where the soldiers are either already poorly motivated or the job itself really sucks.
As leaders, they have to motivate their troops and having a deep wellspring of personal drive makes that job much easier. The many successful female officers thus end up getting assigned (and succeeding) at one shitty job after another. This builds respect for them (both above and below). The few unsuccessful ones quickly drop out of the combat arms.
Posted by: AEL | 07 November 2016 at 09:37 AM
OMB
"I think the current footprint of whatever Blackwater is called now (Academi??) is pretty large." Stop waving your arms and talking about rumors. You are unable to point to any mercenary combat units in the US armed forces establishment. A facility guard or body guard with a gun is not a mercenary soldier. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 09:48 AM
My training was as an Army intelligence agent, and I never saw a female in training or in the field way back then. Probably changed now. Apropos was watching the movie Apollo 13 with my then small son and daughter a few years back. When the film switched to a view of the mission control room in Houston, my then 8 year-old daughter suddenly got up and left the room. When I asked her if she didn't like the movie she stated "there are no women in that control room"! That small and very observant little girl is now a very successful biomedical engineer. The times they are changing, mostly for the better I think, though I'm certainly not qualified to question TTG's views about women's role in the infantry.
Posted by: McGee | 07 November 2016 at 09:50 AM
LeaNder
Officers either have their uniforms tailor made or have off the rack uniforms tailored to fit them. there is no reason why this woman lieutenant should have her ass hanging out. Do you think that will make her a more effective leader of male soldiers? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 09:52 AM
My dad fought in the U.S. Army 77th (Statue of Liberty) Division* in the Battle of Okinawa. Same division as Desmond Doss, the Medal of Honor recipient whom the new movie "Hacksaw Ridge"** is based on. My dad earned PHs and other combat medals and came back and went to school, got married, raised 5 kids, has been a faithful Catholic and has been married to the same woman for over 60 years. He's going on 91. I talked with him this morning and mentioned about this piece by TTG and female infantry lieutenants. His take? "This country is finished." He added, "And if that witch wins on Tuesday I'm gonna go out into the middle of the street and burn the American flag." And still with a sense of humor added, "And I'll kneel down while doing it."
*The 77th Division in the Battle of Okinawa was also where Gen. Simon B. Bruckner, Jr. (VMI grad and son of Confederate Gen. Simon B. Bruckner Sr.) was killed along with war correspondent Ernie Pyle.
**Both my dad and I saw the movie and loved it. My dad was always a huge fan of Desmond Doss as long as I can recall. Doss never picked up a gun. My dad manned a BAR.
Posted by: Mike P | 07 November 2016 at 09:53 AM
McGee
Carrying a snub nosed .38 and credentials as a CI agent is nothing like serving in the infantry. nothing. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 09:56 AM
But thinking about combat and combat roles there is now a very blurred line of who is what. I think an inordinate amount of US soldiers were killed doing duties not in their job descriptions like long range truck driving and getting killed by IED's enroute. Patrol duties seem to be also widely diversified so I don't know how it all fits anymore. Maybe we aren't thinking correctly that the majority of combat is performed by Infantry or mechanized infantry. Now we have an inordinate number of SOF working sometimes against each other (as in Syria) so it is completely bizarre and I cannot really understand how it all fits together now. I can't even imagine trying to command or coordinate a Theater these days. Then you have contractors and CIA in the mix? FUBAR
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | 07 November 2016 at 09:58 AM
OMB
I was in the field a lot with 1 ID, 1st Cavalry Division, 11th ACR. It did not seem to me that infantry lieutenants were casualties in exceptionally high numbers, certainly not more than the grunts in their platoons. but, this is just an impression that I had. I looked at the statistics. There were 450 odd Army O-1s who died in VN and 1400 or so O-2s. Most of these would have been KIA or died of wounds and the great majority would have been in the infantry. To be honest, these do not seem to be unacceptable losses given the length of the war, the intensity of the combats. USMC dead lieutenant statistics are comparable but of course fewer dead people because of the smaller size of their force. Interestingly, the higher your rank as an officer in our forces was in VN the less likely you were to be killed. In the much malighed Wehmacht the opposite was true. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 10:10 AM
OMB
Thinking about this some more it seems likely to me that a lot of the O-2s were helicopter pilots. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 10:18 AM
I agree over a protracted infantry intense war like that it wasn't huge. My point though is why waste valuable money training a 2LT in SPECOPS etc. They need platoon time first so they aren't super green in their first specialized assignment.
Posted by: Old Microbiologist | 07 November 2016 at 10:40 AM
OMB
Unless things have changed the GBs do not take lieutenants who do not have conventional experience. Both TTG and I had served in the infantry before going to SF. As TTG says, in the old days if you were sent to the SF qualifying course, you took the PT Test and the swimming test and then started the course. I will be surprised if any women get through the present pre-course screening that lasts two weeks and is literally two weeks in hell. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 10:55 AM
I'm with TTG that female Soldiers can fill many deadly and serious military billets, but that should not include duty in a line infantry platoon or company.
On the other hand I have no beef against them serving in combat in other functions. A case in point is women fighter pilots in the Soviet Air Force in WW2. Historically there have been many mixed gender units. But I believe the vast majority were guerilla units or militias. The most recent example is women in the PKK. I read somewhere they have severe penalties for hankie-pankie.
The Syrian Kurds have the YPJ women fighters. But they seem for the most part to be all female units and not mixed??? Yazidi women have also been formed into fighting units to protect themselves and their villages. Someone a lot smarter than I said about those female Yazidi fighters: "When the consequences of defeat are brutal rape and death ... the cultural proscription against female soldiers tends to go by the wayside."
Posted by: mike allen | 07 November 2016 at 10:59 AM
OMB,
That's the way training and assignments work in Special Forces and SOF. I don't know of any instances of a 2LT being selected for SF, Delta or a Ranger assignment. My SF class was all captains except for one National Guard 1LT. Even the foreign officers, which there were many, were all captains. One has to be a promotable 1LT in order to apply for accession to the special forces branch.
Posted by: The Twisted Genius | 07 November 2016 at 11:06 AM
Colonel,
Again the pure physical demands of being an infantry officer mitigate against women serving in infantry billets- officer or enlisted. I hear of loads of 140 pounds being humped by troops. Add to that the hunger and exhaustion, and it would take a super-physically fit woman to do the physical requirements of the job- and then on top of that, to do the supervision and leadership tasks that being an infantry officer requires. I recall, as a Marine LT being so tired by the lack of sleep and constant moving after a week or more on an exercise in the field. And we walked up and down hills- no riding. I have no problem with women serving in most ground combat and combat support units. But infantry is another thing altogether.
By the way, speaking of overloading infantry- I recall the classic by S.L.A. Marshall, "The Soldier's Load and the Mobility of a a Nation". It should be required reading for all Army and Marine officers. It seems to have been forgotten.
Posted by: oofda | 07 November 2016 at 11:20 AM
Ditto for the Israelis sir. There was an article in The Journal of Military Operations a couple years back about that, the pluses and minuses of the Israeli tradition of leading from the front.
Posted by: Seacoaster | 07 November 2016 at 11:29 AM
oofda
Yes. The level of privation experienced in Army or Marine infantry has to be experienced to be understood. The privation may actually be worse in peacetime training. I completely agree that loads being carried are far too heavy. They always were but are worse now. I have structural damage as does TTG from carrying too much weight. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 07 November 2016 at 11:37 AM