Tag Archives: US Army

medical news, military news, national news, political news

Smoke 'em if you got 'em … for now?

Military veterans of a certain age — or older — should understand what I’m about to say next.

There might be no greater barometer of society’s cultural shift than an idea to ban the selling of tobacco products at military installations.

That idea is on the table. So help me, I cannot decide how I feel about this.

http://www.politico.com/story/2014/10/military-smoking-congress-111671.html

I quit smoking cold turkey 34 years ago. It was in February 1980. I took a drag on a cigarette, nearly choked on it, snuffed it out, tossed the rest of the pack into the trash and I was done. So I’m now a dedicated non-smoker who detests the smell of cigarette smoke wafting into my face.

I also once was a young man in my late teens who served in the U.S. Army. I did a couple of years from August 1968 until August 1970. Smoking was part of my life then.

Navy Secretary Ray Mabus floated the idea of banning the sale of tobacco in the spring. Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel ordered a review of the idea. It might come up during the lame-duck session of Congress.

Is this right? Well, from a health standpoint, of course it is.

From another angle, which I have difficulty describing, it seems somehow wrong.

U.S. Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif., a Marine reservist who served tours in Afghanistan and Iraq, perhaps spoke for a lot of vets when he said: “It’s not curbed for anybody else. Why pick out the folks who have chosen of their own accord to fight for their country and serve their country and punish them? Leave us the hell alone — we’re out here fighting for your freedom and you’re taking away ours.”

Ouch!

During basic training, there was many a time when we’d get PX privileges we’d spend our then-meager $103 monthly stipend on “necessities.” Cigarettes, which then sold for 15 cents a pack, were among them. We’d have them handy while out running from place to place lugging an M-14 and a pack full of gear. Our drill sergeant would stop us for a break. “Light ’em up!” he’d bark. We would scramble for the cigarette and Zippo lighter, fire one up, then he’d yell, “Put ’em out!”

There’s something, oh, rather unique about that experience that sticks with me to this very moment — 46 years later.

Has society changed so much since that time? I reckon so.

Uncategorized

Women are ready for combat, more or less

4 Comments

This blog post is going to get me in trouble with some of my female friends.

Here goes anyway: I have trouble accepting that women are capable of performing as infantry personnel in combat.

There I said it. Now I’ll explain why.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2014/07/10/marine-corps-dilemma-with-women-prompts-change-at-infantry-school/

The Washington Post reports on an experiment under way in the Marine Corps, where women will be taking the same Physical Fitness Test as men. As the Post reports: “The PFT requirement is the likely sticking point for many female Marines: To score a first-class PFT, men must do at least five pull-ups, assuming they rack up maximum points by running three miles in 18 minutes or less and complete 100 sit-ups. Under current rules for female Marines, women are not required to complete pull-ups.”

I’ll stipulate that I am well aware that women are performing well in some dangerous and deadly assignments in all branches of the military. They’re flying high-performance combat aircraft, as well as helicopters in close-air support roles on the battlefield.

Indeed, a young cousin of mine is now an Army master sergeant who has served multiple tours in Iraq and Afghanistan. Her earliest assignments in Iraq were with a civil affairs unit, which meant she would venture into villages to set up infrastructure for Iraqis — not knowing if the village was occupied by enemy combatants. In Vietnam we called the effort “pacification.”

I do not doubt that women can perform in two of the three combat arms: artillery and armor; the third one being infantry. They can drive tanks or armored personnel carriers and they can fire big artillery pieces.

I long ago disabused myself of the concern about women being emotionally capable of performing combat duty. I hold up my cousin as the prime example of a female soldier’s emotional stamina.

But does a typical 120-pound woman have the same upper-body strength as a typical 200-pound man, enabling her to lug around an 80- or 100-pound rucksack while slogging across some rough terrain?

I tend to think not.

Therein lies what I consider to be the problem with allowing women to serve as infantry personnel.

I fear this experiment is not going to work for either the Army or the Marine Corps.