CrashbotUS

Also Christoffer Cold of Ravenkilde. He will be over in the fall for some training sessions with us down in Austin. If anyone in the area wants to check it out. 

https://www.youtube.com/user/coldravnkilde/videos

Pretty sure special treatment is exactly what the gender ideologues want. In every action, they display this, at least in the US.

They are already getting it to a degree, even without adjusting for the potential additions to combat arms. This is clear in the different fitness requirements for men and women and most of us ex military people have 101 anecdotes we could share.

 The issue is which standards should ALL soldiers meet in order to perform specific MOS task. The debate over women being in combat roles is kind of pointless now, that train has already left the station. 

I guess this is relevant to this thread, so I figured I'd stick it here. If you want to learn more about HEMA and other forms of period fighting check out this guy.  Many of our members are trained by him. 

Roland Warzecha'  

www.dimicator.com/index.php 

https://www.youtube.com/user/warzechas/videos

5lb bag of peanuts. $5.88 = 2 64 oz jars. Grocery store is 28 oz for 4 dollars. Not a hippy, just cheap. 

The only hippies around here are 4 hours south and from California. 

Look on the container. Ingredients should be: peanuts.  

Or you can just buy a few pounds of peanuts and run them through the grinder. 

Remove bush. 

Also relevant. 

http://www.armytimes.com/story/military/careers/army/2015/07/10/three-women-third-try-pass-darby-phase/29968107/

Crab apple. 

The APFT has absolutely nothing  to do with a soldiers ability to perform a given task. It's nothing more than an indicator of general physical fitness.  The standards would really need to be MOS specific and to drill that  down even further, specific to the  type of unit you are working in. 

A box mover or paper filer does not need to meet the same physical requirements as a cannon crewman or a rifleman. 

A good example would be what I did. I was a forward observer and worked within light, airborne, and mechanized units during my career. With a full combat load in a light/airborne unit, I HAD to be able to carry well over 100lb of gear and I had to be able to do this consistently, quickly, and over long distances. There is obviously a certain level of strength, conditioning, and overall physical fitness required to do that. On the other hand, when I was mechanized I carried far less equipment because we had a vehicle. If I did have to dismount our vehicle, the amounts of gear and the distance required to carry them would be both less and shorter.

The regular old PT test we did was not an indicator of my ability to do any of that. 

I have my own built in Slav. 

If a female could do they job I did in the Army, good on her. I think you'll find a pretty even divide among people who have actually served in combat arms jobs when it comes to women filling those positions. Some of resistance comes from a perceived notion that women in the military get special treatment simply because they are female (lower pt standards, less field time, etc). 

Here are a few more images of my most of my 10th century fighting kit. I didn't include the clothing/camping/campaign gear.  Needs polished up but I got all the rust off for now. 

I want to put all of Ohio Express' members heads into the T-72 auto loader. 

There are a bunch of requirements for soldiery during that period. Everything from which weapons they are required to have, who is allowed to own what, what basic materials they are required to provide, the size and shape of the shields, and so on. I've never read anything from the period saying that a archer was required to fire x amount of arrows in a set amount of time. There are rules for the size of bow, the equipment needed by an archer, and when they should begin their training (typically a boy would be provided a bow and two arrows at the age of 7), but that is about it. 

I have a jar of pickled beets that I am munching on right here in my office.

This thing makes me missing shooting things with artillery. I bet the guy in that cupola would shoot out like a roman candle. 

It's almost begging to be blown up. 

I don't think anything past the mantlet is M47. Not sure what that weird ridge is on the top of the turret is either? That oddity on the back of the turret really does look like a trash bin. 

Looks like a trash bin welded on the top of a grain silo. 

That 1976 Ford Pinto paint job is most excellent. 

I remember some female relatives complaining that the only under garments they could buy came in tan and white. Capitalism brought pretty panties for the ladies. 

Mankind is a disaster for mankind. 

Remove. 

Atrocious. 

Maybe there is a clever multi million dollar technologically advanced  string the pilot can pull in the event of a door malfunction.