Random
Only logged in members can reply and interact with the post.
Join SimilarWorlds for FREE »

Hegseth orders review of physical standards for military combat roles

Military Times reports:

“ Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Sunday ordered a 60-day review of military combat arms standards to ensure that exceptions are not being made for female troops to assume the physically demanding roles.

The review follows past concerns from Hegseth that military readiness has diminished since 2016, when combat roles were first opened to women. Roughly 4,800 women serve in Army infantry, armor and artillery jobs, according to data provided by the Defense Department late last year.

Although military leaders have testified that standards have not been lowered for entry into those combat posts, conservative groups have insisted that women are being subjected to lower physical fitness requirements than their male counterparts, and they demanded changes in the military’s approach.

Defense Department officials did not say whether the findings due in May could result in some of those female service members being asked to leave their current roles or being forced out.

In a social media statement, Hegseth said the move was needed to ensure “the highest and equal standards” for all troops.

“For far too long, we allowed standards to slip, with different standards for men and women in combat arms. That’s not acceptable,” he said.

The memo ordering the review, released by Defense Department officials on Monday, calls for a redefinition of combat arms occupations and non-combat roles. It specifically lists three military specialties “which require heightened entry-level and sustained physical fitness.”

For ground combat operations, standards must include “the ability to carry heavy loads, endure prolonged physical exertion, and perform effectively in austere, hostile environments.”

For special operations forces, the standards will incorporate “advanced swimming, climbing, parachuting, and the ability to operate in extreme environments,” as well as “sustained peak physical performance.”

And for specialized operations, the memo calls for a focus on “proficiency in those unique and demanding tasks such as aquatic rescue, repair, and demolition.”

“All entry-level and sustained physical fitness requirements within combat arms positions must be sex-neutral, based solely on the operational demands of the occupation and the readiness needed to confront any adversary,” the memo states.

It continues, “In establishing those standards, the secretaries of the military departments may not establish standards that would result in any existing service member being held to a lower standard.”

Implementation of the new standards will happen over the next six months, according to department officials.

Under the direction of Hegseth, military offices have already begun removing some photos, stories and web pages detailing historic accounts of women’s contributions to the military. Department leaders have labeled the works as running afoul of new rules designed to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

Women make up about 18% of the current active-duty force, according to department statistics. Female troops must meet different fitness standards for general occupations in the ranks than male service members, but they must pass gender-neutral standards for combat posts.

In an podcast appearance last November, Hegseth was critical of women in serving in any combat occupations, asserting that “everything about men and women serving together makes the situation more complicated, and complication in combat means casualties are worse.”

“I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles,” Hegseth said. “It hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal. It has made fighting more complicated.”

Military leaders at the time pushed back against those statements. Then Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said female combat troops “add significant value to the finest and most lethal fighting force on Earth.””

My Commentary:

More Hegseth BS. The incompetent SECDEF who violated every single concept of Operational Security, before, during, and after an active military attack on a foreign nation which put our air crews and navy personnel at grave risk, for him to say, “For far too long, we allowed standards to slip, with different standards for men and women in combat arms. That’s not acceptable,”and “I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles,” and “ “It hasn’t made us more effective, hasn’t made us more lethal. It has made fighting more complicated.”

After what he and the rest of tRUMP’s misadministration did with Signalgate, then him lying to the press, finger pointing, acting unprofessional—he is clearly unfit and he should apologize to all of our armed forces and immediately resign and cooperate fully with a bipartisan full investigation.

There should be both civil and criminal charges levied against all but Goldberg in that chat and they should already be fired with permanently revoked security clearances.
This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
What about intellectual standards for being in a position to order people into the line of fire?
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@FreddieUK Ironically, Hegseth has been there, in action!
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
@ArishMell But that doesn't mean he has the strategic ability to command at the top level, I think
@FreddieUK There has been total erosion in the military’s faith in Hegseth’s ability to command and lead. He is clearly unfit to fill the role as SECDEF given his complete disregard of SOP re: classified information. His character is tarnished by credible complaints against his conduct including criminal complaints.

Does tRUMP not realize that it is his personal responsibility to see that everyone he nominates has been fully vetted? This was a complete and total failure of the senior chain of command all the way up to and including the VP!

What’s more, there was a complete lack of any of these people to take responsibility.

The troops deserve better. Much better. If any of those involved has a shred of decency they would immediately resign and fully cooperate with any investigation.
@FreddieUK @ArishMell His actual service record can best be described as not at all above average. He left as a junior O-4. His rank was bestowed in the Reserve which promotes earlier and less accomplished candidates than from the active components.
FreddieUK · 70-79, M
@KunsanVeteran Does Trump care about decency, vetting, or national security? I think he cares about himself and his wealth and his public image...in that order. Anything that gets in the way he ignores.
ArishMell · 70-79, M
@KunsanVeteran Thankyou.

Ah, so not as impressive as he might at first seemed. He expects front-line personnel, of any rank in any of the Services, to be able to cope with the sheer nastiness, privations and horror of fighting a war.

Many people, male or female, could not: I know I could not have done. Fortunately very many can.

On the other hand surely the same personnel expect reliable, decent support, albeit in a very different way, from the Secretary of Defence.

Perhaps the Sec. does not need an active Service record, though it would certainly help.

Depending to some extent on how a nation's administration is constructed, the role is that of link between the Government and the Diplomatic Corps, both civilian, and the Services; the last with people at top Staff Officer rank who can advise the Secretary on technical and strategic matters relevant to their own Services.

Yet all three groups must be able to trust the ability, probity and discretion of the Secretary of Defence at all times, whatever the official's previous career.
@ArishMell Thank you for this excellent post!

The bottom line (we used the acronym BLUF for bottom line up front in the USAF) on Hegseth is that 1. He has a checkered past. 2. He brings none of the required skills to the position he has been appointed to. 3. His temperament is not appropriate for command at any level yet alone the Presidential Cabinet and most importantly 4. Signalgate and his participation & role in this gross security SNAFU, his response when revealed, and his refusal to resign have led to the military rank and file losing confidence in him.

He never should have been nominated.

He never should have been approved.

He should have been immediately fired when this scandal broke.

Given his role, he should face civil and criminal charges. His gross negligence may not have been intentional, but it demonstrates beyond any doubt just how unfit he is.

Our troops deserve better than Pete Hegseth—much, much better!