The Center for Military Readiness has provided the following information to officials in the Pentagon, Congress, and the White House, starting in April 2006. This document accompanies a list of questions about this issue, which appears nearby on this website.




Army Changing Regulations Without Required Notice to Congress




Our female soldiers are serving with courage and distinction in Iraq and Afghanistan, and all soldiers, regardless of their specialty, are “in harms way.” But even without a “front line,” missions of “direct ground combat” (DGC) troops remain the same.





“Direct ground combat” means engaging or attacking the enemy with deliberate offensive action under fire. It is more than the experience of being in danger or “in harms way.” 1




Direct ground combat units, coded “P1,” are required by current Defense Department regulations to be all male. Examples of DGC units include Army and Marine infantry, armor, and Special Operations Forces like those that fought to liberate Baghdad in March 2003 and Fallujah in November 2004.




Female soldiers are also exempt from placement in support units that embed or “collocate” with smaller direct ground combat battalions 100% of the time. Most brigade level positions, which do not involve constant collocation, are coded “P2” and are open to women.




These regulations, including the collocation rule, were adopted in January 1994 and remain in effect today. 2




If Army leaders want to change these regulations, current law requires formal notice from the Secretary of Defense to Congress 30 legislative days (about 3 months) in advance. Current law also requires a report on the effect of proposed rule changes on women’s exemption from Selective Service registration. 3



Land Combat-Collocated Forward Support Companies (FSCs)




The DoD collocation rule, which is not difficult to understand or implement, affects only those support units that constantly collocate with DGC maneuver battalions. Army officials nevertheless have placed female soldiers in forward support companies (FSCs), which collocate with all-male infantry/armor maneuver battalions 100% of the time.





To support the claim that this practice does not violate current regulations and the congressional notification law, Army officials have administratively “assigned” female soldiers (on paper only) to brigade support battalions (BSBs) that are legally open to women, while physically “attaching” or “opconning” them to battalion-level direct ground combat units.




Arrangements of this kind have been made in maneuver battalion forward support companies in the 3rd and 4th Infantry Divisions, the 101st Airborne, the 1st Cavalry, and Reconnaisance, Surveillance, Target Acquisition (RSTA) squadrons. (See February 2006 CMR Policy Analysis)




This practice violates DoD regulations, which requires land combat-collocated units to be all-male. (See diagram of “opconned” FSCs in the 1st Cavalry)




The Secretary of the Army and other officials claim the service is in compliance with policy and law because female soldiers will not be present when DGC units are “conducting” direct ground combat. This suggests that the women will be evacuated (somehow) just prior to battle. 4




It is not clear how these evacuations might be accomplished under wartime conditions, when there are no aircraft or vehicles available for that purpose. Nor is it clear how the separation of FSC personnel on the eve of battle, when they are needed most, would improve the combat effectiveness of land combat battalions.




In addition to land combat-collocated support units, the Army has dropped multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) and RSTA squadrons from the list of DGC units coded to be all male, without DoD authorization or notice to Congress.



Congressional Oversight Delayed and Denied




Nothing in the history of regulations regarding female soldiers, going back to 1992, indicates that the Army may alter DoD regulations without the approval of the Secretary of Defense.





The Army’s practice of “assigning,” “attaching,” or “opconning” female soldiers to combat collocated forward support companies effectively and unilaterally repeals the collocation rule by rendering it meaningless.




The Defense Department has also disregarded legislation in the 2006 National Defense Act, which mandated a report on this subject by March 31, 2006. 5




Although a May 2004 Army briefing speculated that there might be a shortage of male soldiers for placement in the combat-collocated forward support companies, no data has been presented to support that speculation.




The law requiring advance notice to Congress of proposed rule changes regarding land combat, and a similar one regarding assignment of female sailors to submarines, were designed to ensure congressional oversight.




Acceptance of the status quo effectively relinquishes responsible congressional oversight, and opens the door to future incremental rule changes without the opportunity to have timely hearings. Units affected could include Army and Marine infantry, armor, and Special Operations Forces, and even submarines.

for more info regarding this check: http://www.cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp?DocID=271

Spammer go Away.once is enough for that link I think you even STARTED a thread with that link

RandomX sweetie thats just Gary! Ya know gary if YOU would have had your land or home burning and i was still working the forestry....your so obnoxious i would just go ahead and would have taken my SWEET EASY....REALLY NOT TO RAPIDLY....caring much about your hatred towards WOMEN in ANY PROFESSION. But of course i WOULD have called the law telling them to come and take you away for INTERFERRING with a FEDERAL WORKER. It would have been such a joy watching you cuffed and stuffed in a squad car! and THEN I would have LOVED sitting in that courtroom TESTIFYING to your RADICAL HATRED TOWARDS A WOMAN/FEDERAL WORKER...after all SOME ARE WOMEN. Something to THINK ABOUT. There are WOMEN working in fields besides Iraq. Your a bigoted JERK.