- Chinese Death Star: The moon cited as the perfect launch pad for ballistic missiles
- Help wanted: Homeland Security plagued by vacancies at the top
- We are not amused: Queen’s protection officers warned to keep ‘sticky fingers’ off the royal cashews
- Unleash the crossbows: Gov. Scott Walker creates new hunting season
- Bubonic plague kills 20 in Madagascar
- G-20 diplomats fell for hacker attack promising nude photos of former French first lady Carla Bruni
- Minnesota guardsman charged with stealing private soldier data for fake IDs
- Florida appeals court rules universities can’t regulate guns
- Vladimir Putin defends Russian conservative values
- Tea Party Patriots call key GOP firing a declaration of war
Army revised rules for women
Question of the Day
The Army drafted new language about a regulation barring women in combat-support units 11 days after the Army’s top civilian told Congress there would be no changes.
A military advocacy group has asked the Pentagon inspector general to investigate the discrepancy and whether the Army’s “transformed” brigades violate the combat exclusion as they fight in Iraq.
Army and Pentagon spokesmen say the Army is not violating any regulations or laws in the assignment of female soldiers to the new brigades.
“We believe the Army is in compliance,” said Lt. Col. Joe Richard, a spokesman for the Pentagon’s top personnel official. Department of Defense “reviews of the policy have not identified conflict between Army concept and current policies and statutes.”
The Army is transforming brigades so they can deploy faster, with support units in tow as “organic” to the unit. The conflict is that current policy bars Forward Support Companies (FSCs) from being embedded if they include women.
But if the Army obeys standards set out in the policy — and keeps the Forward Support Companies as it was ordered to do — it would not have enough soldiers to fill the companies, according to internal Army documents previously discovered by The Washington Times. Other internal documents have argued that the Army should eliminate the collocation rule.
The issue involves the part of the policy that says mixed-sex support units are prohibited from embedding — or collocating — with land combat units.
Army Secretary Francis J. Harvey told the chairmen of the House and Senate Armed Services committees in Jan. 13 letters: “No change to the extant policy is required.”
Army regulations bar women from support units that “collocate routinely with units assigned a direct ground combat mission.”
Pentagon guidelines approved in 1994 say women are barred “where units and positions are doctrinally required to physically collocate and remain with direct ground combat units that are closed to women.”
Therein lies the discrepancy. A “Women in the Army” point paper, dated Jan. 24 and drafted within the Army secretary’s office, states the policy a different way. It says women are barred from units, “which routinely collocate with those units conducting an assigned direct ground combat mission.”
The addition of the word “conducting” is significant, because it implies that if the combat battalion is not in the midst of fighting it can collocate with mixed-sex support units.
Elaine Donnelly, who heads the Center for Military Readiness, said the new language would violate the Army policy. She sent a five-page letter this week to Pentagon Inspector General Joseph E. Schmitz asking for an investigation.
Mrs. Donnelly said the 3rd Infantry Division, the first to transform its brigades into smaller “units of action,” is violating the policy in Iraq by shifting women in and out of FSCs depending on the level of fighting.
Mrs. Donnelly, who opposes placing women in combat, said she met with Mr. Harvey and top generals on Feb. 16 at the Pentagon. The Army officials told her that female soldiers will be “evacuated” from FSCs once fighting begins, according to her letter to Mr. Schmitz.
By Matt Kibbe
The short-term deal will assure long-term overspending
- Obama's Afghanistan experts stumped on U.S. death toll, war costs during hearing
- NAPOLITANO: A conspiracy so vast
- House pushes through two-year Ryan-Murray budget deal
- Comma on!: Twitter erupts over Obama-Castro 'marriage'
- N. Korean news agency: Kim Jong Un's uncle executed
- Biden guarantees victory on immigration reform
- Jane Fonda Foundation fails to make single contribution in 5 years: report
- All-out war breaks out in GOP over budget pact
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- White House improvises again on patchy Obamacare rollout
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Born in 1930 in rural Missouri, Charles Vandegriffe, Sr., brings his time and place to the Communities.
Columns from Voices around the World talking about the events, people, politics and social issues that concern us wherever, and whoever, we are.
Chef Mary Moran discusses the food we eat, where it comes from and what it does for us.
An informed and often humorous take on the world of advertising, public relations and social media. 100% Pure. Not from concentrate.
Extraordinary day at Redskins Park
White House pets gone wild!
Let it snow