Major Judith Webb tells it as it is.

WOMEN ARE BEING ALLOWED to serve in the infantry from 2016. This is what the MoD has decided: and in this age of political correctness no male dare question the wisdom of such a manoeuvre. Sexist is the cousin of racist in the liberal lexicon, and it will be spat out at any male who disagrees with the MoD.

            

             So any such doubt must be expressed by a woman; and one has stepped forward. Major Judith Webb has raised doubts about the effectiveness of women in front line combat.

            

            Major Webb is the first woman to command an all male squadron. Although the major believes in equality, she insists that women are 'physically different'. If women are to proceed in training on the same basis as men then it has been predicted that just '34 women' will be tough enough to meet front line action: unless, that is, standards in training are lowered to accommodate the PC agenda. In which case it will weaken our fighting strength and effectiveness and make it more likely that we will lose engagements with the enemy.

            

             Their will come a time, as there always is in armed conflict, when man to man fighting takes place – often dirty fighting, that has little in common with training but with street fighting.  It is fighting where physical strength  applies and the Queensbury rules have little place. When struggling to keep yourself alive in such an arena of combat physical strength and stamina counts; and once man on woman fighting follows; under such gruelling conditions - I am afraid that testosterone will out.

FRONT LINE combat is the one arena where women must continue to remain homeless. All other disciplines, whether in the army, navy, or air force; should be open to women and they should be welcomed. Women make good pilots, whether they fly helicopters, transports, or fighters on the front line of aerial combat.

            

             In the modern navy, women can in many instances outperform men. The modern Navy is technology dependent , and women can compete and even better men at this level of expertise – but the front line is different, it is flesh against flesh. Sooner or later on the battle field, as we found during the Second World War, or latterly in the Falklands; dirty fighting man to man can decide the outcome of a battle, and even the war.

            

             So you can understand why Major Webb and many MoD officers baulk at this latest PC (for this is all it is) confection. The front line belongs to the men with a few female exceptions that will succeed in matching the training of men.

            

             My guess is that the  politicians will eventually lower the training standards to accommodate women onto the front line. It goes, after all, with the grain of feminism and political correctness; the two ideologies that know little about armed conflict and the nature of war; but to whom the modern liberal political culture are held in thrall.

            

             On the BBC's Today programme, Major Webb s who retired in 1986 said: 'We had a maximum of four women in my squadron and it was perfectly natural and normal for the guys would do all the heavy jobs and those jobs that were physically demanding while women would do the slightly less physical it was just the normal course of events.

When we are talking about an infantry section of eight guys and you’ve got one person who is not actually as physically strong or as physically capable as the other seven over possibly an extended period of time, which is what has not been tested, that could create an effect on our combat effectiveness,’ added major Webb, who was the first woman to command an all-male field force squadron in the British Army."

            The woman's role in the armed forces has nothing to do with equality but ability, and usually physical ability. It is ability under the stresses of combat that has to be taken into consideration. This is the only criteria when faced with an enemy. A kind of enemy that poses a real threat to our country, as was the case during the First and Second World Wars.

            Women, on the front line combat role up against an enemy comprising solely of

 men will lose out when it comes to men and women dirty fighting. If I could be convinced by any example that British women could be as ruthless and equally so as the men in combat; as well as equally proficient in man to man combat, then I would willingly admit that I was wrong. But in such an engagement the UK would be put at a great disadvantage if the contribution of women to front line combat proved a failure under flesh to flesh combat with an enemy who does not believe in women soldiers.

            As far as the army is concerned, it still comprises male on male combat. This is not to say this situation will remain, but while it does, for the sake of our country, it must continue. As far as individual man to man combat is concerned, the place of women must remain insolvent.

WOMEN HAVE MADE great advances in all fields of front-line combat within the RAF and the Royal Navy, doing front line jobs of killing the enemy. But such advances in women's front line ability have never extended to the infantry  -  where the Glasgow handshake may save a life when combating an enemy.

            Men should be left in charge of man to man combat, where all sorts of primitive devices are used to keep themselves alive. Women had no place on the beaches of Normandy; and for those feminists who think the contrary…let them see the first 40 minutes of Saving Private Ryan.

            Major Judith Webb has brought to the debate a female council of sense to the MoD's wish to allow women to fight in the infantry on the front line. She should be listened to. If not our armed forces will be compromised on the battlefield, and as such this must be considered sedition. Sedition brought about by political correctness. Any deliberate weakness in a combat situation will always be exploited by an enemy; and such a weakness qualifies, in this case, as being deliberate. Feminist equality will, when it comes to the battlefield and hand to hand combat, prove facile and dangerous to the outcome of any military engagement. It is not about being anti-feminist, but about winning a military engagement or a war, which has little bearing on feminism. Why is it that in sport, the role of women and men are seen as being different? It is because men and women are different; and this applies equally to man on man combat on the front line.