Comments on: Human Terrain Mapping

By: SCOTTtheBADGER

SCOTTtheBADGER — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 09:31:44 +0000

“Insure Domestic Tranquility” Does anyone else hear the tune from Schoolhouse Rock when he reads the Preamble to the Constitution?

By: MaxDamage

MaxDamage — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 07:17:03 +0000

Anybody else here remember their oath? To protect and defend the Constitution? The preamble declares that one of the purposes of the Constitution is to “preserve domestic tranquility.”

Which, I’ve been trying to do that ever since I got married…

Now I don’t know about what happens as your house, but in mine domestic tranquility is preserved only if My Good Wife is happy. And I’m pretty sure that no matter where you are if Mom isn’t happy then nobody is happy in that household.

Say what you will, the old adage is that all politics are local and there’s nothing more local than the Spousal Unit, the supper table, and that bed you may or may not be allowed to or want to sleep in that night next to the Spousal Unit.

So having those women-to-women talks probably isn’t a bad thing. As for security, well, there’s still husbands who want to protect their wives and soldiers who want to protect their squad-mates, and that’s something the men-folk can easily see as similar roles.

My bet is while the women are inside talking the men are outside, staying vigilant and sharing coffee while discussing the finer points of What In The Hell Do They Really Want? When the women emerge and know what they want, is there a man who would forget his oath and deny it if he his has any hope of self-preservation?

In the move “Paint Your Wagon” it was claimed that Brigham Young had 27 wives. At the risk of making a pun I don’t care if the man was a latter-day Saint, I’m betting that without the help of outside intervention from other women discussing their lives with his wives he would have spent most of his nights sleeping on the couch.

– Max

By: FbL

FbL — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 02:01:25 +0000

I followed a lot of the work MNF-I did with women in Iraq during the surge. If they’re modeling it after that, I’m rather optimistic. As I understood it, there was a lot of work done to bring together groups of women to discuss their (and the community’s) most pressing needs. The resultant programs ranged from child health care improvements to schools for girls, training in skills that would allow the women to make money from the home, to the women simply banding together to address the men in their villages.

I know the cultures are different, but I think that this type of thinking (by the military) has potential. The Afghan women are starting a lot further back than the Iraqi women, but I don’t think we can dismiss it out of hand…

By: Quartermaster

Quartermaster — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:56:41 +0000

Any country that intentionally places women in harm’s way is a barbaric country unworthy of defense.

That, in a nut shell, describes the feminista Officer’s Corps. Another reason to tell young men to stay away from the military.

By: Quartermaster

Quartermaster — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 01:53:33 +0000

If you were one of the denizens of said Navy O-club, then I could understand her ambivalence. All that Navy class invaded by a knuckle dragging AF type. The mind doth reel

By: -Jas

-Jas — Mon, 08 Mar 2010 00:48:41 +0000

Point taken, Steve. Seems as though we may be “agreeing violently.” Of course you’re right about the gradualism of the agenda that’s gotten us where we are. And you’re right, too, about the general public perception of the opinions I’ve expressed. I guess I’m just at a point where I don’t care about that. Long have I said (privately) that I value truth above fashion; perhaps I’ve become so overwhelmed at the “upside-downness” of our society (and the absurdity and futility of the projects like the one that started this thread), that I’m compelled to stand and declare the Emperor to be buck-a$$ naked, and consequences be damned. Not like I have any great position to lose, anyway–I’m just an aging working stiff.