Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff: If Women Can’t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask ‘Does It Really Have to Be That High?’

It’s an Obama world.
Even the military is changing its rules to make sure that everybody feels good inside and nobody’s feelings are hurt.

Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters this week that now that women will be serving on the front lines that the military may have to look at requirements and ask,
“Does it really have to be that high?”
Here is the press briefing on the Women in Service Implementation Plan:

CNS News reported:

Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said Thursday that with women now eligible to fill combat roles in the military, commanders must justify why any woman might be excluded – and, if women can’t meet any unit’s standard, the Pentagon will ask: “Does it really have to be that high?”

Dempsey’s comments came at a Pentagon news conference with Defense Sec. Leon Panetta Thursday, announcing the shift in Defense Department policy opening up all combat positions to women…

… Dempsey replied: “No, I wouldn’t put it in terms of operations, Jim. What I would say is that, as we look at the requirements for a spectrum of conflict, not just COIN, counterinsurgency, we really need to have standards that apply across all of those.”

He added: “Importantly, though, if we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high? With the direct combat exclusion provision in place, we never had to have that conversation.”

UPDATE: Allen West disagrees.

Get news like this in your Facebook News Feed,
Gateway Pundit

Commenting Policy

Please adhere to our commenting policy to avoid being banned. As a privately owned website, we reserve the right to remove any comment and ban any user at any time.

Comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, anti-Semitism, or personal or abusive attacks on other users may be removed and result in a ban.

Facebook Comments

Disqus Comments

  • Pingback: Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff: If Women Can’t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask ‘Does It Really Have to Be That High?’ « infowarsusa()

  • “Importantly, though, if we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary, why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high? With the direct combat exclusion provision in place, we never had to have that conversation.”


    You were setting qualifications to weed out the unqualified from a homogenous source.

    What a political ass kisser. He could have said…”Yep. We set it that high because that is what is needed. Meet it and you’re in.”

  • Lim Lynn

    It’s the silliest question I have heard. Have it to be high standard to sacrifice women to demons?

  • Pingback: Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff: If Women Can’t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask ‘Does It Really Have to Be That High?’Politifreak()

  • Does the fool of a General think the enemy will lower their standards? Does he think the laws of physics will change to accommodate a woman who can’t carry a wounded 180 pound man back to safety? How did morons like this ever reach flag level?

  • jorgen

    Under Obama no standard will be high.

  • zaire67

    If standards are lowered, then men who meet the new standards but not the old will be called to duty. Yeah, that’ll happen. I can see the establishment of two different standards, one for men and one for women, to ensure a certain percentage of women and men meet the standards.

  • Will women be subject to the draft now? Will they be subject to INVOLUNTARY assignment to a combat arms position like men are now?

    Let’s lower standards. Everyone meets the same one.
    Of course, evaluations are based upon physical fitness scores too. So, again, women will be at the lowest scores when men exceed the maximums.

    So, then, evals will then be changed so physical fitness is NOT a qualifier.

    And let’s explore how everything else will interact? Will the last person on a hump now need to be politely requested to hurry or will “MOVE YOUR SORRY ASS!” still be acceptable? When women’s bodies begin to break down under the strain of continually patrolling….will there be lawsuits because the “military should have known?”

    This a a major cluster f##k.

    And I say, MORE POWER TO THEM! Because stupid should hurt and the the only way to get this changed is for the American people to feel the pain of their choices. And the people voted for this.

    Time to put your daughters on draft notice.

  • Muddywood

    We must sacrifice our brave soldiers on the altar of Political Correctness.
    It is for the good of the Collective. //////

    It makes me ill thinking about it.

  • JDR-Taq

    The same Democrats:

    “Do we really have to teach black people to read and write? I mean, come on, man! They’re subhuman and cannot learn to speak and enunciate and elaborate with words that Mychal Massie was using when he was TEN YEARS OLD.”

    This is the same as that. No less. No more.

  • Jeff Long

    Michael Savage describes people like Dempsey as “political generals.” This guy doesn’t have a clue and is little more than a suckup, like Panetta, to Obama and the liberal Democrat elites who are now all hell-bent on radically transforming our once great society, and if making cannon fodder out of little girls is called for to accomplish this, then so be it. Been there, done that as an Infantry officer myself. Yep, you will lower the standards. What was YOUR PT Test Score Dempsey?? You wimp! I can imagine what Panetta’s was–or would have been if he ever took it! This current leadership is itself a threat to our national security.

  • JDR-Taq

    We have to lower the “bar”. In all cases. “Social Justice” is all about outcome, not input.

    We’re all Soviets now.

  • Servo1969

    For every one female that deserves a place at the tip of the spear there are probably a couple of thousand who don’t. They will be allowed to slide and when the lead starts flying they will be sacrificed on the altar of Progressiveness. That means there are thousands of little girls growing up right now who are being sentenced to rape, mutilation and death by this line of reasoning. It’s not their fault but because of their genes they don’t stand a snowball’s chance in Hell in combat. Lying about it changes nothing.

    Hug your daughters and granddaughters.

  • Marsh626

    I watch a lot of war porn and documentaries on soldiers. I’ve seen numerous examples of soldiers being severely injured in combat and their fellow soldiers having to carry them hundreds of yards to safety. Sometimes in ditches full of water and mud. Sometimes over huge mud walls. This is no place for females (or weak males). Frankly, I don’t think the requirements for getting into the military are high enough. The idea that they should be lowered even more than they already have is criminally irresponsible. The military already has way too much affirmative action as it is. We should be removing it. Not adding more.

  • Jeff Long

    Awards (Wikipedia)

    1966 – Army Commendation Medal

    Leon Panetta

    Just as I thought. No wonder they have no trouble in lowering the standards!

  • John Bourne

    “Women in Service Implementation Plan”

    Yes, that is a key part of the overall Women In Military Plan.

  • -Ed.

    When did Army generals start wearing that ridiculous uniform? All that gold looks like it belongs on a Broadway stage. Or on a tinpot dictator.

    Women belong in combat. All of them. No conversation necessary, General. Any chance they will bring back the draft? Take my wife. Please.

  • chunkdog

    I am female and this is just embarrasing. If I, or any other woman can’t meet the same standards men do then either work until I can, or I’m out.

    This is no different than dumbing down employment tests because not enough minorities are passing.

    And it always seems the same group of women, who whine about inequality, are the first ones to think they should lower the standards.

    Well, no thanks. I don’t need somebody’s ” politically correct charity”.

  • Ghost

    y’knowww, at some point I’d think you’d stop debating the symptoms of the disease and realize that a super-virus is killing the country. They mean to destroy America, y’understand yet?

    DIVORCE now, sooner or later you’ll agree… probably after it’s too late

  • RedBeard

    The filthy left succeeded with the vile “outcome based education” agenda, lowering standards so everyone can feel good and no one gets a decent education. Now they want the same result in national defense.

    What the hell is wrong with leftists? Leftism is truly a mental disorder of some sort.

  • martin dempsey evidently is cic to destroy the competence of our military the same as the left did to the police and fire departments of america.

    again i ask who asked for this? do the majority of the american people want this? are the majority of american women clamoring to go into combat?

    this is what happens when the american people ignore the admonition of the founding fathers to never have a government powerful enough to oppress you.

    tell your elected officials you don’t want this.

  • Indy

    I would like to encourage readers here to contact members of the Senate Armed Services Commitee who will be conducting the confirmation hearings for Chuck Hagel to make sure they ask him if he will lower the physical standards for women serving in combat to get him on the record. Perhaps Kelly Ayotte or Deb Fischer will raise the issue. Lowering the physical standards will cost lives. I don’t want to see Hagel confirmed and the chances for Leftists voting against him are slim but this better not be another pathetic confirm hearing like it was for Kerry, senators need to learn from Rand Paul on how to ask questions.

  • the real purpose of putting women into combat positions is to lower the standards so that the military will not be able to effectively defend us. their purpose is not to put women into these positions but to use them to lower the standards just like they used blacks to lower the standards in police and fire departments. once they lower the standards all the men that couldn’t make the grade will now be able to pass muster. they will be the ones that make an ineffective military.

    everyone needs to speak out againist this, notify your elected officials, the media pannetta, dempsey.

    a word about pannetta, the first time he ran for public office he ran as a candidate of an off shoot the communist party.

  • Joe Blow

    I doubt this is the result of just the twisted Obama administration, but also a result of the continual push of the butch women libbers. Men and women were made different for a reason, reproduction. What will happen when the Muslim enemy realizes they will have “fun times” when they capture female soldiers. Yes, I know they usually don’t like women but only when they can debase them. Remember the female reporter in Egypt? She was close to loosing her life when just the common Muslims decided she looked ripe for the picking. Stupid military leadership if they can still be called leaders and stupid equal rights women. I guess you can’t blame the men for giving the women the equal right to die on the front line even if it is a result of brutal gang rape.

  • Indiana

    I just had a vision of a little yellow and white daisy hanging out of the barrel of a machine gun poised on the edge of a bunker. Obama has surrounded himself with idiots.


    The only standard Obama applies to the military commanders is: Will they fire on Americans…

  • Gravelyvoice Jim

    Was this the “…More flexibility…” Obama was telling Medvedev about having after the election?

    Silly us, we were all thinking about nuclear disarmament, but he has effectively disarmed our infantry.

    With this regime it’s not what they SAY, but what they DON’T say that we need to be worried about. Unfortunately our Republican “firewall” in Congress is too collectively stupid to figure this out.

    Simple nutless Republican solution: defund the military in the next C.R. (don’t believe for a minute that there will be a “budget” in May as a result of this debt bill the feckless Republicans caved on last week) unless this regulation is repealed, otherwise let the federal government shut down. After all, wasn’t a strong military one of the primary reasons the government was formed in the first place?

    Sadly, cowardly Republicans are too chicken to play “chicken” with Obama, thus the playground bully rules the yard with impunity while Boehner “the ice cube swirler” covers for them and kicks the “tea party” caucus around.


  • RedBeard

    Fun exercise: Picture General George S. Patton at the same microphone, addressing the same subject.

    Patton shouldn’t have slapped that shell shocked soldier, but I would have actively encouraged him to slap this Dempsey fool. Repeatedly. And hard.

  • JKB

    If the standards are found to b arbitrarily high and there is no shortage of qualified candidates who meet that standard now, how is the changing of the standard now that women may compete, not lowering the standards? How was the arbitrarily high standard not discriminatory against men who were just as qualified as the women who meet the new ‘objective standard” are now? Are they going to choose a number of women who meet this new minimum standard over male candidates who exceed the minimums to a greater degree than the women candidates?

    Typical Lefty dissembling. They think as long as they use cute phrasing it isn’t actually the lowering of standards.

  • B.O. don’t know diddley squat

    Where this is all headed :

    Mr Taliban person…

    1. Before I shoot you…Does that make you feel more better or less better about yourself ?
    2. Do you get fulfillment in your life and from the journey,that has brought us together?
    3. Of Bush,Cheyney or Rumsfeld..which one do you hate the most ?( you can have multiple picks)

    Obozo,destroying one American institution at a time

  • Robert

    “Why is the standard so high?”

    “So that our troops have the BEST CHANCE at SURVIVING.”

    Standard remains as is.

  • eatmelickmebiteme


  • driguana

    Yes! The standards do have to be that high even though the Obama administration keeps lowering the standards bar in every category. Keep the standards high and if only 6 women in the country can meet them….bless them and welcome them!

  • RKflorida

    So now women CAN serve. Sounds like a lousy plan. But I bet the plan looks worse when a draft or MUST serve is implemented. That would still include the women, so you ladies out there between the ages of 18 – ?? (up to 37 during WWII) had better gird your loins.

  • Chris W.

    If you are not strong enough to carry a fellow soldier on your back along with all your (and his) gear out of harm’s way, then you are not fit to serve in combat.

  • GGMac

    Can’t you just hear it rollicking through the halls [and tents, and caves] of governments the world over –

    The U.S.A. military: battalions of GIRLIE MEN!

    God help us.

  • grammiecracker

    In cow-towing to those military women who’ve instigated this, Obama’s sycophants [alternate spelling: psychohants] have opened yet another can of worms.

    They want women to have equal ‘advantages’ as the men have? Then they’d better immediately pony up and make age 18 draft registration mandatory for all girls as well!

    Malia and Sasha will be thrilled with that – as will Michelle! Suck on that, Obammunist!

  • Pink Tie Republican

    The military has been deteriorating since my time on active duty in the late 70’s, but under Clinton and Barry it has started to greatly accelerate, it is all part of the leftist plan to destroy the military and the US.

  • donh

    Gen. Martin Dempsey is THE reason we cannot push Big Bird off the public dime….He will order a SHOCK and AWE bombing if we CUT Sesame Street…..>

  • xiphos

    Set the standards so low, that John Kerry might re-up! Instant war hero. Then hope we have enough medals in stock.

  • All you did today Dempsey was weaken a country.

  • “It’s an Obama world” where mediocrity reigns supreme and the crap floats to the top.

  • USMC Thomas

    Am I being cynical if I believe a woman, of color, will be awarded the Medal of Honor before SØBama leaves office?

  • no one has a RIGHT to serve in a combat unit, man or woman. you only have the right if your good enough.

  • Buffalobob

    “Does it really have to be that high”? “What difference does it make”? So it begins.

  • bigkahuna

    Yeah because that affirmative action works so well in the private sector and that lowering of the standards in the loans and banking industry worked reallly well didnt it ?


    I could not make it as a Marine Recon, SEAL, Ranger. Hell, I would not have made a good straight leg infantry man. There are standards set. These are set to achieve a successful mission with limited casualties. Combat takes physically and mentally tough people.

    Then there is the logistical concern, and I have this same concern with gays in the field. Is our society at the stage where people who are physically attracted to one another can bathe, toilet, and sleep closely together? I am not ready for it, but maybe our current generation is. Women who get pregnant are sent out of the war zone. In Gulf War I an entire ship was made nonoperational when half of its sailors became pregnant during their duty patrol. Can you imagine that happening to a company of Rangers?

    I am also pro-life. The women in the military just like the men are extremely aware of duty to their fellow soldiers, sailors, marines, and the mission. Once pregnant many feel force to abort due to a sense of duty, or outright pressure from their command.

  • billntwrk

    lower standards=increased diversity

  • Pingback: Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff: If Women Can’t Meet Military Standard, Pentagon Will Ask ‘Does It Really Have to Be That High?’ | The Gateway Pundit | Bring the heat, Bring the Stupid()

  • RS

    Women… check.
    Homosexuals… check
    Next we can expect the handicapped to enter the armed forces.

    A small step since we already have the mentally defective leading the nation.

  • bg


    pardon if a repeat:

    January 25, 2013

    Report: Washington Didn’t Even Tell
    Marine Gen. He Was Being Replaced

    [… General Mattis was travelling and in a meeting when an aide
    passed him a note telling him that the Pentagon had announced
    his replacement as head of Central Command. It was news to him
    — he hadn’t received a phone call or a heads-up from anyone at
    the Pentagon or the White House.]

    “litmus test”

    [There seems to be an ever growing contention as to whether the
    Obama Administration is testing the waters and its powers to prepare
    for another civil war against Americans. Is all of this over Americans
    fighting for their constitutional rights, or is it Obama’s plan to be allowed
    to ‘take out’ whomever he sees as a threat to him or his Administration
    at any time? You decide!]

    breaking the war mentality

    [In 1933 the German establishment thought it could use Hitler to restore a modicum of order to the confused and confusing Weimar Republic. In fact, Hitler did strengthen the German establishment, but not exactly in the way the bankers and businessmen had wanted; and now, fifty years later, it is clear who was using whom. Nevertheless, the Western World did not complain in 1933 because Hitler, though a fascist and a totalitarian, was seen, like countless American puppet dictators today, as someone who leaves the established order in place.


    Consequently. the thrust of ARA is towards generating dialogue
    which will give people a rational handle on this controversial subject.
    this includes bringing speakers like Daniel ElIsberg to campus, publishing
    fact sheets compiled by interested faculty, and investigating the possible
    development of an interdisciplinary program in the Columbia curriculum
    dealing with peace, disarmament, and ‘world order’.]

    [End Note

    Our civilian readers maybe wondering why the Combat Arms
    Survey was circulated so heavily within the Department of the
    Navy. The reason is simple; the Navy is not subject to USC Title
    10 Posse Comitatus prohibitions against using federal military
    forces for domestic law enforcement. This includes the US Marine

    Just thought you would like to know.]

    “burden of global citizenship.”

    [The armed forces, therefore, according to the decree issued by Chávez last July 22nd, in the practice will be responsible for enforcing by means of arms the failed socialist constitutional reform. To that end, in order to dilute the country into its militia-like organization, will “prepare and organize the people for integral defense.” In addition, it will “forge alliances or coalitions with the armed forces of foreign countries.” The ongoing military revolution will have not borders. At the end, there is one single purpose -retired military officer Chávez Frías will boast his five-sun insignia appropriate for his new rank of commander in chief, awarded by himself, and not by the grace of God.]


  • Blacque Jacques Shellacque

    Gen. Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, told reporters this week that now that women will be serving on the front lines that the military may have to look at requirements and ask, “Does it really have to be that high?”

    Isn’t that pretty much how affirmative action works in higher education?

  • BarbaraS

    I pity the last surviving wounded soldier left with only a woman to get him out. She couldn’t do it. No woman is strong enough to carry a 200 lb. ,more or less, man to safety.I have seen reports that fellow soldiers have carried their wounded comrades to safety. This would not happen that that soldier was a women. The whole issue is dumb and should never have been brought up. Just a feel good iniative and likely a sop thrown to the lesbian community. Women are in the service to free up men to fight by taking the safe jobs. Also, putting women on the front lines in fighting the enemy we have will get them raped and tortured and killed if they are so unlucky to be captured.

  • jony101

    pefumed earring wearing generals and admirals got us gays and women in the military. Some generals forgot who they are and what there primary mission is. In the movies maybe woman can win wars, in real life probably not. Its one of those laws of physics. If woman where better warriors, the Romans who were doing the warrior thing for almost a thousand years would have discovered there usefulness in the battlefield.

  • frank k.

    “If at first you don’t succeed , try lowering the standards.” … Hey, why not , since it’s worked “so well” for the public-school educational system …. We are truly goin’-down-the-proverbial-crapper …. frank k. … (N.Va.)

  • Jeff Long

    It has begun with earnest. Does the Chinese war machine utilize female combat troops in critical fast-moving/.hard-hitting units? Not that women dying in battle would be of particular concern to them in any moral sense in China’s mad rush to contain population.

    How about the Ruskies? These are examples of the SERIOUS foes we will need to contend with in days ahead. This is NOT a game for lit. majors and “equality policy analysts” like Dempsey and Panetta to play using our daughters and sons.

  • Shawn

    Thank God my military days are behind me if these are the kinds of buffoons who are running it now.

  • bg


    Army acknowledges pedophilia part of Islam

    more at link, in connecting links, and threads..


  • saveus

    Affirmative action has dumbed down our colleges and even worse our medical schools.
    It’s such a bad idea that of course the “progressives” want to extend it to the military.
    The mission has changed from winning wars to making gays and women happy.

    No wonder we lost two wars under the affirmative action president.

    Standards do matter.

  • Pingback: Shabby, craven & stupid — Winds Of Jihad By SheikYerMami()

  • bobbymike

    Obama the anti-Reagan – Reagan built up America and made us proud Obama will tear it down and humble us to the world.

    Dear God is this really happeneing America?