Feature Image: RAAF FA-18 Hornets
RAAF Alpha Jets
The Insane Political Movement
To Push Women Into Combat
Should Women Fight Men?
The latest trend in society around the globe is the belief that women should be fighting in the frontline in War Zones, and yes even in the police force on the streets against criminals. It is true… women can contribute good value and excellent service working in the military, and some of them are better in performance and smarter, than some men are. All very true- no argument about that reality; but do we really want to go the extra step? Should women fight men? During the last one hundred years, many women have been quoted as saying, in various ways of literal presentation that women can do the same things as men. What a man can do, women can do. And despite physiological differences between the sexes, women can do anything a man can do. In the name of equality, between the sexes, the idea sounds reasonable. The non-chauvinist male has started to remind the new free-thinking female, that what a woman can do, men can do. Men can do anything a woman can do. Well almost- but this reality applies both ways, for both sexes. Are we outsmarting ourselves with this new higher individual philosophy? Where do we draw the line with some common-sense exceptions? Generalizations are a trap- almost is right! There are exceptions for both sexes.
I taught my sons as they were growing up, that they must not hit women. I taught them as my father taught me, and as my grandfather taught my father. “Do not hit women!” One of my sons, when he was 16 years old, asked me the question… “But I can hit my sister, can’t I?” I replied “no… if you do I’ll drop you. And you know I would.” My boys are now fully-grown men, at this point of time range in age from 20 years to 27 years. My four adult sons know I mean business, if I ever caught them hitting a woman, their sister, their girlfriend or their wife, I would hit them in the face full fist. I will not tolerate men hitting women. One of my boys is 6 feet 4 inches in height and in top physical condition and my sons know that would not stop me from dealing with them. I have drilled this rule into their soul to such an extent, that the idea of hitting women is repugnant to them and deemed as an intolerable action.
Any man who hits a woman is a coward and is a man without honour. Likewise, any woman who hits a man is a coward, and is a woman without honour. I told my sons that if a woman hits them they are to turn the other cheek and walk away. If their girlfriend or wife starts hitting them, I said walk out on the relationship or marriage. You do not need violence in your life, and do not have to tolerate such cowardly nonsense. The way to peace is to get rid of troublemakers out of your life. You only fight when you have no choice. And unarmed women who lash out with hands and feet and by throwing things, gives a man the fundamental opportunity to simply walk away and never come back. The one exception is when a woman is totally evil, like some violent men, and attacks the male with a weapon. When a woman attacks a man with a weapon, she is no longer living with femininity within, and is in fact living with masculinity within, and by her adopted violent action has become in soul, a male. If a woman attacks a man with a weapon, he has the right to use whatever degree of force is necessary. In extreme situations when his life and survival is at risk, he may be forced to fight to the death and kill. Most men pray that they never be forced into this rotten situation. It is bad enough to have to kill a male in battle, but to have to kill a female is the pits of existence, the worst of worst experiences.
The habit of war is madness. Throughout history billions of men have been killed in war. Women and children have been murdered in war. But men traditionally have been the supreme sacrifice in uncountable numbers. I guess you could argue that women should share the same risks as men and pay the same supreme sacrifice. We need to stop the habit of war, not fuel it further by adding battle proven women. It is not about whether women can fight. We know many women can fight. This is basic common sense. We do not need to research this reality to prove it with evidence. You would be as thick as a brick, if you could not recognise that many women can fight just as well as men. And that many women can fight even better than some men can. Of course, this is also true on the other side of the fence. Many men can fight better than some women can. But what is right for our society? What is right for the development of Universal Peace?
I taught my sons “Thou Shalt Not Hit Women!” Do I now say to my Sons, “Thou Shalt Not Hit Women, but in street fights it is okay to use whatever degree of force is necessary and in war it is okay to kill women?” Wake up World! How can we teach not to hit women and then condone violence against women?
The Sunday Telegraph an Australian newspaper dated May 13th, 2001, reported in well written bold headlines… Women Should Fight… Defence report gives clearance for frontline… (i)
“Women will fight alongside men on the frontline for the first time under historic Defence Department recommendations. A Defence Force report to Federal Cabinet recommends women be admitted to combat roles if they match men’s physical standards. Until now, women have been banned from serving in combat roles in full-scale armed conflict. They carry arms only for self-defence. But after a three-year study by the army’s directorate of career management, the Defence Department concluded women were ready for battle.” (i)
“The report says there is no medical reason for women to be excluded from combat roles as long as, they are of the same height, weight and fitness levels as the men,” a senior Defence source told The Sunday Telegraph.” (i)
“Women can do anything men can.” (i)
“Women who chose combat roles would have to meet the same physical requirements as men and pass the same physical tests.” (i)
“Women now have different fitness requirements, which include a less rigorous test of their physical abilities.” (i)
“Australia would be only the sixth country in the world, after the US, Canada, Holland, Norway, and Israel, to let women fill combat roles. At present, Australian women can fly fast jets, including fighters and bombers, and serve on warships. But under an exemption in the Sex Discrimination Act, they are not allowed to assume full combat rolls.” (i)
“Women are also excluded from serving with the elite navy clearance diving teams, air force ground defence units including infantry, armour, artillery and combat engineers.” (i)
“The report, headed by Major-General Simon Willis, will go before the military’s powerful chiefs of staff committee early next month before it is presented to Cabinet.” (i)
End of major extract from Page 1 & 2 the Sunday Telegraph NSW Australia. Dated May 13th, 2001 Exclusive Report by national political writer… SIMON KEARNEY 2001. (i)
The Daily Telegraph dated May 14th, 2001 reported that “The RSL yesterday rejected a proposal to allow women to serve as frontline combat soldiers.” (ii)
Further in the article, the report stated… “Prime Minister John Howard yesterday refused to express an opinion on whether women should serve in combat, but instead pointed out 95 percent of defence force jobs were already open to women.” (ii)
“I’m regularly flown by very talented female pilots in the RAAF. I think they’re terrific,” Mr. Howard said.” (ii)
End of small extract from Page 13 the Daily Telegraph NSW Australia. Dated May 14th, 2001 by MATT SUN 2001. (ii)
Well these reports by one of the NSW newspaper media presenters of up to date insight, good and bad, laid reality right on the table. Women are now ready to join the mindless antics of men and become dedicated to the madness of the last ten thousand years of war. Even in victory, no one truly won.
Australian Parachutists… “Do we now encourage women to jump from a plane into combat to fight men overseas?
Will future images like this one of men in Vietnam War now include Women?
Howard was right many female pilots are no doubt great women, but does this justify women fighting in combat? Politicians who sit on the fence refusing to voice an opinion on critical path issues for fear of being unpopular, reflects a weakness in their own personal philosophy and their own basic character. A brave man would answer immediately! An honourable man would reject women fighting in frontline combat. It should be noted again… the media report implies Howard said nothing. Is this true or false? Only Howard can answer that question.
A few eager women with masculine tendencies, backed by fundamental feminism, do desire to fight in frontline combat to prove themselves equal to the best of men. With this proved approval, Governments will during the time of new generations’ conscript women to fight into frontline combat, to be savagely killed and their breasts blown apart, just as they did conscript hapless men into World Wars, Korea and Vietnam. This kind of mentality is not acceptable. Such path of action… forcing women into destined wars is by moral law totally wrong.
If women had ‘balls’, they would say No! Since women don’t have ‘balls’ all they need is the courage to unite and stand up and be counted and say no!
Note in the first report “Women can do anything men can.” So, by this logical reasoning this often-sound valid fact, we can now assume that it is okay to send women to war. Sounds reasonable subject to the fact that you are willing to encourage the global habit of war, and you are willing to encourage that males now have the right to kill women, and women no longer have the right to complain about being hit by a man. By this logic, Chivalry is dead; honourable men should cease rushing in to help a woman, doing any more than they would do for a man. In other words, when a woman is in trouble, men should do nothing. Men wisely learnt never to enter a street fight in defence of another man, they did not know. But men often came to the defence of female strangers needing help. This new backward social logic which condones women should fight, will also encourage men to take the view never help a woman being attacked by other men. Our wives, our mothers, grandmothers, daughters, and sisters can no longer depend upon protection by honourable male strangers, when dishonourable males attack them.
The question is not whether women can fight? The question is do we want to become a mindless society of uncaring warlike backward mentality, which does not value Chivalry and Honour and the loyalty of men and women as compliments to each other? Do we want to become a competitive society to the extent where we want to prove that women and men are both equally capable of not only killing each other, but also capable of mass extermination of humans? Chivalry embraces honour as a first principle and evolved from ancient cultures, as a solid foundation necessary for the wholesome wellbeing of society. Chivalry strengthens our values and gives meaning and purpose to our existence. When we toss Chivalry into the garbage bin by condoning women in combat, we do toss ourselves into the rubbish heap and clearly reveal our thinking has become trashy, scum-like, void of honour.
The defence force wasted 3 years in research to tell us what mankind has known by common sense for millenniums. Women can fight- but do we want them to fight? Many mothers and fathers in past wars saw their sons sent to war, sacrificed by the evils of tyranny. Do we now want to submit to tyranny further, and send our daughters to war to be also sacrificed? Grave sites- memorials around the world list 100 million dead men from past wars. Are we during the next 100 years going to now list 100 million women plus 100 million men dead from wars? When shall the madness of mankind end?
So, what- that other countries have allowed women in combat rolls? Just because these countries are evolving backwards, are we Australians going to blindly follow their stupidity and do the same? It is reasonable that adventurous women may choose to work in dangerous jobs, just like men. But doing a dangerous job is not encouraging men and women worldwide, to fight and murder each other. Let’s face reality even in the name of self-defence in war, killing is murder. Anyone who says otherwise is both an idiot and a liar. No government that allows women to fight can be called brave. Any government, which condones women the right to fight, is a stupid irresponsible government. Approval of women in frontline combat is an enemy of an honourable society. Without Chivalry, we are nothing. We cannot teach the hypocrisy that men shall not hit women, but it is okay to kill women in war. It is bad enough that we have a cold war between extreme feminists and chauvinists- but do we want to take this battle further? When the sexes start waging hot wars against each other, it will be the end of great nations and the beginning of social downfall.
Vietnam War 1967
Americans or Australians the question is the same, “Will images like above now include women? Will we see women’s breasts uncovered after they have been wounded? Will we see photos of dead women on the battlefield, blown apart, torched or cut down. Haven’t we got enough history of too many men dying cruelly in war and being maimed for life. What political fools want to now sacrifice women in war?”
And when I turned to God for advice, God said unto me… “I am a God of Love, I am an Ahimsa God, I do not condone men fighting and killing in wars. So, it is by their historical stupidity and senseless behaviour that I will condone even less women fighting in wars. Male mindless behaviour does not need the additional thrust of female mindless behaviour. War is senseless; women will serve best by teaching men to quit the habit of war.”
And so, I stand true to Cosmicism opposed to women fighting in frontline combat and opposed to those dishonourable men who condone women fighting in war.
It should be noted that real men are dedicated to the military as defenders of freedom and peace. Real men will fight to the death head-on and give no quarter and expect none. And real men and women are dedicated conscientious objectors and do reject women fighting in frontline overseas combat positions. The right to expect military defence training for purposes of defending their country against invasion, is the justified right of every woman. Women have the natural survival right to learn how to protect themselves, their family, their friends, and their country from attack. Women have the right of self-defence to fight in their own country, when it has been invaded…that is all…sending women overseas into war is insane. We are trying to stop the habit of war, not increase the habit of madness. Under no circumstances should women ever be sent overseas to fight. Women should not ever leave their country, to fight in other territories of land, sea or air. The authorisation of women fighting outside the borders of their country, is an approval of dishonour. Such evil approval is promoting the escalation of the bad habit of war. Be tough, be brave, stand up and be counted… say no! To women fighting in frontline combat overseas!
It came to pass…
The Sunday Telegraph, NSW Australia, dated 3rd June 2001, reported…
“Australian service personnel are overwhelmingly against women fighting on the front line, an internal Defence Department survey has found. The survey showed a large majority of male and female personnel were opposed to combat roles for women.” (iii)
“An army female warrant officer who helped prepare the survey told The Sunday Telegraph: “It was indicated to us that the overwhelming majority of men did not want women in the front line and the overwhelming majority of women did not want to go there.” (iii)
Thank God for common sense. In Australia honour and chivalry is not dead and still thrives. Wake up governments! It is time USA, Canada, Holland, Norway and Israel, grew up and reversed their backward decision, and enforced refusal to allow women to fight in overseas combat zones. It is time for global chivalry! It is time to become once more honorable men and women.
And God said unto each sex, written ‘Cosmic Law’ in the solar wind, “Thou shalt not hit women. Thou shalt not hit men.” Whosoever of either sex breaks this eternal commandment by hitting the opposite sex, shall be deemed without honour, and is an enemy of God, decency and Humanity.
(i) Report “Women Should Fight – Defence gives clearance for frontline.” By SIMON KEARNEY ‘National Political Writer.’ Published in THE SUNDAY TELEGRAPH, SYDNEY NSW AUSTRALIA Sunday, May 13th, 2001.
(ii) Report “Should GI Jane go into combat – RSL shoots down front-line role.” By MATT SUN Published in THE DAILY TELEGRAPH, SYDNEY NSW AUSTRALIA Monday May 14th, 2001.
(iii) Article “Front no place for women” Author not named. Published in THE SUNDAY TELEGRAPH NSW AUSTRALIA, Sunday, June 3, 2001.
Allan Peter Ivarsson © 2001/2020
Authors Note 2015: The Qur’an the Holy Book of Islam, revered by 1.2 billion Muslims, the book approved by all naïve misguided inferior thinking, Western Politicians, CEO’s and Educational Leaders, who are submitting to the dictatorship of so-called ‘Moderate Islam’, states quite clearly that Muslim men, do have the right to use domestic violence and beat their wives. 4:34 Surah Women ‘Al-Nisa’.
The Qur’an is deemed to be the perfect book, the infallible book. To criticise the Koran is ‘Blasphemy’ that which is anti-freedom of speech law… which is subject to the death penalty, by stoning or beheading, crucifixion or hanging or buried alive etc.
And all global organisation movements against ‘Domestic Violence’ say nothing…
“Silence is Approval”.
Islam including so-called ‘Moderate Islam’, says it is okay to beat their wives if they misbehave. Never mind that many Muslim Husbands are Chauvinist Pigs. We in the West through Suffragette Feminism just spent 150 years of societal effort to establish equality for women, to eliminate the inferior thinking of non-Muslim male chauvinist pigs that beat their wives, and now we as a society, through our politicians and CEO’s are afraid to denounce this insidious anti-freedom apartheid text in the Koran.
Cowards refuse to openly reject this Muhammad instruction 4:34 verse.
Even American politician ‘Hillary Clinton’ refuses to publicly denounce this right to beat women text in the Koran. How do I know this is true? “Silence is Approval”.
Fact: Allah did not instruct men to beat their wives when they refused to obey their husband’s instructions. Allah did not ever teach that men were superior to women. The 4:34 text in the Koran are the words of War Lord Muhammad. Paedophile Muhammad lied, when he claimed that Allah tabled these instructions. It was Muhammad that invented these instructions, pretending to be the words of Allah. Muhammad is a liar and he admitted it when he said… “War is Deceit”. Muhammad even lied to his followers to ensure they submitted to him. He knew that if he did not claim Allah gave him the instructions, then his male followers would never have served him.
Read Treatise ‘Violence Against Women’ & Men & Disabled’ series of articles published in 2018 book COMPENDIUM II, available in Paperback, printed in illustrated colour on quality white paper. Also available in electronic Kindle book at Amazon.com This presentation is a Collector’s Item in Paperback and is an ideal textbook for Students study.
Images Selected From COMPENDIUM II
An excellent good read important book.
Reads available now on website…
Follow the above link trail to read all the ‘Combat Women Treatises’ for an exciting read of insight about reality.
‘Blue Light Defiance’ Books… Published on Kindle & Paperback Amazon.com
United States of America
Also Available at…
Allan Peter Ivarsson ©
Paperbacks Quality Printed in Colour Amazon.com
Kindle Electronic Books in Colour Amazon.com
I am a Fan of the Website BNI since 2011
To learn more about the dangerous anti-freedom threats of Islam…
It was the founder of BNI that inspired me to start this website. Originally, I was only planning to write books… but BNI encouraged me to extend my writing skills… her American support has been amazing and very good in every sense of the word.
(Passed Forward by ‘Blue Light’ Cosmic Philosophy)
Thought for Today
It, is now 2020 and for six years I have not purchased Cadbury Chocolates since I learned in 2014 that Cadbury was now Halal Certified.
Cadbury forced to explain why its chocolate is halal after being accused of ‘Muslim appeasement’