Feminism weakened our military — now it’s time to fix the damage



In the spring of 2003, the U.S. military spearheaded a major push in high schools nationwide to recruit young women. Military recruiters even called homes asking for high school girls by name.

Meanwhile, military recruiters handed out trendy military “swag” at schools to help boost recruitment efforts. This occurred against the backdrop of the tragic story of 19-year-old Pfc. Jessica Lynch, whom the enemy captured in the post-9/11 Iraq War.

Truly moral nations do not place their women on the front lines.

Her eight days in captivity and her dramatic rescue became a round-the-clock news event. Jessica’s story was initially romanticized to lure young women into military service. Many moms, however, sensed the “fake news” was not telling the whole story.

Jessica Lynch’s nightmare

The heinous reality of Lynch’s captivity, revealed in her authorized biography, “I Am a Soldier, Too,” shattered the romanticized narrative surrounding women in the military. In captivity, Jessica endured three hours of torture by several Iraqis, which included anal sexual assault and rape. Her spine was fractured, her arm shattered, multiple other bones were broken, and she suffered internal injuries.

By the grace of God, Jessica was rescued by U.S. special operations forces from behind enemy lines. When asked eight months later in an interview by ABC’s Diane Sawyer about the decision to include the brutal sexual assault in the book, Lynch — to her credit — said, “It was a decision to tell the reality, not selective parts, of a story of going to war.”

We owe Lynch a debt of gratitude for her honesty and courage in sharing such a painful truth.

Obama lifts the ban

In 2013, 10 years after Lynch’s rescue, the Obama administration officially lifted the ban on women serving in combat roles. In fact, women were already serving in combat when Obama initiated this major policy shift, even though Congress had not approved it.

The original policy only allowed women in combat roles if they met the same training standards as men. When they failed to do so, the Pentagon lowered the standards, weakening military readiness and effectiveness. Twelve years of data now justify reconsidering why women were banned from combat roles in the first place.

Beyond physical strength differences, other practical concerns make integrating men and women in training or war zones problematic. These include increased romantic relationships, sexual activity, higher rates of STDs, unintended pregnancies, abortions, and sexual assault. Military leadership ignored these concerns to push a political agenda.

Thankfully, the “roar to restore” was heard in the 2024 election.

Reinstating sanity

Moms for America is grateful to Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth for having the courage to say aloud that women — especially moms — do not belong in combat. Years of radical feminist indoctrination have led young women to believe there is no difference — physical or emotional — between men and women. Such indoctrination has misled women, marginalized men, and perverted the natural chemistry of relationships between them.

Strong, intelligent, determined, and accomplished women have long held critical noncombat roles in the military, including medics, nurses, doctors, intelligence analysts, communications specialists, cybersecurity experts, logistical specialists, linguists, and many others. These roles are no less essential to the military’s mission than the infantry.

Men and women possess incredible and unique gifts and, in some roles, can perform to the same standards. Yet men and women are different, and acknowledging those differences is not discriminatory.

The call to reinstate the ban on women in combat does not disrespect the valued women who serve in the military, the parents who have daughters in the military, or those women who gave the ultimate sacrifice for our country. Instead, it is a call back to sanity — to evaluate and assess a policy that never should have been changed.

Lowering standards for women decreases the military’s effectiveness and strength to protect and defend America. Moreover, keeping women in combat puts them at the same risk of torture and rape that Jessica Lynch endured during active combat.

Truly moral nations do not place their women or children on the front lines.

The feminist left has demonized the God-given instinct of men to protect women since at least the 1960s. It is time to tell the truth again. It is OK to say that we want men to protect women — and we are grateful for it.

It’s time to protect once again America’s mothers and daughters: Ban women in combat.

Trump Shuts Down Pentagon Office Linked to Russiagate Probe

President Donald Trump has shut down a little-known Pentagon office that paid more than $1 million to an FBI source who spied on the Trump campaign as part of its 2016 investigation into Trump's links to Russia. The Department of Defense announced Thursday it is "restructuring" the Office of Net Assessment, an internal Pentagon think tank that studies long-term geopolitical military trends.

The post Trump Shuts Down Pentagon Office Linked to Russiagate Probe appeared first on .

Hegseth Guts Pentagon Office That Gifted Lucrative Contracts To Famed Russia Collusion Hoaxer

Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has ordered a complete overhaul of a Pentagon think tank that infamously gifted lucrative contracts to a key player in the Russia collusion hoax, the Defense Department revealed on Thursday. “As part of the Department’s ongoing commitment to strengthening our national defense, the Secretary of Defense has directed the disestablishment of […]

Hegseth razing Pentagon think tank linked to Crossfire Hurricane following accusation of 'waste, fraud and abuse'



Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is razing the in-house Pentagon think tank that Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) accused last month of "egregious waste, fraud and abuse."

Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said in a statement Thursday, "As part of the Department's ongoing commitment to strengthening our national defense, the Secretary of Defense has directed the disestablishment of the Office of Net Assessment (ONA) and the development of a plan to rebuild it in alignment with the Department's strategic priorities."

"This decision ensures that our resources are focused on the most pressing national security challenges while maintaining accountability and efficiency," added Parnell.

ONA personnel will be reassigned to mission-critical roles within the Defense Department, noted the spokesman.

Grassley celebrated the move, stating, "After years raising Cain about the Office of Net Assessment's failure to strengthen our national defense and its rampant abuse of taxpayer dollars, I'm thrilled to hear the news that President Trump is abolishing this wasteful and ineffective office."

"Praise the Lord," continued Grassley. "This wise move saves American taxpayers over 20 million dollars a year."

The ONA, which has contracted a lot of work out to Washington, D.C.-based think tanks, was established during the Cold War as an outfit that would go beyond traditional intelligence reporting and short-term trends assessments, and instead provide long-term "comparative assessments of trends, key competition, risks, opportunities, and future prospects of U.S. military capability to the secretary of defense."

The agency, which has apparently had trouble in recent decades performing the very future-oriented work that it was created to do, has sunk time and money into various pet projects, or what former Pentagon press secretary John Kirby alternatively referred to as the study of "'orthogonal' issues — issues that may not obviously appear to affect the department, but that may indeed turn out to have important implications for the future security environment and future warfare that DOD will need to take into account."

The Pentagon confirmed in 2014 that the agency was spending $300,000 annually to study the body language of Russian President Vladimir Putin. Politico noted that this research continued even though the Pentagon admitted that such analysis turned out to be useless regarding the Russo-Ukrainian War, which kicked off that year.

'ONA is not performing its mission for the taxpayer and has engaged in financial waste.'

In his Feb. 7 letter to Hegseth, Sen. Grassley highlighted another pointless study undertaken by the ONA in 2009 that discussed the connection between the American willingness to use military force and the "persistence of Scotch-Irish culture in America" — a culture the authors claimed "must also be understood as having been reinforced by slaveholding, and American Protestant religious beliefs" and shaped by "endemic warfare that placed high value on violent and immediate personal responses to challenges and high loyalty to clan and kin."

Grassley suggested that discussions of Scotch-Irish culture in America and the study speculating about Putin potentially having Asperger's "have nothing to do with ONA's core mission, which is to produce a net assessment that measures our military capabilities against our foreign adversaries."

The senator also raised concerns about the agency's apparent improper classification of contract and project data to "prevent embarrassment," as well as its contracts with Stefan Halper, the professor who helped the Obama FBI get FISA warrants to spy on the 2016 Trump campaign by serving as a confidential informant for the bureau's Crossfire Hurricane operation.

A Pentagon Office of Inspector General audit found various problems with the ONA's contract management and oversight process, noting that in the case of the FBI's Trump campaign infiltrator, the ONA "could not provide sufficient documentation that Professor Halper conducted all of his work in accordance with applicable laws and regulations" and "did not require Professor Halper to submit any evidence that he interviewed personnel cited in his proposals and statements of work."

"I remain concerned that ONA is not performing its mission for the taxpayer and has engaged in financial waste," wrote Grassley.

To Grassley's delight, Hegseth has directed the Pentagon's top acquisition official in a memo obtained by Breaking Defense to "ensure that the necessary steps are taken" by department contracting authorities to scrap "all ONA contracts awarded for ONA and ONA-related requirements."

While the defense secretary is gutting the agency, he indicated that he wants a plan in 30 days concerning how to rebuild the office such that it is in accord with the Pentagon's priorities.

The decision has rankled some so-called experts in the D.C. think-tank game who might be out a potential source of income.

Rush Doshi, the director of the Council on Foreign Relations' China Strategy Initiative, called the decision to raze then rebuild the ONA "an enormous mistake."

"This was a little-known but enormously consequential fifty year-old institution that actually thought long-term. It helped us win the Cold War, grasped the China challenge early, and figured out revolutions in warfare," continued Doshi. "When I was at the [National Security Council], ONA produced some of the best analysis anywhere in the USG and had enormous and even historic policy impact. No other institution presently can do what it did. Ending it is another unforced error."

Tom Shugart, an adjunct senior fellow at the D.C.-based Center for a New American Security, also clutched pearls, suggesting the ONA's overhaul might weaken America's national defense.

Kyle Balzer, a fellow at the American Enterprise Institute, called it a "poor decision."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

The Pentagon’s $850B Nightmare Will Be DOGE’s Biggest Challenge Yet

The Pentagon doesn’t appear to have a battle plan to turn around seven straight years of audit failures.

Democrats Try To Use Colby Confirmation Hearing To Sabotage Trump’s Russia-Ukraine Negotiations

'My personal interest is in making sure that I don't do anything that would disrupt the resumption of a move towards peace that I think would benefit Ukraine.'

Vance Makes The Definitive Case Why Elbridge Colby Is The Right Man To Shepherd U.S. Defense Policy

On Tuesday, Vice President J.D. Vance made the definitive case why Elbridge Colby is the right man to serve as the Trump administration’s under secretary of defense for policy. Speaking before the Senate Armed Services Committee, the vice president touted Colby as a sound mind who understands the realities of existing global affairs and the […]

Hillary Clinton's attempt to dunk on Hegseth over Russia-related order backfires gloriously



Unnamed sources told the Record that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth ordered U.S. Cyber Command last week to pause offensive operations against Russia — apparently as part of the Trump administration's broader efforts to induce President Vladimir Putin to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.

Failed presidential candidate Hillary Clinton evidently saw the report as an opportunity to recycle her go-to smear and dunk on Hegseth.

Critics mindful of Clinton's history with the Russians were, however, quick to note that the former secretary of state was pitching rocks from a glass house.

Background

Three individuals supposedly familiar with the order told the Record on the condition of anonymity that Hegseth instructed Cyber Command chief Gen. Timothy Haugh last week to halt offensive digital actions against Russia. Haugh reportedly passed on the instruction to Cyber Command's outgoing director of operations, Marine Corps Maj. Gen. Ryan Heritage.

The unnamed sources noted that the order does not apply to the National Security Agency or its Russia-aimed signals intelligence work.

A Pentagon official told the Record, "Due to operational security concerns, we do not comment nor discuss cyber intelligence, plans, or operations. There is no greater priority to Secretary Hegseth than the safety of the Warfighter in all operations, to include the cyber domain."

Citing one current official and two former officials briefed on the new guidance, the New York Times reported Sunday that the order was issued prior to President Donald Trump's discordant engagement with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Friday and that its scope was unclear, especially as the line between defensive and offensive actions is oftentimes blurred.

Former officials told the Times that it was common practice to pause military operations during diplomatic negotiations such as those presently pursued by the Trump administration.

Secretary of State Marco Rubio told ABC News on Sunday, "We have to bring [Russia] to the table. You're not going to bring them to the table if you're calling them names, if you're being antagonistic. That's just the president's instincts from years and years and years of putting together deals."

Rock, glass house

Hillary Clinton shared news of Hegseth's alleged order on Sunday, writing, "Wouldn't want to hurt Putin's feelings."

Clinton was soon inundated with reminders that in the days of her political relevancy, she not only played nice with Moscow — despite its repeated aggression against neighboring nations — but signed away American resources for Russia's benefit.

'We also need to keep trying to find common ground.'

Hegseth was quick with a response. His reply on X contained no words, just an image from 2009 of then-Secretary of State Clinton cackling beside Putin's foreign minister Sergey Lavrov.

Although Clinton is now critical of the Trump administration's efforts to improve diplomatic relations with the nuclear power, at the time she and her boss thought it was a worthwhile pursuit.

The picture, taken a year after Russia's invasion of Georgia and few years ahead of Russia's invasion of the Crimean Peninsula, shows Clinton presenting Lavrov — dubbed by some Western diplomats as a "mouthpiece for Putin" — with a red button symbolizing her desire to improve relations between Washington and Moscow. The red button was emblazoned with the English word "reset." It also had what Clinton figured for the Russian word for "reset," which was actually the Russian word for "overload."

Hegseth was far from the only person to highlight an instance where Clinton previously massaged the feelings of those in the Kremlin.

One user on X asked Clinton, "This you?" referencing a video excerpt of Clinton's 2014 CNN town hall where she described her efforts to bond with Putin over endangered species and noted, "We also need to keep trying to find common ground [with Putin]."

Numerous critics also issued reminders about Clinton's role in the Uranium One deal.

During Obama's tenure in the White House, a Russian state corporation headquartered in Moscow took majority ownership of a Canadian company, Uranium One, that had significant mining interests in the United States.

Since uranium is a strategic asset, the deal ultimately required the sign-off of the State Department. The department, then run by Hillary Clinton, provided the green-light, reportedly granting the Russian state corporation control of roughly 20% of American uranium production. It's unclear whether the State Department under Clinton did so with Putin's feelings in mind.

The New York Times reported that Bill Clinton received $500,000 from a Kremlin-linked investment bank that was promoting Uranium One stock shortly after the Russians announced they sought to acquire a majority stake in the company. Months prior to the announcement, Hillary Clinton met with Putin and other high-ranking Russian officials.

Several of Uranium One's owners were Clinton Foundation donors, who collectively poured at least $145 million into the scandal-plagued outfit.

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Pentagon finally giving 'transgender' troops the boot



The Pentagon indicated in a Wednesday court filing that unless granted a waiver, troops who identify as members of the opposite sex will be removed from the military.

President Donald Trump — who vowed to "restore the Trump ban on transgenders in the military" in August 2023 — issued an executive order on Jan. 27 titled "Prioritizing Military Excellence and Readiness," effectively banning transvestites from the military.

In the order, Trump stressed that the military's policy to establish "high standards for troop readiness, lethality, cohesion, honesty, humility, uniformity, and integrity" is incompatible with the accommodations sought and health constraints faced by gender-dysphoric individuals.

Trump noted further that those "expressing a false 'gender identity'" at odds with their actual sex "cannot satisfy the rigorous standards necessary for military service" and cannot satisfy the soldier's "commitment to an honorable, truthful, and disciplined lifestyle."

'Service by these individuals is not in the best interests of the Military Services and is not clearly consistent with the interests of national security.'

The president directed Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth to update military policy accordingly.

Despite the federal lawsuit filed on Jan. 28 by GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders and the National Center for Lesbian Rights challenging Trump's order — Talbott v. Trump — Hegseth announced earlier this month that the Pentagon was pausing "all new accessions for individuals with a history of gender dysphoria" along with all sex-change procedures for service members.

The Office of the Under Secretary of Defense revealed the Pentagon's new guidance in a Wednesday court filing in Talbott.

The guidance, delineated in a 13-page memo, states:

Military service by Service members and applicants for military service who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria is incompatible with military service. Service by these individuals is not in the best interests of the Military Services and is not clearly consistent with the interests of national security. Individuals who have a current diagnosis or history of, or exhibit symptoms consistent with, gender dysphoria are no longer eligible for military service.

The guidance noted further that current service members afflicted with gender dysphoria "will be processed for separation from military service." Unless the transvestic service members' military records otherwise warrant a lower characterization, their discharges will be honorable.

According to the memo, exceptions could be made for gender-dysphoric service members if they are willing to abide by Pentagon guidelines and there is a "compelling Government interest in accessing the applicant that directly supports warfighting capabilities."

The memo directed the secretaries of each military branch to identify gender-dysphoric service members within 30 days and to proceed with "separation actions" over the following 30 days.

SPARTA Pride, an activist group that supports transvestites in the military, said in a statement, "Thousands of transgender troops are currently serving, and are fully qualified for the positions in which they serve. No policy will ever erase transgender Americans’ contribution to history, warfighting, or military excellence."

Jennifer Levi of GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders bemoaned the Pentagon's new guidance, stating, "This is a purge of unprecedented magnitude."

A recent Pentagon estimate indicates the magnitude of the removals is actually quite small. Of the roughly 2 million Americans in uniform, roughly 4,240 individuals have a diagnosis of gender dysphoria, reported the New York Times. Activists frequently suggest that the number of troops who are chronically confused about their sex serving in the military is somewhere in the neighborhood of 15,000.

The planned removal of transvestites from the military appears to be a case of history repeating itself.

Trump announced in July 2017 that "the United States Government will not accept or allow Transgender individuals to serve in any capacity in the U.S. Military." Two years later, the Trump Pentagon established a policy permitting "transgender" troops to serve so long as they didn't attempt to masquerade as members of the opposite sex or invade their spaces.

Former President Joe Biden reversed the Trump policy after taking office, stating, "America's strength is found in its diversity."

Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!

Trump Ousts Leftist Joint Chiefs Of Staff Chair, Other DEI-Pushing Military Officials

'Under President Trump, we are putting in place new leadership that will focus our military on its core mission of deterring, fighting and winning wars.'