The Fighting Future is Female?

The Army Times brings us saddening news:

Officials at Fort Bliss confirmed Monday that the FBI is investigating the alleged assault of a female soldier at Fort Bliss, Texas, by several male Afghan refugees.

"The investigation is currently with the FBI and have since provided acknowledgement that they received the case from Fort Bliss," said Lt. Col. Allie Payne, 1st Armored Division spokeswoman, in a statement emailed to Military Times.

According to Payne, the incident occurred on Sept. 19 when a "small group of male evacuees" at the Doña Ana Complex in New Mexico allegedly assaulted a female servicemember.

While Payne declined to comment on specific details of the assault, she did say that the soldier received medical care and counseling in the wake of the attack.

The perpetrators are, of course, Afghan "refugees" that the United States rescued from the medieval tyranny of the Taliban, at vast expense and bother, when we abruptly decided to stop supporting their existing corrupt and incompetent but not particularly bloodthirsty government.  Whether or not that was a good idea, it's certainly the case that they are spreading both crime and disease, having been neither medically tested nor effectively vetted or even searched.

But that's a topic for a different article, and a problem for another day.  Today, let's consider the strange events reported above: This trained member of our military was attacked on her own military base while she was deployed on active duty defending our country.

Think about this for a moment: Somehow, criminals are - what, just wandering around a U.S. military base in wolfpacks looking for people to attack?  What sort of security do we have there?

Payne told Military Times that the installation "took an in-depth review" of protocols after the report was made.

"Since that date, we reiterated the established buddy-system, installed security cameras and monitoring systems with staff, increased lighting, and increased our health and safety patrols in the village," Payne said.

Somehow we do not find this reassuring.  The Lt. Col. is now instructing his soldiers to travel in pairs for their own safety on their own military base under his command?   Dare we wonder what other sort of things might be found on that base that we wouldn't want the bad guys to have access to - yet, our own soldiers are not safe in the same space?

Do we need to remove our tanks, guns, planes, and nukes from this base for their safety?  Or, just possibly, we should remove the bad guys or, at least, non-Americans?

But there's an even more scandalous problem: The purpose of soldiers is specifically to be dangerous to the enemy.  Our warfighters are reputed to be the best-trained and equipped military force in all of human history; for sure, they are overwhelmingly the most expensive.

At present, they are led by, at best, an utterly incompetent and feckless pack of buffoons, at worst by profoundly corrupt traitors - but that needn't affect their own personal dangerousness.  And as far as motivation to take violent acton to ward off serious bodily harm, being sexually assaulted is pretty much at the top of the list.

Yet, the article tells us, the lady soldier received "medical care and counseling" - as well she should.  What about the attackers?  Did they receive medical care?  Or were their dismembered corpses carefully scraped up with spoons and loaded into closed caskets?

The article doesn't say, but we'd imagine that the sort of bloodbath we'd expect from the spiritual descendants of, say, Sergeant York or General Patton would have scandalized lily-livered reporters the world around.  But, nothing.

No, we can only conclude that, while the lady soldier required hospitalization, her attackers needed nothing in particular.

Now, in no way are we suggesting that any woman deserves to be sexually assaulted - nothing could be further from the truth.  Similarly, we ought not to live in a world in which women must routinely defend their virtue by force.  Clearly, Fort Bliss has been permitted to become that sort of world - and yet, one of history's most highly-trained dealers of deadly violence, presented with the ultimate motivation to do so, dealt... nothing at all.

Let's be fair: as is typical these days, the news reports only what they want to see, without regard to the truth, to say nothing of the whole picture.  It's possible the numberless "several" male Afghans snuck up behind her with catlike tread and coshed her from behind; that could happen to Rambo or even James Bond.  Such a sneak-attack would make for an irresistibly newsworthy tidbit, though, and there's no sign of that in any report we've seen.

No, what seems to be the case is this: the lady soldier was involved in an altercation with the Afghans, who overpowered her and abused her without her even doing any noticeable damage to them before, during, or afterwards.

What, then do we expect her to do to an enemy?  What kind of soldiers are we training, honoring, and counting on for our national defense

Can it possibly be that, contrary to every dogma of leftist wokeism, that women simply are smaller and weaker than men and inherently less capable of inflicting personal damage no matter how well-trained or highly motivated?

We can't help but notice that our ruling Democrats are all-in, with the cooperation of a fair number of Republicans, for extending the draft to the weaker sex. Maybe they actively want us to be conquered and humiliated as this unfortunate young woman was, in the very place where she should be safest of all?