Quote:
Originally Posted by Mohoender
And this idea doesn't reflect my opinion on women capabilities.
|
Mohoender,
Agreed, and please accept my apologies for any sarcasm. It was meant somewhat in jest, but we must be careful about opening any cans of worms, too.
As for Germany, in either the v1 or v2 timeline they started the European phase of the war in 1996 for what are nationalist reasons. It's not hard to see that at that time a similar court judgment could have been handed down a few years early during the time of patriotic fervor, nationalist feeling and the buildup to war.
At any rate, let's not lose focus here on the EFCP:
(Continued.)
The EFCP was successful enough that similar programs were adopted in West Germany/the newly unified FRG (depending on the timeline) and other NATO allies.
The EFCP was not without its problems. The reality of combat in the front lines meant that the program couldn't always be adequately monitored, even when there were resources to do so. Such radical-seeming changes went against centuries of US military tradition and a highly masculine sub-culture, although most objections were overcome in through by simple necessity. Some elements never did accept the change wholeheartedly, and concerns over issues like reverse-discrimination and the lowering of crucial standards could not always be dismissed out of hand. Nevertheless, it can't be ignored that the inclusion of women in universal service (the draft) and on the front lines through the EFCP provided a much-needed boost to critical personnel at a crucial time.
More seriously, it could be argued that the same alteration (some might say lowering) of accepted standards allowed less-desirable elements into the US military. The greater inclusion of women into the military and further into front-line combat collided with the influx of a core hardened criminal element that had been accepted into military service for one reason or another.
It is impossible to determine statistics but it's possible that as many as 20-25% or more of inductees in 1997 and after in the US military had some kind of criminal record, up to and including felony convictions such as theft, violent assault, drug charges, even murder and sexual assault. Gang membership in the military far exceeded that of the general population. The means to conduct extensive background checks on recruits simply no longer existed in most areas, and what capacity to do so was overwhelmed after the adoption of universal compulsory military service.
Further, a considerable portion of the corrections population was conscripted into military service, and not without a certain kind of logic. Namely, there was little means or political will to continue feeding them. Letting criminals fulfill their debt to society by serving in uniform has a long historical precedent. While many acquitted themselves admirably (so to speak), others did not and criminal activity such as drug trafficking, black market activity and arms dealing flourished despite increasingly harsh measures. The relaxation of supervision and eventual breakdown in morale and disciple put the large influx of female conscripts squarely on a collision course with various former and current criminal elements, especially those with a history of violence or sexual assault against women. Interestingly, women serving in combat units through the EFCP experienced lower level of sexual harassment and sexual assault (rape), but few were completely immune.
Eventually, many criminal-soldiers (from almost all nations) put their training and weapons to personal and illegal use, commonly forming the core of the gangs that were called "Marauders" during the Twilight War. In the USA, a few that chose to remain in military service during the latter stages of the war sided with the federal government but many remained chose to back MILGOV for different reasons, mainly due to a lack of loyalty to civil society in general.
Tony