U.S. Military May Lift Submarine Ban
By Wyatt Earp | September 28, 2009
What’s long, hard, and full of seamen?
A submarine, of course! Although that old joke may have to be re-worded to include sea-women if the Pentagon has its way. American military officials are reconsidering the ban on women serving aboard submarines, a decision that could “excite” some of our brave sailing men.
WASHINGTON – Top Pentagon officials are calling for an end to the U.S. military’s historical ban on allowing women to serve in submarines.
Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the top U.S. military officer, advocated the policy change in written congressional testimony distributed by his office to reporters on Friday.
“I believe we should continue to broaden opportunities for women. One policy I would like to see changed is the one barring (women’s) service aboard submarines,” Mullen said.
Navy Secretary Ray Mabus said he was “moving out aggressively on this.” (H/T – )
Yeah, and so will hundreds of submariners the second the first hot babe steps onto the deck. I imagine there will be many calls for female sailors to “Prepare to be boarded.”
Topics: The Troops | 13 Comments »
September 28th, 2009 at 8:53 pm
Obviously, the Submarine Service will have to make a few changes…
Out – “Anchors Aweigh.”
In – “Dive! Dive! Dive!” by Bruce Dickinson of Iron Maiden fame:
“…Seaman Staines is down below/
Torpedoes loaded, he’s ready to go.
Wait to discharge, wait to release/
Swing wide around, come up from below!
Gonna blow you ‘midships!
Gonna dive tonight!
There’s no release
‘Til you’re deep down inside!
Dive! Dive! Dive!
Dive! Dive! Dive!
No m*ff too tuff
We dive at five!
Etc. …”
September 28th, 2009 at 9:00 pm
I shudda coulda been a frog! Cant swim, but boy can I ever dive!
September 28th, 2009 at 9:18 pm
More submarine races?
September 28th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
Great just what the Navy needs, more love boats. When I was in only the support ships had women on them and from what I hear they could make a lot of money on the side if you know what I mean.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:34 pm
Yeah who needs to be distracted. I have seen what happens in the firehouse and we’re not hundreds of feet below the waves. Idiotic.
September 28th, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Wes S. – You just made Captain America very happy.
Alan – Especially where it counts.
Proof – It’s the only way to fly!
Rob D – Hey, pimpin’ ain’t easy. Especially in the armed forces.
Captain – The flip side of that is that if these women look anything like a lot of female Philly cops, there should be no problem at all. Blecch!
September 29th, 2009 at 12:46 am
From what I have seen, not a lot of super pretty women in the Navy. But after 2 months under water I suspect they are all pretty.
September 29th, 2009 at 12:48 am
Hey Rob, might as well keep the money with Americans instead of Thai or Filipino women.
September 29th, 2009 at 2:36 am
It’s going to happen, and the divorce rate in the Subs will jump up to match the rest of the Navy…sigh…
September 29th, 2009 at 6:41 am
Back in the 80′s this idea was floated for the crewing of Fast Attack boats. They use two crews, one the Blue Crew and the other the Gold Crew. The idea was to have one of the crews be female. There was no proposal to put women aboard SSBNs. Three letters, PMS. Not a good idea on a Trident with 24 in the tubes.
Fast Attack boats are hunter-killers and not armed with MIRV equipped Trident ICBMs.
Mind you this was in the early 1980′s.
September 29th, 2009 at 11:34 am
Ingineer66 – Good point. Time heals all uglies.
Old NFO – And the police department.
Glenn – PMS. It’s why we can’t elect Hillary POTUS. Heh.
September 29th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
Is the starboard one bigger?
September 30th, 2009 at 9:50 am
Jon – Damned good question.