Latest news with #Ranger
Vox
10 hours ago
- Politics
- Vox
Should women be in combat?
Women weren't allowed to officially serve in combat jobs when Emelie Vanasse started her ROTC program at George Washington University. Instead, she used her biology degree to serve as a medical officer — but it still bothered Vanasse to be shut out of something just because she was a woman. 'I always felt like, who really has the audacity to tell me that I can't be in combat arms? I'm resilient, I am tough, I can make decisions in stressful environments,' Vanasse said. By 2015, the Obama administration opened all combat jobs to women, despite a plea from senior leaders in the Marine Corps to keep certain frontline units male only. Then-Defense Secretary Ash Carter told reporters that, 'We cannot afford to cut ourselves off from half the country's talents and skills.' The policy change meant that women could attend Ranger school, the training ground for the Army Rangers, an elite special operations infantry unit. When Capt. Kristen Griest and 1st Lt. Shaye Haver became the first women to graduate from the school in 2015, Vanasse taped their photos to her desk and swore she would be next, no matter what it took. She went on to become one of the first women to serve as an Army infantry officer and graduated from Ranger school in 2017. After the Pentagon integrated women into combat jobs, the services developed specific fitness standards for jobs like infantry and armor with equal standards for men and women. Special operations and other highly specialized units require additional qualification courses that are also gender-neutral. To continue past the first day of Ranger school, candidates must pass the Ranger Physical Fitness test, for which there is only one standard. Only the semi-annual fitness tests that service members take, which vary by branch, are scaled for age and gender. Despite that, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has continued to insist that the standards were lowered for combat roles. In a podcast interview in November, Hegseth said, 'We've changed the standards in putting [women in combat], which means you've changed the capability of that unit.' (Despite Hegseth's remark, many women worked alongside male infantry units in Iraq and Afghanistan, facing the same dangerous conditions.) In the same interview, Hegseth said that he didn't believe women should serve in combat roles. In March, Hegseth ordered the military services to make the basic fitness standards for all combat jobs gender-neutral. The Army is the first service to comply: Beginning June 1, most combat specialties will require women to meet the male standard for basic physical fitness, something most women serving in active-duty combat roles are already able to do. Vanasse told Noel King on Today, Explained what it was like to attend Ranger School at a time when some men didn't want to see a woman in the ranks. What is Ranger School? I went to Ranger School on January 1, 2017. I woke up at 3 am that day in Fort Benning, Georgia, shaved my head, a quarter-inch all the way around, just like the men. Took my last hot shower, choked down some French toast, and then I drove to Camp Rogers, and I remember being very acutely aware of the pain that the school would inflict, both physically and mentally. I was also very aware that there was kind of half of this population of objective graders that just kind of hated my guts for even showing up. They hated you for showing up because you're a woman? Back in 2016 and 2017, it was so new to have women in Ranger School. I used to think, I don't have to just be good, I have to be lucky. I have to get a grader who is willing to let a woman pass. I had dark times at that school. I tasted real failure. I sat under a poncho in torrential rain and I shivered so hard my whole body cramped. I put on a ruck that weighed 130 pounds and I crawled up a mountain on my hands and knees. I hallucinated a donut shop in the middle of the Appalachian Mountains and I cried one morning when someone told me I had to get out of my sleeping bag. But I think all of those experiences are quintessential Ranger School experiences. They're what everyone goes through there. And I think the point of the school is that failure, that suffering, it's not inherently bad, right? In a way, I like to think Ranger School was the most simplistic form of gender integration that ever could have happened because if I was contributing to the team, there was no individual out there that really had the luxury of disliking or excluding me. When you wanted to give up, what did you tell yourself? What was going through your head? I don't think I ever considered quitting Ranger School. I just knew that it was something that I could get through and had the confidence to continue. I had a thought going in of What could be so bad that would make me quit? and the answer that I found throughout the school was, Nothing. Did you ever feel like they had lowered the standards for you compared to the men who were alongside you? No. Never. I did the same thing that the men did. I did the same Ranger physical fitness test that all the men took. I ran five miles in 40 minutes. I did 49 pushups, 59 situps, six pullups. I rucked 12 miles in three hours with a 45-pound ruck. I climbed the same mountains. I carried the same stuff. I carried the same exact packing list they did, plus 250 tampons for some reason. At no point were the standards lowered for me. Whose idea was it for you to carry 250 tampons? It was not mine! It was a misguided effort to have everyone very prepared for the first women coming through Ranger School. In Ranger School, there's only one standard for the fitness test. Everybody has to meet it, and that allows you to get out of Ranger School and say, 'Look, fellas, I took the same test as the men and I passed.' Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth is saying that Army combat jobs should only have one standard of fitness for both men and women. And there's part of me that thinks: Doesn't that allow the women who meet the standards to be like, look, We met the same standards as the men. Nothing suspicious here, guys. I think gender-neutral standards for combat arms are very important. It should not be discounted how important physical fitness is for combat arms. I think there's nuance in determining what is a standard that is useful for combat arms, right? But it's an important thing. And there have been gender-neutral standards for combat arms. In things like Infantry Basic Officer Leader Course, which is the initial basic training for officers going into the infantry, there are gender-neutral standards that you have to meet: You have to run five miles in 40 minutes, you have to do a 12-mile ruck. All of those standards have remained the same. Pete Hegseth is specifically referring to the Army Combat Physical Fitness test, and to a certain extent I agree, it should be gender-neutral for combat arms. But I think there's nuance in determining what exactly combat arms entails physically. Secretary Hegseth has a lot to say about women, and sometimes he says it directly and sometimes he alludes to it. What he often does is he talks about lethality as something that is critically important for the military. He says the Army in particular needs more of it, but he never really defines what he means by lethality. What is the definition as you understand it? There's a component of lethality that is physical fitness and it should not be discounted. But lethality extends far beyond that, right? It's tactical skills, it's decision-making, it's leadership, it's grit, it's the ability to build trust and instill purpose and a group of people. It's how quick a fire team in my platoon can react to contact. How well my SAW [Squad Automatic Weapon] gunner can shoot, how quickly I can employ and integrate combat assets, how fast I can maneuver a squad. All of those things take physical fitness, but they certainly take more than just physical fitness. There's more to lethality than just how fast you can run and how many pushups you can do. To an average civilian like myself, I hear lethality and I think of the dictionary definition, the ability to kill. Does this definition of lethality involve the ability, physically and emotionally and psychologically, to kill another person? Absolutely. And so when Secretary Hegseth casts doubt on the ability of women to be as lethal as men, do you think there's some stuff baked in there that maybe gets to his idea of what women are willing and able to do? Yes, possibly. I think the [secretary's] message is pretty clear. According to him, the women in combat arms achieved success because the standards were lowered for them. We were never accommodated and the standards were never lowered. What's your response, then, to hearing the Secretary of Defense say women don't belong in combat? It makes me irate, to be honest. Like, it's just a complete discounting of all of the accomplishments of the women that came before us. Do you think that if Secretary Hegseth could take a look at what you did in Ranger School, and he could hear from you that there were no second chances, there were no excuses, there was no babying, the men didn't treat you nicer just because you were a woman, do you think he'd change his mind about women serving in combat? I'd like to think he would, but I've met plenty of people whose minds couldn't be changed by reality. I'd love it if he went to Ranger School. He has a lot of opinions about Ranger School for someone who does not have his Ranger tab. What is a Ranger tab, for civilians? A Ranger tab is what you receive upon graduating Ranger School, which means you have passed all three phases and you are now Ranger-qualified in the military. You have that. And the Secretary of Defense doesn't.
Press and Journal
a day ago
- Business
- Press and Journal
Inverness security firm with 14 staff acquired
A leading Inverness security firm has been acquired by Ranger Fire and Security in a move set to boost job growth and expand fire and safety services across the Highlands and north-east. IRN Security, founded in 2011, officially joined the fast-growing Ranger Group this week. The deal marks a major step in Ranger's expansion across Scotland's fire and security sector. Headquartered in Inverness – with a footprint in Aberdeen and Glasgow – IRN has earned a strong reputation for delivering high-quality CCTV, alarm and integrated security solutions to NHS hospitals, schools, universities, and private clients. As part of the deal, IRN's co-founders Malcolm MacDonald and Kenny Smith will remain in leadership roles, and all 14 staff members will continue in their current positions. This acquisition follows Ranger's purchase of Motherwell-based Secureshield, further cementing its presence across Scotland. Kenny Smith, director at IRN Security, said the team had turned down multiple offers over the years – but this one felt different. 'The opportunity arose to be part of something really special,' he said. 'With Ranger, what they are building really excites us. 'We've had the door knocked on several occasions and it's never been right – until now.' Mr Smith explained that one of the key concerns was protecting IRN's identity and values. 'You can get swallowed up by a big multinational and lose everything that makes your business unique. That wasn't what we wanted.' For Mr Smith and Mr MacDonald, the priority was keeping the business's people and trusted service intact. 'The critical thing for us is that nothing changes,' added Mr Smith. 'The leadership stays in place, the team stays and the look and feel of how we serve clients stay exactly the same. 'We're able to keep delivering the service we're proud of and that was absolutely key for us and our staff.' Looking ahead, Mr Smith said the IRN team is confident about the road ahead. 'As a group we are here to grow. The roadmap looks excellent. It's really exciting.' The IRN acquisition brings Ranger's total headcount to 225, marking its ninth acquisition since early 2024. The group's expansion is backed by investment firm Hyperion Equity Partners and funding from ThinCats. Mark Bridges, CEO of Ranger Fire and Security, called the IRN acquisition a key milestone in the group's Scottish strategy. He said: 'With their strong regional presence, technical excellence, and a leadership team committed to delivering a first-rate customer experience, IRN Security is a natural fit for Ranger, complementing and improving the services offered by other Group businesses.' Ranger says it remains focused on becoming the UK's leading one-stop provider for fire and security services.
Yahoo
2 days ago
- General
- Yahoo
Boone man killed in Thursday morning crash on Highway 30
BOONE COUNTY, Iowa — A Boone man was killed in a crash on Highway 30 Thursday morning. At around 8:23 a.m. the Boone County Sheriff's Office and multiple other agencies responded to a report of a crash at the intersection of Montana Road and Highway 30, just southwest of Boone, involving a Ford Ranger and Ford Mustang. According to an Iowa State Patrol crash report, the Ford Ranger was traveling southbound on Montana Road and failed to yield to a Mustang that was traveling eastbound on Highway 30, and the two vehicles collided. Former Marshalltown substitute teacher accused of sexually exploiting student The driver of the Ranger, identified as 89-year-old Dale Ray Crouse of Boone, was transported to a nearby hospital but later died from his injuries, according to the sheriff's office. No other injuries were reported. Multiple agencies responded to the scene, including the Boone County Sheriff's Office, Boone Police Department, Boone Fire Department, and personnel from the Boone County Hospital. The Iowa State Patrol will be handling the investigation into the crash. Iowa News: Boone man killed in Thursday morning crash on Highway 30 Former Marshalltown substitute teacher accused of sexually exploiting student WHO 13 Farm Report: Thursday, May 29th Hawkeyes' kickoff times announced Johnston man killed in wrong-way, head-on Highway 30 crash Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
7NEWS
3 days ago
- Automotive
- 7NEWS
Ford income falls 65 per cent as Trump's tariffs bite
Ford has postponed its full-year financial forecast, and announced US President Donald Trump's tariffs introduced in April will cost it $US2.5 billion ($A2.32 billion) and as much as $US1.5 billion ($A2.32 billion) in 2025 alone. The carmaker reported a 65 per cent fall in profits for the first three months of 2025 despite tariffs not coming into effect until April 3. Ford is the second carmaker in a week to drop its forecast with arch-rival General Motors (GM) – which said it's set to lose $US5-6 billion due to the tariffs – pushed its investor call after President Trump softened tariffs. Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now. The President's move gave carmakers temporary relief from tariffs on steel, aluminium and other imports being applied in addition to the standard automotive tariff. The automotive tariff – separate to additional 'reciprocal tariffs' announced later – applies a 25 per cent duty on vehicle imports into the United States (US). A secondary tariff applying to 'key' automotive parts came into force on May 3, 2025, further impacting supply chains for US carmakers. Ford has previously said it expected to be less impacted than most rivals as it has a large US manufacturing footprint, although it still produces the Mustang Mach-E electric SUV, for example, in Mexico. It will also follow through with plans to increase highly profitable Ford F-Series Super Duty production in Ontario, Canada. The Super Duty name is set to arrive in Australian showrooms in 2026 on a tougher version of the Ranger. On Monday, May 5 the carmaker said it would not issue its usual forecast, saying the uncertainty around the tariffs prevented an accurate picture of the business for the remainder of 2025. 'Given material near-term risks, especially the potential for industry-wide supply chain disruption impacting production, the potential for future or increased tariffs in the US, changes in the implementation of tariffs including tariff offsets, retaliatory tariffs and other restrictions by other governments and the potential related market impacts, and finally policy uncertainties associated with tax and emissions policy, the company is suspending guidance,' a statement from Ford said. 'These are substantial industry risks, which could have significant impacts on financial results, and that make updating full year guidance challenging right now given the potential range of outcomes.' It said it was on target to meet its previous forecast of between $US7-8.5 billion ($A10.83-13.15 billion) EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes) and will give its next update at the end of June 2025. The US carmaker's EBIT fell 63 per cent to $US 1 billion ($A1.55 billion) in the first quarter (January-March) 2025, with revenue down five per cent to $US40.7 billion ($A62.96 billion). Ford Pro, the brand's commercial vehicle unit responsible for the Ranger, Transit and F-150 sold in Australian showrooms, made $US1.3 billion (A$2.01 billion) – but this was 56 per cent down on the same period in 2024. The Blue Oval's 'Model e' electric car division – yet to turn a profit, which saw ex-Ford Australia President Kay Hart installed as its boss in February 2025 – is expected to have its best year to date. It still posted a $US849 million loss ($1.31 billion) in the first quarter, but this was a substantial improvement over the $US1.3 billion ($A2.01 billion) loss over the same period in 2024. 'We are strengthening our underlying business with significantly better quality and our third straight quarter of year-over-year cost improvement, excluding the impact of tariffs,' Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a statement. In postponing its earnings call, cross-town rival GM's chief financial officer, Paul Jacobson, told Reuters: 'The future impact of tariffs could be significant… we're telling folks not to rely on the prior guidance, and we'll update when we have more information around tariffs.' US new vehicle sales were up 4.4 per cent year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025, led by Toyota ahead of Ford and GM, but with GM's 17 per cent year-on-year growth making it the only one of the trio posting a significant increase in sales.
West Australian
3 days ago
- Automotive
- West Australian
Ford income falls 65 per cent as Trump's tariffs bite
Ford has postponed its full-year financial forecast, and announced US President Donald Trump's tariffs introduced in April will cost it $US2.5 billion ($A2.32 billion) and as much as $US1.5 billion ($A2.32 billion) in 2025 alone. The carmaker reported a 65 per cent fall in profits for the first three months of 2025 despite tariffs not coming into effect until April 3. Ford is the second carmaker in a week to drop its forecast with arch-rival General Motors (GM) – which said it's set to lose $US5-6 billion due to the tariffs – pushed its investor call after President Trump softened tariffs. Hundreds of new car deals are available through CarExpert right now. Get the experts on your side and score a great deal. Browse now . The President's move gave carmakers temporary relief from tariffs on steel, aluminium and other imports being applied in addition to the standard automotive tariff. The automotive tariff – separate to additional 'reciprocal tariffs' announced later – applies a 25 per cent duty on vehicle imports into the United States (US). A secondary tariff applying to 'key' automotive parts came into force on May 3, 2025, further impacting supply chains for US carmakers. Ford has previously said it expected to be less impacted than most rivals as it has a large US manufacturing footprint, although it still produces the Mustang Mach-E electric SUV, for example, in Mexico. It will also follow through with plans to increase highly profitable Ford F-Series Super Duty production in Ontario, Canada. The Super Duty name is set to arrive in Australian showrooms in 2026 on a tougher version of the Ranger . On Monday, May 5 the carmaker said it would not issue its usual forecast, saying the uncertainty around the tariffs prevented an accurate picture of the business for the remainder of 2025. 'Given material near-term risks, especially the potential for industry-wide supply chain disruption impacting production, the potential for future or increased tariffs in the US, changes in the implementation of tariffs including tariff offsets, retaliatory tariffs and other restrictions by other governments and the potential related market impacts, and finally policy uncertainties associated with tax and emissions policy, the company is suspending guidance,' a statement from Ford said. 'These are substantial industry risks, which could have significant impacts on financial results, and that make updating full year guidance challenging right now given the potential range of outcomes.' It said it was on target to meet its previous forecast of between $US7-8.5 billion ($A10.83-13.15 billion) EBIT (Earnings Before Interest and Taxes) and will give its next update at the end of June 2025. The US carmaker's EBIT fell 63 per cent to $US 1 billion ($A1.55 billion) in the first quarter (January-March) 2025, with revenue down five per cent to $US40.7 billion ($A62.96 billion). Ford Pro, the brand's commercial vehicle unit responsible for the Ranger, Transit and F-150 sold in Australian showrooms, made $US1.3 billion (A$2.01 billion) – but this was 56 per cent down on the same period in 2024. The Blue Oval's 'Model e' electric car division – yet to turn a profit, which saw ex-Ford Australia President Kay Hart installed as its boss in February 2025 – is expected to have its best year to date. It still posted a $US849 million loss ($1.31 billion) in the first quarter, but this was a substantial improvement over the $US1.3 billion ($A2.01 billion) loss over the same period in 2024. 'We are strengthening our underlying business with significantly better quality and our third straight quarter of year-over-year cost improvement, excluding the impact of tariffs,' Ford CEO Jim Farley said in a statement. In postponing its earnings call, cross-town rival GM's chief financial officer, Paul Jacobson, told Reuters : 'The future impact of tariffs could be significant… we're telling folks not to rely on the prior guidance, and we'll update when we have more information around tariffs.' US new vehicle sales were up 4.4 per cent year-on-year in the first quarter of 2025, led by Toyota ahead of Ford and GM, but with GM's 17 per cent year-on-year growth making it the only one of the trio posting a significant increase in sales.
