quote:

ORIGINAL: Yogi the Great

quote:

ORIGINAL: warspite1


Can I suggest that we bring this thread to a halt now?

The case for and against has been made and strongly argued by both sides, but the danger now is that - with nothing really new to add - the thread runs the risk of descending into more heated comments with all that that means.

And thus warspite1 joined the ranks of histories great predictors of the future. [;)]

[image]http://static.ddmcdn.com/gif/1-nostradamus.jpg[/image]
Warspite's uncle Nostradamus

quote:

ORIGINAL: t001001001

I use bbs like a shrink's couch. During the day u bite ur tongue and try not to whine too much, b/c it lowers morale and bores everyone to death anyway. It's still nice to kick back sometimes and scream. Get's out the bad blood.

SLAAKMAN, I bought you a ticket for the next Carnival cruise. Once the food runs out the pretty ladies aboard will do anything. Tell im u got a banana and retire to ur cabin. ur all set, brah. You're welcome.

quote:

I use bbs like a shrink's couch. During the day u bite ur tongue and try not to whine too much, b/c it lowers morale and bores everyone to death anyway. It's still nice to kick back sometimes and scream. Get's out the bad blood.

SLAAKMAN, I bought you a ticket for the next Carnival cruise. Once the food runs out the pretty ladies aboard will do anything. Tell im u got a banana and retire to ur cabin. ur all set, brah. You're welcome.

quote:

ORIGINAL: SLAAKMAN

THE MAN-OF-CLUCK,

quote:

I use bbs like a shrink's couch. During the day u bite ur tongue and try not to whine too much, b/c it lowers morale and bores everyone to death anyway. It's still nice to kick back sometimes and scream. Get's out the bad blood.

SLAAKMAN, I bought you a ticket for the next Carnival cruise. Once the food runs out the pretty ladies aboard will do anything. Tell im u got a banana and retire to ur cabin. ur all set, brah. You're welcome.

SO WHO DO YOU CHOOSE MISTACHICKEN? IS MELISSA STILL YOUR BETROTHED IN THE HERE-AFTER? U KNOW CELIBACY ONLY LEADS TO MORE NEST POLLUTION & BEAK ABSOLUTION;

PIRATES SEEK AMAZON BOOTY
http://www.matrixgames.com/forums/tm.asp?m=3240722
[image]http://44aml.itocd.net/www/images/girl/1169601-1169800/79398b18-9a07-4f07-afac-62d69adb5e4f.jpg[/image]

quote:

Conservatives often stand accused these days of standing outside the "reality-based community." Yet liberals can be blinded by ideology, and nowhere is this more true than in the debate over women in combat.

Over the past two decades, the United States has moved steadily to open all military roles to women. Last month, departing Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta removed the last barriers. Women may henceforward qualify for every duty, including combat infantry. The few - very few - public objections raised to this decision were met with derision rather than argument, well represented by this sneering item from the Daily Show. [link omitted here]

Yet to deny the highly combat-relevant differences between the sexes is to deny reality as blatantly as ever done by any anti-evolutionist - and with potentially much more lethal consequence.

In 2007, Kingsley Browne gathered the evidence in a clear and concise book, Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn't Fight the Nation's Wars. The case presented by Browne won't come as news to any military decision-maker. But it will and should jolt those who have relied on too credulous media sources for their information about what soldiers do and how they do it.

...

The military executes missions, and the generals and admirals understand that one of their most important missions - from the point of view of their personal advancement - is to recruit sufficient numbers of women to please their political masters. The only way to achieve that mission is to operate very unequal standards.

...

Sex integration has tangled the military in double standards and collective denial. The Army, Browne reports, maintains an unofficial policy whereby women - but not men - showers in the field every 72 hours. This practice is not written down, but it's observed by the troops as another example of a demoralizing military culture of denial and lying. Browne quotes interviews of enlisted men by military sociologist Laura Miller:

quote:

"Today all you hear in the Army is that we are equal, but men do all the hard and heavy work whether it's combat or not."

"The majority of females I know are not soldiers. They are employed. Anything strenuous is avoided with a passion. I would hate to serve with them during combat! I would end up doing my job and 2/3 of theirs just to stay alive."

(LOC 3644)

More cutting still, Browne repeats a bitter military joke that true equality will arrive - not when women receive Medals of Honor (since it will be suspected that the standards were bent in their favor) - but when women "can be subject to a court-martial for cowardly conduct."

...

4) It is on the point of "fairness" that Browne expresses himself most scathingly. It's not the military's job to be "fair." It is the military's job to win wars. Our society values freedom of speech. It values the right to elect leaders. It values individual choice and market competition. All of those values are suspended in the military, sacrificed to the paramount need for military effectiveness. Yet on gender issues, the military seems to have decided that the desire of a relatively very small number of female officers to reach the highest levels of command trumps the necessities of national defense.

...

Too many draw an analogy between sex distinctions and the military's discredited history of racial discrimination. Browne urges us to think of sex as a distinction more like age.

quote:

[W]hat would happen if the United States had fifteen thousand sixty-year-old men in Iraq and Afghanistan instead of fifteen thousand women. If it did, many of these older men would undoubtedly behave bravely. Would these stories be persuasive evidence that the military should allow sixty-year-olds to enlist? Not at all. The relevant question is whether the sixty-year-old men are as effective in combat as twenty-year-old mean, and few would be (or be expected to be).

(LOC 3943)

Co-ed Combat depicts a country that seems to have made up its collective mind that it need not worry about ever again fighting a major war against a capable enemy - A country so confident in its margin of superiority that it can afford deliberately to weaken its own military performance for reasons of pure ideology. And this time it is the so-called progressive side that treats facts as unwelcome intruders.

quote:

Sara Lister, [the Clinton-era] Assistant Secretary of the Army for Manpower and Reserve Affairs, candidly stated that the Army does not publicly discuss strength and pregnancy issues because "those subjects quickly become fodder for conservatives seeking to limit women's role in the Army."

(LOC 3831)

Well, yeah. But if your preferred policy can only be advanced by concealing relevant facts, isn't that a blaring warning of a bad policy? A big, rich country like the United States can afford many mistakes. But in this case, the mistakes will exact a cost in lives sacrificed and - very conceivably - future battles lost.

quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski

What kind of a man is it who can send women off to kill and maim? What kind of society does that?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski

What kind of a man is it who can send women off to kill and maim? What kind of society does that?

What kind of society sends ANYONE to kill and maim?

quote:

What kind of society sends ANYONE to kill and maim?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

What kind of society sends ANYONE to kill and maim?

quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski

Well, according to the Washington Post:

"To graduate from boot camp, soldiers must perform 35 pushups and 47 situps and run two miles in at least 16 minutes and 36 seconds — but that’s only for male soldiers.
Female troops are required to do 13 pushups and 43 situps and run two miles in 19 minutes and 42 seconds."

And:

"In the 1990s, the British army, under political pressure to put women in traditional male jobs, adopted a “gender-free” policy with identical fitness requirements for both sexes and abandoned its “gender fair” system of separate standards.
A decade later, Dr. Ian Gemmel conducted a study for the British army’s personnel center. He found that the number of women who could qualify for basic training decreased in the “gender-free” system, as more women dropped out of training because of injury, compared with the “gender fair” system of separate fitness requirements.
This study confirms and quantifies the excess risk for women when they undertake the same arduous training as male recruits,” Dr. Gemmel reported."


Why is there a difference? I think it is self explanatory.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/30/army-may-train-women-for-rigor-of-front-lines/?page=all

quote:

ORIGINAL: Titanwarrior89

Interesting article.

quote:

ORIGINAL: parusski

Well, according to the Washington Post:

"To graduate from boot camp, soldiers must perform 35 pushups and 47 situps and run two miles in at least 16 minutes and 36 seconds — but that’s only for male soldiers.
Female troops are required to do 13 pushups and 43 situps and run two miles in 19 minutes and 42 seconds."

And:

"In the 1990s, the British army, under political pressure to put women in traditional male jobs, adopted a “gender-free” policy with identical fitness requirements for both sexes and abandoned its “gender fair” system of separate standards.
A decade later, Dr. Ian Gemmel conducted a study for the British army’s personnel center. He found that the number of women who could qualify for basic training decreased in the “gender-free” system, as more women dropped out of training because of injury, compared with the “gender fair” system of separate fitness requirements.
This study confirms and quantifies the excess risk for women when they undertake the same arduous training as male recruits,” Dr. Gemmel reported."


Why is there a difference? I think it is self explanatory.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/jul/30/army-may-train-women-for-rigor-of-front-lines/?page=all

quote:

ORIGINAL: Sarge

quote:

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

What kind of society sends ANYONE to kill and maim?

Never mind Matti's hobby is wargamming …………… [sm=00000280.gif]





PS/Edit:more proof the hobby has been infiltrated by peace loving hippies ………..[;)]

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns
Note the two backpacks of the women being carried by men in the unit.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

My nephew sent me this image and it reminded me of this old thread. Looks like the standards are already starting to drop to allow women to pass training in the infantry. Note the two backpacks of the women being carried by men in the unit.

[image]local://upfiles/5815/FB1DDAA4893546C5ACE24EBFAA6D9007.jpg[/image]

Jim

quote:

ORIGINAL: Ostwindflak

Why would the unit leader allow this to happen in the first place?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

The length of their strides tells me this is a training hump and they're moving at a very brisk pace. All I can say is if a man failed to carry his own pack during training, he'd be cashiered from the program and sent to a physical fitness platoon to get into shape before being allowed back into training. If he failed to get into shape he'd be discharged from service.

Imagine these women carrying these packs in combat along with their rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammo. Now imagine they're humping up a mountain in Afghanistan under fire, simply put they won't make it and will force the unit to stop. People are going to die because of this PC agenda trying to force feed women into combat roles.

Jim

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zap

quote:

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

The length of their strides tells me this is a training hump and they're moving at a very brisk pace. All I can say is if a man failed to carry his own pack during training, he'd be cashiered from the program and sent to a physical fitness platoon to get into shape before being allowed back into training. If he failed to get into shape he'd be discharged from service.

Imagine these women carrying these packs in combat along with their rifles and hundreds of rounds of ammo. Now imagine they're humping up a mountain in Afghanistan under fire, simply put they won't make it and will force the unit to stop. People are going to die because of this PC agenda trying to force feed women into combat roles.

Jim

I agree with all your points of concern. I was just joking in my previous post.