RE: Women In the Infantry

RE: Women In the Infantry (Full Version)

All Forums >> [General] >> General Discussion

Message

DOCUP -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 1:45:25 PM)
Laszlozoltan: Yes, I have a problem with women being captured or tortured. I also have a problem with the same happening to men. I don't like war any more than you do. I would love to see an end to all of man kinds suffering. But it won't happen just like war will always be here. I do not know what country or region you are from. I also don't know of your upbringing. You may think that I am not intelligent enough since I was in the military. I hold 3 different college degree's. I joined because I felt that I had a debt to pay to those men and women who kept me free, either during war time or peace time. I also wanted college money, I was smart enought to realize that my parents could not afford my tuition and planned a way for me to repay my debt and get a free education along with job training. I got to see the world, different cultures, grow up and respect what I have and to hold on to it. In most cases military personnel do not start wars. It is the politicans that do. I also do not agree with the vicious attack on MrRoadrunner. That was uncalled for and very rude. I took that as an insult to me also. I responded to your message in a polite and open way. I am more than willing to listen to yours or anyone elses thoughts on this matter. But lets be adults here and respect everyone elses. I understand tempers can flare up and get the best of us. Be an adult and apologize to MrRoadrunner and show us that you are a person that can sit down and express his/her opinions openly and respectfully. If you can do this I will do the same to you. Have a nice day.

MrRoadrunner -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 2:14:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: laszlozoltan quote: ORIGINAL: MrRoadrunner Is this serious thought? First off, people do not join to "die for their country". That is one of the stupidest things I hear parroted often. A person joins to serve their country and protect it (and The Constitution) from outside harm. Any one who served can tell you that a soldier is willing to lay down his life for a fellow soldier. I was being facetious about the dying for you country, just like the joke that you joined to serve your country and protect it and the constitution- because be honest, you didn't- you did it to serve yourself by agreeing to try to kill someone else on orders from your commander, right? you maybe finished high school and had nowhere to go other than flipping burgers at mcdonalds, or you got a college degree in basket weaving or some other field that left you pretty much unqualified for doing anything more than flipping burgers at mcdonalds, except this time you'd have a sheepskin to hang on the wall beside the grill station- so you thought you'd escape the rat race that everyone else has to fight through and go into this gentle, mans world where all your decisions are made for you; a world of men, living with men, sleeping with men, eating, showering, crapping and no women to bother you. Ah yes ! How proud you must have felt when you signed up and got though basic training- but the real secret that you never told anyone is why you really joined. Thats the joke. Equal rights does not mean equal ability. Especially in the area of physical ability. It's not about push ups or the ability to keep up on a run. It's about a woman being able to assist picking up a wounded 200 lb man and carrying him to safety. It's also about the male inherent instinct to protect females. There are differences between men and women that should be kept that way. The military has reduced standards for physical requirements to allow women to serve. That is a fact. Gender difference exists and it needs to be addressed properly. Question: how many soldiers could meet the standard requirements 5 years into the service ? most folk get older get lazier, get comfortable, get fat. gender difference means nothing- not in the age of firearms, neither does age, or health- a 200 pound soldier is too heavy; there are no 200 pound marathon runners, or competitive swimmers or cyclists- you go on about physical ability, but ignore the limitations- what purpose do push-ups serve in combat ? women peak around age 30 and maintain physical strength and ability through to age 50+ while men generally peak around 30 and start to decline thereafter. You are just pulling rules for standard requirements as though it has any relevance to the job- exerting political force through the barrel of a gun, which as we have seen since firearms came into the picture, is childs play. so wheres your gender difference now ? sorry mr delta force ranger commander, your 24hour record pushups meant nothing to the kid who got you with the ak 47 Does a woman have equal rights as a citizen, of course. Do those rights ensure her she can join and serve, of course. But those rights should also be pared with the ability to perform the tasks needed to be part of the team. Put them through the PT and obstacle courses from twenty to thirty years ago and require them to keep up will make them quite equal, if they can complete them. Equality as you seem think is what turned the French Revolution into a bloody and negative event. Why do you bring blacks into the discussion for? boy, my argument went way over your head in that one huh ? I am wondering how Dr Suess might put this for you, Sam; I used as hypothetical ( that means "I made it up for the sake of the argument") statement to construct a rule which I could use to exclude a percentage of people (they be of any other color) for no other reason than the sake of exclusion. The rest of your post is just rubbish as well, and as you seem to be unable to deal with concepts I might as well leave this at that. Most of your comments seem to come from the "progressive" playbook. You bring out old canards, such as "flipping burgers is bad, so a young man joins the military to kill people and collect a paycheck." You talk about getting old and everyone loses strength. That was not the point at all. Most women who have joined the military do not meet the strength and endurance standards of years ago. The military was made to lower standards so that women could pass the physical tests. You brought up the black issue. Now you want to belittle me over going down your rabbit trail? Progressives always want others to respect their opinions, while not respecting the opinions of others. This form of making fun of the way a person thinks is part of the progressive agenda. I may have been foolish to comment on your "rabbit trail" thought. I am spot on that you have an agenda that goes far beyond women serving in the military. That is just a means to an end that you know you want. Put together a better argument, stop erecting straw men or creating diversions, and quit with the sarcastic comments meant to belittle any poster. I've seen personal attacks before. I will continue to do so. Water off a ducks back as far as I am concerned. I do not think that your comments went over my head as much as under my feet. RR

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 3:29:39 PM)
There are a multitude of real problems in allowing women in combat, but consider this : When soldiers deploy they live together, sleep together, eat together, shower together, and bleed together. So will women be given separate quarters and showers? What if a female platoon leader (in charge of 40 men) becomes pregnant? Will she go home? Will she have to stay in combat? What if she is the only female in the platoon … does she not have to bunk with a man? The issues of pregnancy are most disturbing, women who become pregnant are allowed to immediately resign. So if we are discussing fairness then women should be forced to stay in the military and carry the baby to full term, even if in combat. If one is appalled by this notion, then the entire argument is built on wet sand.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 3:34:11 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt quote: ORIGINAL: parusski But why don't you respond to the ideas that women should play in the NFL, NBA, MLB and NCAA against men? Let's back away from hippies, strawmen and soap operas. So, Qwixt, since blacks were discriminated against based on perceived(wrongly)social inferiority let's leave that tired argument alone. If you have no problem with women in combat, do you agree that women's restrooms should be open to men?? Should college sororities be open to men joining? Finally, should women's Olympic mountain biking, which has separate men's and women's competions, be integrated? PLEASE just tell us you support these ideas. If you do, then I applaud your consistency. Here is my post (#12) from the first page: quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt I don't think they belong on the front lines because men and women are not physically equal. They just aren't. I was in a combat MOS in the army, 12B, and the physical lifting requirements were quite demanding. I think most females would have been a weakness. Our battalion had a 100 mile march context to see which two companies would represent it in an event. It was between 4 companies that sent about 15-20 people each. Two of them were support companies with females, and the other two were combat (like mine) or just sent men. The two with females couldn't even complete the event. You really need to read better. I did read and re-read the referenced post. I am still not sure how the post you referred to are a response to my proposals. So, I try again. Do you support full integration of college and professional sports teams?? Should women's restrooms be open to men? If not, why?

Qwixt -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 3:44:32 PM)
I kind of thought this had it covered 100%, "I don't think they belong on the front lines because men and women are not physically equal." Now given that why would I support integration of sports. I think there are shared restrooms already with nothing but stalls. I've never used one though. I think both genders prefer to keep them separate for obvious reasons.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 4:10:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt I kind of thought this had it covered 100%, "I don't think they belong on the front lines because men and women are not physically equal." Now given that why would I support integration of sports. I think there are shared restrooms already with nothing but stalls. I've never used one though. I think both genders prefer to keep them separate for obvious reasons. If one supports allowing women in combat, it follows that all sports should be integrated on the terms of equality. If women can participate in the most violent and destructive activity known to man, then they should be able to play pro-football as a linebacker, or even a half-back.

Aurelian -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 4:57:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt I kind of thought this had it covered 100%, "I don't think they belong on the front lines because men and women are not physically equal." Now given that why would I support integration of sports. I think there are shared restrooms already with nothing but stalls. I've never used one though. I think both genders prefer to keep them separate for obvious reasons. If one supports allowing women in combat, it follows that all sports should be integrated on the terms of equality. If women can participate in the most violent and destructive activity known to man, then they should be able to play pro-football as a linebacker, or even a half-back. Is there any law that prevents it?

barkman44 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 7:18:53 PM)
Frontline abortions perhaps?the military has its own judicial service does'nt it. anyway there is a problem with a society that tries to make its men pansies and its women men [darius's statement at the battle of salamae"My men fight like women and my women fight like men"keeps coming to mind] Alot of women can't cope with the stress of pms how are they going to handle the stress of actual combat? really how many REAL men are going to stand by and let a women volunteer for a dangerous assignment while he stays back thats just not chivalrous so they will take her place and get killed instead because the military has to be pc. like dirty harry said in the enforcer"thats a hell of a price to pay to be stylish". quote: ORIGINAL: parusski There are a multitude of real problems in allowing women in combat, but consider this : When soldiers deploy they live together, sleep together, eat together, shower together, and bleed together. So will women be given separate quarters and showers? What if a female platoon leader (in charge of 40 men) becomes pregnant? Will she go home? Will she have to stay in combat? What if she is the only female in the platoon … does she not have to bunk with a man? The issues of pregnancy are most disturbing, women who become pregnant are allowed to immediately resign. So if we are discussing fairness then women should be forced to stay in the military and carry the baby to full term, even if in combat. If one is appalled by this notion, then the entire argument is built on wet sand.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 7:34:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: barkorn45 Frontline abortions perhaps?the military has its own judicial service does'nt it. anyway there is a problem with a society that tries to make its men pansies and its women men [darius's statement at the battle of salamae"My men fight like women and my women fight like men"keeps coming to mind] Alot of women can't cope with the stress of pms how are they going to handle the stress of actual combat? really how many REAL men are going to stand by and let a women volunteer for a dangerous assignment while he stays back thats just not chivalrous so they will take her place and get killed instead because the military has to be pc. like dirty harry said in the enforcer"thats a hell of a price to pay to be stylish". quote: ORIGINAL: parusski There are a multitude of real problems in allowing women in combat, but consider this : When soldiers deploy they live together, sleep together, eat together, shower together, and bleed together. So will women be given separate quarters and showers? What if a female platoon leader (in charge of 40 men) becomes pregnant? Will she go home? Will she have to stay in combat? What if she is the only female in the platoon … does she not have to bunk with a man? The issues of pregnancy are most disturbing, women who become pregnant are allowed to immediately resign. So if we are discussing fairness then women should be forced to stay in the military and carry the baby to full term, even if in combat. If one is appalled by this notion, then the entire argument is built on wet sand. Right on the money. Loved the Eastwood quote.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 7:35:33 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt I kind of thought this had it covered 100%, "I don't think they belong on the front lines because men and women are not physically equal." Now given that why would I support integration of sports. I think there are shared restrooms already with nothing but stalls. I've never used one though. I think both genders prefer to keep them separate for obvious reasons. If one supports allowing women in combat, it follows that all sports should be integrated on the terms of equality. If women can participate in the most violent and destructive activity known to man, then they should be able to play pro-football as a linebacker, or even a half-back. Is there any law that prevents it? Prevents what?

warspite1 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 7:48:17 PM)
So in time of war, a unit is deployed overseas. An Infantry(wo)man then gets pregnant. Is this a court-martial offence? Is she effectively a desserter?

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 7:54:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So in time of war, a unit is deployed overseas. An Infantry(wo)man then gets pregnant. Is this a court-martial offence? Is she effectively a desserter? You know better. In the US military if a woman gets pregnant she is given a choice of a leave or resignation. How is that for equality...oh wait, men can't just resign or get a leave of absence. That would be great for morale and unit cohesion if the pregnant soldier was a platoon leader.

warspite1 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 8:01:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So in time of war, a unit is deployed overseas. An Infantry(wo)man then gets pregnant. Is this a court-martial offence? Is she effectively a desserter? You know better. In the US military if a woman gets pregnant she is given a choice of a leave or resignation. How is that for equality...oh wait, men can't just resign or get a leave of absence. That would be great for morale and unit cohesion if the pregnant soldier was a platoon leader. warspite1 I don't know "better". I was simply asking a question to better understand this subject. So what you say for the US military is true even in time of war?

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 8:15:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So in time of war, a unit is deployed overseas. An Infantry(wo)man then gets pregnant. Is this a court-martial offence? Is she effectively a desserter? You know better. In the US military if a woman gets pregnant she is given a choice of a leave or resignation. How is that for equality...oh wait, men can't just resign or get a leave of absence. That would be great for morale and unit cohesion if the pregnant soldier was a platoon leader. warspite1 I don't know "better". I was simply asking a question to better understand this subject. So what you say for the US military is true even in time of war? Sorry Mc Collegue, I meant to put a smiley face at the end of the "...know better" line. Yes it is true in time of war. If we have no problem with women in combat then women are the same as men. If that is the case then we accept there are no differences, therefore pregnancy should receive no special consideration. Fight right up till the baby pops out. I don't think those who support women in combat will accept that. Just like the supporters would have a collective fit if women were told "you are just like you male counterparts, so you MUST shower together". That's not likely to happen either.

barkman44 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 8:18:25 PM)
Men and women think and behave differently theres no avoiding that fact. Hasbro made an interesting study which came to that conclusion males are just more aggressive and women are naturally nuturing in nature and this extends to other species,they filled a room with toys and put young chimpanzees in it. the males gravitated to the masculine toys ie balls blocks toy weapons etc. the females went to the dolls. hasbro tried to market a "gender"free playhouse when it came to playing with the toy baby included the girls would put it in its bed and let it sleep while the boys would put it in its carriage and roll it off the roof! i was talking to a guy who's wife wanted their daughter to be less stereotyped as a female so he got her a train set after messing with it for awhile she wrapped the locomotive up in a blanket and put it in bed so it could take a nap. Women are instictivly nuturing in nature and to force them to do things against that nature like killing and destoying things will have dire consequences i'm afraid

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 8:42:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: barkorn45 Men and women think and behave differently theres no avoiding that fact. Hasbro made an interesting study which came to that conclusion males are just more aggressive and women are naturally nuturing in nature and this extends to other species,they filled a room with toys and put young chimpanzees in it. the males gravitated to the masculine toys ie balls blocks toy weapons etc. the females went to the dolls. hasbro tried to market a "gender"free playhouse when it came to playing with the toy baby included the girls would put it in its bed and let it sleep while the boys would put it in its carriage and roll it off the roof! i was talking to a guy who's wife wanted their daughter to be less stereotyped as a female so he got her a train set after messing with it for awhile she wrapped the locomotive up in a blanket and put it in bed so it could take a nap. Women are instictivly nuturing in nature and to force them to do things against that nature like killing and destoying things will have dire consequences i'm afraid I saw the this gender behavior in my three children. My two son's gravitated to guns, trucks and dirt. My daughter, with no prompting, was pretending to take care of babies when she was about 4 or 5. I have bragged that my daughter likes to play Squad Leader and watch war movies...with me, her brothers and her fiance. But she is all girl with her female friends, several who have never understood her willingness to play our "way". My wife has always insisted my daughter likes to please the men she cares about(like her mother). There are no women I know(including those in the military) who want, or even understand why women would want to fight. My daughter told me "if I am ever drafted I might dodge service. If in combat I would find a man or group of men to hide behind." NUFF SAID.

barkman44 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 9:07:45 PM)
I bet you Gal-Queda {national organization of women}is all for this ruling!

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 9:14:51 PM)
quote: Gal-Queda HA! Good one.

Aurelian -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 11:26:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: Aurelian quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: Qwixt I kind of thought this had it covered 100%, "I don't think they belong on the front lines because men and women are not physically equal." Now given that why would I support integration of sports. I think there are shared restrooms already with nothing but stalls. I've never used one though. I think both genders prefer to keep them separate for obvious reasons. If one supports allowing women in combat, it follows that all sports should be integrated on the terms of equality. If women can participate in the most violent and destructive activity known to man, then they should be able to play pro-football as a linebacker, or even a half-back. Is there any law that prevents it? Prevents what? Playing pro football as bolded by me and stated by you. :)

Orm -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/27/2013 11:44:21 PM)
I watched a science show on TV that claimed that men are significantly more prone in taking risks when females are watching them. The reason for this behavior is that male hormones go up when there are attractive females watching them. I suspect that this could be bad in combat situations. But what do I know. I should perhaps add that this is not the fault of neither male nor female. It is just how the male body functions. I should perhaps also add that the show said that the reason for this risky behavior of the males is because males are programmed to show females that they are strong males and would be good mates.

DivePac88 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/28/2013 9:05:18 AM)
Just something from my past: Many, many years ago in a country once called Rhodesia, I was in a small fire fight once. With a (BSAP) Woman Police Officer armed with an FN beside me, and I can tell you she was calm as a cucumber.

berto -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/28/2013 12:46:38 PM)
Some advice on women in combat from a female veteran: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/27/some-advice-on-women-in-combat-from-a-female-veteran/ quote: I say again, I would have loved to be in the infantry. I think I could have done it physically, I could’ve met almost all the male standards (jumping aside), and I think I’m mentally tough enough to handle whatever came. But I would never do that to the men. I would never sacrifice the mission for my own desires. And I wouldn’t be able to live with myself if someone died because of me.

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/28/2013 2:52:20 PM)
Very interesting article and so is the sub link in the article about women going into the Rangers. quote: ORIGINAL: berto Some advice on women in combat from a female veteran: http://hotair.com/archives/2013/01/27/some-advice-on-women-in-combat-from-a-female-veteran/ quote: I say again, I would have loved to be in the infantry. I think I could have done it physically, I could’ve met almost all the male standards (jumping aside), and I think I’m mentally tough enough to handle whatever came. But I would never do that to the men. I would never sacrifice the mission for my own desires. And I wouldn’t be able to live with myself if someone died because of me.

Laz -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/29/2013 10:35:32 PM)
I prefaced my post with stating I have a lot of respect for many in the service but the service itself. i feel my response though harsh was fair given the disrespect and deliberate misreading of my own referenced post. this is not a personality contest- this is a forum to discuss and exchange ideas. it is disrespectful and incorrect to take a statement out of context and use it to redefine the statement while attempting to humiliate the speaker. I recognize I am in a group of many experienced servicemen, and I did not expect my post to gather any support- but I feel it is important to challenge conventional views and in turn be challenged by them- that does not mean that my purpose is to troll, but it seemed there was too much agreement for a conventional thought and without disention as a citizen I felt it important to interject my own contrary point of view. For a bunch of soldiers, you guys seem awfully incapable of attacking an idea, or defending yourselves against a counter-strike. Call me a hippie, whatever, if by that you mean a leftist, then yes I am, I care about people and I am proud of that fact. I am an idealist too. I don't see why anyone should not strive for something better because there are numerous difficulties to be overcome on the way. Finally, without regard to how it may seem, I have no emotional involvement in this discussion; I don't know any of you and you neither me- this is not about being right or wrong- this is about communicating an idea, accept that I have respectfully given you an idea to consider- and I see that thus far you have not yet considered it.

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/29/2013 11:57:51 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: berto quote: I am not aware of any comparable crusade to create gender-integrated football teams. At least America knows what’s really important. Heather Mac Donald, writing ironically, quoted from: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338613/wrong-women-warriors-heather-mac-donald I love Heather Mac Donald. She made an excellent point about gender-integrated football teams. Now, those who have no problem with women in combat, I propose we force the NFL to allow women to start on their football teams. Please respond and tell us where you stand on this issue. Since you asked . . . The issue of women in combat is stats. The NFL are elite males in the areas being measured. The SEALs if you will. Few male soldiers are SEALs (or GBs, or Rangers.) To be acceptable a female soldier has to be as good as your worst male. He's acceptable; then so is she. And a lot of women are as good as the worst male in terms of push-ups and sit-ups. And they bring lots of other qualities to the table. I don't know where you cavemen have been for eleven years, but woman are out there NOW. They patrol for weeks at a time with male units. They go into hot LZs. They man MCs in convoys. They engage in fire-fights on a regular basis. They just aren't officially "in combat." Now they will be. It's also comical to watch you guys act like it's "your" military and you'll decide to let them in or not. They're citizens. They're the majority of citizens in fact. It's their country and their military as much as yours or mine. And the 20-something women of today are not the women you knew in the 60s and 70s. Meet a few of them.

parusski -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/30/2013 12:12:44 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58 quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: berto quote: I am not aware of any comparable crusade to create gender-integrated football teams. At least America knows what’s really important. Heather Mac Donald, writing ironically, quoted from: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338613/wrong-women-warriors-heather-mac-donald I love Heather Mac Donald. She made an excellent point about gender-integrated football teams. Now, those who have no problem with women in combat, I propose we force the NFL to allow women to start on their football teams. Please respond and tell us where you stand on this issue. Since you asked . . . The issue of women in combat is stats. The NFL are elite males in the areas being measured. The SEALs if you will. Few male soldiers are SEALs (or GBs, or Rangers.) To be acceptable a female soldier has to be as good as your worst male. He's acceptable; then so is she. And a lot of women are as good as the worst male in terms of push-ups and sit-ups. And they bring lots of other qualities to the table. I don't know where you cavemen have been for eleven years, but woman are out there NOW. They patrol for weeks at a time with male units. They go into hot LZs. They man MCs in convoys. They engage in fire-fights on a regular basis. They just aren't officially "in combat." Now they will be. It's also comical to watch you guys act like it's "your" military and you'll decide to let them in or not. They're citizens. They're the majority of citizens in fact. It's their country and their military as much as yours or mine. And the 20-something women of today are not the women you knew in the 60s and 70s. Meet a few of them. Sorry, but I did not know any women in the 60's or 70's. In 1979 I was just 13. Well, I knew my mom and grandmother's. In the end I actually base a lot of my position on the women I know. Including a few who belong to the party I can't mention and a few women in the military. So I will let the women I know, talk with(not talk t0), know that they are wrong to oppose women in combat. Not sure how my daughter, wife, several aunt's, one grandmother, five female subordinates and several female friends will react to your ideas. I also want to say that I do not get angry with those of you who insult me because I disagree with them. These conversations are necessary in any society. But it is disheartening to be called names and talked down to just because I have a different opinion. [sm=happy0005.gif]

Bullwinkle58 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/30/2013 12:28:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: Bullwinkle58 quote: ORIGINAL: parusski quote: ORIGINAL: berto quote: I am not aware of any comparable crusade to create gender-integrated football teams. At least America knows what’s really important. Heather Mac Donald, writing ironically, quoted from: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/338613/wrong-women-warriors-heather-mac-donald I love Heather Mac Donald. She made an excellent point about gender-integrated football teams. Now, those who have no problem with women in combat, I propose we force the NFL to allow women to start on their football teams. Please respond and tell us where you stand on this issue. Since you asked . . . The issue of women in combat is stats. The NFL are elite males in the areas being measured. The SEALs if you will. Few male soldiers are SEALs (or GBs, or Rangers.) To be acceptable a female soldier has to be as good as your worst male. He's acceptable; then so is she. And a lot of women are as good as the worst male in terms of push-ups and sit-ups. And they bring lots of other qualities to the table. I don't know where you cavemen have been for eleven years, but woman are out there NOW. They patrol for weeks at a time with male units. They go into hot LZs. They man MCs in convoys. They engage in fire-fights on a regular basis. They just aren't officially "in combat." Now they will be. It's also comical to watch you guys act like it's "your" military and you'll decide to let them in or not. They're citizens. They're the majority of citizens in fact. It's their country and their military as much as yours or mine. And the 20-something women of today are not the women you knew in the 60s and 70s. Meet a few of them. Sorry, but I did not know any women in the 60's or 70's. In 1979 I was just 13. Well, I knew my mom and grandmother's. In the end I actually base a lot of my position on the women I know. Including a few who belong to the party I can't mention and a few women in the military. So I will let the women I know, talk with(not talk t0), know that they are wrong to oppose women in combat. Not sure how my daughter, wife, several aunt's, one grandmother, five female subordinates and several female friends will react to your ideas. I also want to say that I do not get angry with those of you who insult me because I disagree with them. These conversations are necessary in any society. But it is disheartening to be called names and talked down to just because I have a different opinion. [sm=happy0005.gif] In 1979 I was 21 and about to join the US Navy. I knew few if any women I would have called ready to be infantrymen. Then, at OCS in the fall of 1980, I knew a woman who had trained with the men's Olympic pentathlon team. I saw, with my own eyes, her beat a SEAL who had done tours in Vietnam in a push-up contest. He quit at 700; she did 715. Real, straight-as-a-board guy push-ups. She weighed about 120 pounds. I slow-danced with her and none of it was fat. She became a Navy diver. There was no quit in her. Not a shred. I've known other women like that since, in the military, in business, through sports. They're there whether you personaly know them or not. The proposal is to allow some women in the combat arms. Not all women. Not even most women. There are women who can do it. They should be allowed to. Why? They're citizens. If you object to "caveman" then I'm sorry. I thought a ruff and tuff combat vet could take it.

Joe D. -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/30/2013 12:41:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So in time of war, a unit is deployed overseas. An Infantry(wo)man then gets pregnant. Is this a court-martial offence? Is she effectively a desserter? Under UCMJ, probably nothing more serious than fraternization. When we were getting harardous duty pay in Bosnia, pregnant females were redeployed, possibly to face fines and loss of rank. Then again, accidently discharging your other (issued) weapon was a ticket home too!

Titanwarrior89 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/30/2013 3:43:53 AM)
Well its in the news. DOD now has to do a plan on how set up the Selective Service requirements for femals as well as males(ages 18-25). A group Called SWAN is pushing it also. The different services have until May this year to have their plans completed, allowing women into combat units. I figured this would happen. Not a good move at all. I truly don't understand were these so called educated men and women are coming from in congress and Department of Defense for this kind of move.[:@][:o] God help this nation!

warspite1 -> RE: Women In the Infantry (1/30/2013 4:42:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Joe D. quote: ORIGINAL: warspite1 So in time of war, a unit is deployed overseas. An Infantry(wo)man then gets pregnant. Is this a court-martial offence? Is she effectively a desserter? Under UCMJ, probably nothing more serious than fraternization. When we were getting harardous duty pay in Bosnia, pregnant females were redeployed, possibly to face fines and loss of rank. Then again, accidently discharging your other (issued) weapon was a ticket home too! warspite1 Well to my mind that is having your cake and eating it. If women want to be blokes then fine - but the rules need to be the same. If you are a frontline infantry soldier, you are at war, and you decide to get pregnant - that is desertion in the face of the enemy.

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.84375