Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yeah, yeah, I got it. Always the underdog right? How is Israel going to war with Lebanon going to be worse than what the US has been going through in Afghanistan and went through in Iraq? The last time Israel was at war with Lebanon it lasted 33 days. Jut think, we probably could have ended the war in Afghanistan within 3 months if we had the formidable Israeli military helping the US and the rest of the NATO countries.
I don't even know what your saying anymore. Everything your saying is off subject. America and Israeli military capabilities and objectives are worlds apart and can't be compared on the scale of how long the war's last.
Sorry if my comment seems ignorant, But how about carrying very heavy loads. Like a full grown man out of harms way. I know I couldn't.
I think women should have the right to serve under the same condition as men, but the conditions has to be the same. For safety reasons.
This same argument was used to try and keep women from becoming firemen. I'm not saying if that's right or wrong but I do believe we have female firemen.
This same argument was used to try and keep women from becoming firemen. I'm not saying if that's right or wrong but I do believe we have female firemen.
Pretty much the same arguments have been used for any male dominated profession. Similar arguments have been made before military units integrated black soldiers with white.
Unless that woman was allowing her to be gang banged or we some how integrated the military to a perfect 50-50 sex ratio, only a few men will be having sex. The rest will resent them and the women having sex with them. It's a great way to destroy camaraderie, moral, and yes have rapes happen.
You paint a rather bleak picture of our armed servicemen as a whole. That is not an ad hominem; you may actually be right. But if you are, there are serious problems we need to address beyond female representation in the military.
But really, can anybody be surprised that the Right is the side opposing female representation in the armed forces? After they opposed female police officers, firefighters, workers, students, and black soldiers, officers, firefighters, workers, students...?
You need to read more about this. As part of the changes, the military is going to review the standards required for different types of positions. They've said very clearly that they're not going to lower any of the standards to accommodate women--it looks like they're going to more clearly define them to make sure that people can physically do the jobs before they're assigned to do them. I've known some big, strong women in my life who COULD carry a 200 lb man to safety. I live in Nebraska--have you ever seen our Husker women's volleyball team? Most women can't meet those standards, but if they CAN, there's no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to participate.
I use to live in Nebraska myself. As far as women and men having the exact same qualifications, I will believe it when I see it. I served in the Marine Corps while Carter was President and he also expanded the role of women in the military, only he lowered the qualifications for women for political correctness purposes. Men still had to met the regular standards, but women did not, and that had a profound effect on morale. Thankfully, none of the positions women held at that time with these lower standards were combat related. To this day women in the Marine Corps only have to meet half the physical requirements men must meet, and I do not see that changing anytime soon.
Yeah okay, whatever, I grow weary of your nitpicking and inability to grasp a broader concept.
Have a nice day.
Haha....you are the one who thinks this thread is ONLY about a woman seeing a man naked....talk about not being able to grasp the entire concept...let see, you said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by FinsterRufus
No, this thread is about how women will have to handle seeing men naked - that's what this particular thread is about.
Post 277....
So, when you are able to form coherent posts that really follow what you prior postings in the same thread....you can continue, until then..............
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,877,002 times
Reputation: 886
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostInHouston
Is the anti-women crowd under the impression that women have not served on the front lines in various positions? died in combat? Lost limbs? Been held hostage?
Across the country, members of the military of both sexes said they accepted the policy so long as women will have to meet the same standards as their male colleagues. Both men and women were skeptical about putting females in infantry units, however.
“This gives us more people to work with,” said Army Sgt. Jeremy Grayson, assigned to field infantry at Fort Bliss, Texas. “But they would have to be able to do the physical stuff that men do. ... They have to be able to pull their own weight.”
Panetta said the qualifications will not be lowered and acknowledged that not all women will meet them. He said allowing women to serve in combat roles will strengthen the ability of the U.S. to win wars.
Female Marines soon will be required to perform pull-ups, just like male Marines do, as part of their annual physical fitness tests, the Marine Corps’ top general announced Tuesday.
They should meet the same standards, but they will not. According to your own source:
That study of 318 female Marines found that, on average, they could perform 1.63 pull-ups. More than 21 percent performed at least three, and 37 percent performed at least three when lower-body movement — a banned practice frequently known as “kip” — was allowed.
Only 67 of the 318 female Marines met the absolute minimum requirement of three pull-ups, and that is just the PFT, which every male Marine from clerk to cook must meet. The combat MOS 0311 (Rifleman) has a much higher physical requirement. Allowing women to serve in combat roles that they are not qualified for will only result in getting more Marines killed, females and males alike.
We don't need a bunch of Sandra Fluke's out there engaging the Taliban or any enemy in hand to hand combat if it came to it. They would get slaughtered. Having women on the front lines in combat is a terrible idea
What?
A Navy SEAL is a provincial hick misogynist?
That really, really shocks and surprises me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
