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.
I mean seriously.. Let's be honest. Do you honestly think that most women cant pass the physical testing (same as the men) carry around 70 plus pounds, stay out on missions for several days, handle a massive assault rifle etc... What is the benefit of having females serve in combat roles when A) most wont be able to handle it anyways and B) it will inevitably cause a disturbance within the unit?
Wars have been fought for thousands of years without females.. Let me ask you. Do you honestly think that women who received the same training as men could have stormed the beaches of Normandy sucessfully against a wall of German/French/Czech/Italian men, tanks and artillery?
Of course women can do the job. The taking of the hill may have to wait for their nails to dry, but then it's on.
In Israel just about everyone enters the military because the place is tiny and surrounded by enemies.
America is different and our needs are different.
Except to make a meeting of our future commanding generals look like an episode of The View, there is no reason for America to place females in combat.
The fact remains that women are capable of holding their own in a combat unit. Is that not what this thread is about?
Can you imagine a woman, suffering from PMS in a situation where there is high stress, people are barking orders at her and her actions could result in life or death for one or more people? I think putting women in combat roles is a very bad idea.
I mean seriously.. Let's be honest. Do you honestly think that most women cant pass the physical testing (same as the men) carry around 70 plus pounds, stay out on missions for several days, handle a massive assault rifle etc... What is the benefit of having females serve in combat roles when A) most wont be able to handle it anyways and B) it will inevitably cause a disturbance within the unit?
Wars have been fought for thousands of years without females.. Let me ask you. Do you honestly think that women who received the same training as men could have stormed the beaches of Normandy sucessfully against a wall of German/French/Czech/Italian men, tanks and artillery?
Probably the meanest thing on the planet is a 13 year old girl. They just need to direct venom towards an enemy.
Can you imagine a woman, suffering from PMS in a situation where there is high stress, people are barking orders at her and her actions could result in life or death for one or more people? I think putting women in combat roles is a very bad idea.
20yrsinBranson
That's the perfect time to put her in combat. The enemy won't stand a chance.
There is certainly some women that can perform these jobs but do want a goup of average women or average men operating the guns above?
if the women can pass the same requirements as men why not?
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.
