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.
It was in the paper awhile back. I'm paraphrasing so don't quote me. But there were rumblings of something to that affect where the feminists were up in arms about a bunch of rapes that occurred and the article called for more female leadership.
It's somewhat off-topic to the OP but it causes nothing but problems.
I'm tired of this type of stuff. It's almost comical. Women have no place in intentional, active combat roles.
If a woman is now given EQUAL training as other combat troops and they STILL can get raped by their fellow soldiers then they did not belong in the first place. If you are a woman and ARMED and cannot protect yourself then I don't want you trying to protect me.
Nobody (AFAIK) is trying to pretend they're interchangeable... as a proud woman, I actually find that concept rather offensive. But if a woman can perform the duties, pass the physical tests, etc, she should have EQUAL rights to be in combat if she chooses. Why should men only get the option of trying? And don't give me that nonsense about "men not being able to focus around women," because that is basically a Sharia/Hasidic type of attitude - in other words, incredibly misogynistic and archaic. If a man (or woman) can't control their hormones in a combat situation, they have no place being there anyway.
Why do you think the military does not allow two brothers serve in the same unit? It is the same dynamic. You will or will not do some things if it threatens the safety of a family member. The relationship men have to ALL women is the same in my opinion.
As a service member, I'm proud of the decision the Secretary of Defense made today. In the last decade I've fought alongside numerous women who were later denied leadership positions due to this archaic and arbitrary policy. In modern warfare the line between "combat" and "non-combat" roles has become meaningless; anyone deployed to a warzone is in the line of fire and can at least return defensive fire. The idea that women can't handle the stress of combat is a myth, see for example Major Mary Hagar:Women Warriors Are On the Battlefield. Eliminate Outdated, Unfair Military Combat Exclusion Policy
Every soldier, sailor, airman, and marine deserves to be evaluated based on their ability to perform the mission, instead of being prejudged on antiquated stereotypes.
SJ4
Why does getting wounded and losing your helicopter qualify one for a promotion?
Maybe we shouldn't let women sign up for selective service because the moment that legislation passes I get a feeling we might see another baby boom. I'm sure they're not going to let a woman get drafted if she has children. Hence, women will go out and get pregnant just to avoid the whole process. That is, if there's a likely chance that we go into another big war.
As a conservative I have no problems with women serving in a combat MOS, providing they are required to sign up with the Selective Service just like men, are drafted (if a draft is ever reinstated) just like men, and are required to undergo the exact same training as men. If not, then they are not only a danger to themselves, but also a danger to everyone else around them.
However, I serious doubt they will receive the same training as men. That is certainly not the case today. Women only have to meet half the physical requirements men must meet (at least in the Marine Corps), which is why they have separate boot camps.
Since Democrats are hypocrites when it concerns equality and utterly despise the military, I can only conclude that the reason for allowing unqualified women in combat MOS positions is to ensure more American military deaths, lower morale in the military, and make the military as ineffectual as possible.
Congrats, this post send you right to the stupid list, thank for the heads up.
There were few red army women on the front lines, this is a myth.
And I gave a reason that everyone ignored:
Men would be so busy chasing skirt and competing with other men for the few women around them, it'd destroy moral. Inevitably a couple men will be the lucky ones, the rest will hold grudges, showboat for the women, etc. If women are to serve, segregate.
Why are there so many stupid posts on this topic? Oh never mind I see where you live.
To the ignore list with you.
If a woman is now given EQUAL training as other combat troops and they STILL can get raped by their fellow soldiers then they did not belong in the first place. If you are a woman and ARMED and cannot protect yourself then I don't want you trying to protect me.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 25 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,588,006 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Refresh1
Allowed is one thing. Forced is another.
I don't think they are being forced. Though I could be wrong, but I believe it is still a choice given to the women. I heard Mark Levin read something about it last night and I remember hearing the word choice, in the statement he read that Panette gave, upon leaving his office.
Also though what Levin pointed out was this was decided in the night, without any time for a discussion. Not exactly in the style a Republic government is ran. That is how the dems seem to be running things, one dem in particular, Obama. I don't think the democratic voters see the underhanded way their representatives are conducting business. I'm not sure if the republican voters see their representatives just sitting with their junk in the hands either though...so there we are...Great Government.
Status:
"It Can't Rain All The Time"
(set 25 days ago)
Location: North Pacific
15,754 posts, read 7,588,006 times
Reputation: 2576
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ponderosa
There is no reason impoverished and disadvantaged women should not be sent to slaughter in the name of corporate profits right along with their brothers.
This is also another good way of population control, take out the breeders. Just saying...
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.
