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 agree 100% of what General Patrick Henry Brady says. It is the honest gods truth that women would be a burden in a combat role. Gen Brady is considered the nations most decorated living veteran. He served in Vietnam and received the Medal Of Honor. He used 3 helicopters to rescue over 60 wounded. At the end of the day his aircraft had over 400 holes in them from enemy fire and mines. In two tours in Vietnam he flew over 2,500 combat missions and rescued over 5,000 wounded.
In his 34 years of service, Brady found that women had fewer disciplinary problems than men, “but could not carry their load physically – loading litters in choppers, carrying wounded to safety, even lifting tool chests.” He says that left men to cover for them, “often causing us to use two people when one should have done the job – all of which affected readiness.” The general also found women ineffective in the field due to such problems as feminine hygiene, pregnancy, sexual distractions, favoritisms, fraternization and assault.
But Brady sees another big hurdle to women in combat. They’re not designed to kill. “And they will not be good at it,” he says. “God designed them to produce life and nurture it, not destroy it. They don’t belong in the trenches of the NFL or in the octagon in Ultimate Fighting; combat is the ultimate Ultimate Fighting – and they don’t belong there, either.
“Imagine a draft,” he says, “and a nation forcing our women into killing units. Visualize what will happen to women POWs, not to mention homosexuals, captured by our most likely enemies.”
General Brady's logic is sound.
Last edited by Old Army Soldier; 02-19-2013 at 10:23 AM..
But Brady sees another big hurdle to women in combat. They’re not designed to kill. “And they will not be good at it,” he says. “God designed them to produce life and nurture it, not destroy it. They don’t belong in the trenches of the NFL or in the octagon in Ultimate Fighting; combat is the ultimate Ultimate Fighting – and they don’t belong there, either.
“Imagine a draft,” he says, “and a nation forcing our women into killing units. Visualize what will happen to women POWs, not to mention homosexuals, captured by our most likely enemies.”
General Brady's logic is sound.
He sounds like an ignorant jackass.
First, he can't separate reality from fiction. There is no such thing as a god.
Second, how are our enemies going to know which soldiers are 'homosexuals'?
How would he know about women in combat? There were no women in combat during the Vietnam War.
Quote:
Though relatively little official data exists about female Vietnam War veterans, the Vietnam Women's Memorial Foundation estimates that approximately 11,000 military women were stationed in Vietnam during the conflict. Nearly all of them were volunteers, and 90 percent served as military nurses, though women also worked as physicians, air traffic controllers, intelligence officers, clerks and other positions in the U.S. Women's Army Corps, U.S. Navy, Air Force and Marines and the Army Medical Specialist Corps. In addition to women in the armed forces, an unknown number of civilian women served in Vietnam on behalf of the Red Cross, United Service Organizations (USO), Catholic Relief Services and other humanitarian organizations, or as foreign correspondents for various news organizations
One 8 women died in Vietnam in accidents. 5 died in a helicopter crash during the evacation of children.
Once again I'm going to tell you: there are already women who served in combat and continue to serve in combat. Being on the front line is not the only place where combat takes place. Women move with convoys, go on patrol, security checks with their fellow male soldiers. There are women who hold rank over the men they go on patrol/security and convoys.
As for homosexuals, since DADT is no longer, will gay men be tying a pink ribbon on their weapon? Will it be on their tags: "I am gay"?
I agree 100% of what General Patrick Henry Brady says. It is the honest gods truth that women would be a burden in a combat role. Gen Brady is considered the nations most decorated living veteran. He served in Vietnam and received the Medal Of Honor. He used 3 helicopters to rescue over 60 wounded. At the end of the day his aircraft had over 400 holes in them from enemy fire and mines. In two tours in Vietnam he flew over 2,500 combat missions and rescued over 5,000 wounded.
In his 34 years of service, Brady found that women had fewer disciplinary problems than men, “but could not carry their load physically – loading litters in choppers, carrying wounded to safety, even lifting tool chests.” He says that left men to cover for them, “often causing us to use two people when one should have done the job – all of which affected readiness.” The general also found women ineffective in the field due to such problems as feminine hygiene, pregnancy, sexual distractions, favoritisms, fraternization and assault.
But Brady sees another big hurdle to women in combat. They’re not designed to kill. “And they will not be good at it,” he says. “God designed them to produce life and nurture it, not destroy it. They don’t belong in the trenches of the NFL or in the octagon in Ultimate Fighting; combat is the ultimate Ultimate Fighting – and they don’t belong there, either.
“Imagine a draft,” he says, “and a nation forcing our women into killing units. Visualize what will happen to women POWs, not to mention homosexuals, captured by our most likely enemies.”
General Brady's logic is sound.
Logic has nothing to do with it. It's social engineering. Instead of starting from the position of asking whether a woman can do what a man can do, you instead start from a position that women should do everything that men do. And that's exactly what the folks did who declared women would serve in combat. They had no studies to back this up, they started from the presumption that women should be able to serve in combat and then tasked the Armed Forces to figure out a way to make this happen. It's typical liberal thinking where they want reality to fit their ideology instead of creating an ideology to best deal with reality.
Logic has nothing to do with it. It's social engineering. Instead of starting from the position of asking whether a woman can do what a man can do, you instead start from a position that women should do everything that men do. And that's exactly what the folks did who declared women would serve in combat. They had no studies to back this up, they started from the presumption that women should be able to serve in combat and then tasked the Armed Forces to figure out a way to make this happen. It's typical liberal thinking where they want reality to fit their ideology instead of creating an ideology to best deal with reality.
It was during the Bush era that women in the military took on bigger roles. They didn't take on the same "duties" that they did during the Vietnam War.
Who is saying that women should do everything that men can do? They will go through the same training as men. The same training that many men fail at completing.
Instead of starting from the position of asking whether a woman can do what a man can do, you instead start from a position that women should do everything that men do.
That men and women are equal is the correct assumption.
The burden is on those to show that they are not.
I agree 100% of what General Patrick Henry Brady says. It is the honest gods truth that women would be a burden in a combat role. Gen Brady is considered the nations most decorated living veteran. He served in Vietnam and received the Medal Of Honor. He used 3 helicopters to rescue over 60 wounded. At the end of the day his aircraft had over 400 holes in them from enemy fire and mines. In two tours in Vietnam he flew over 2,500 combat missions and rescued over 5,000 wounded.
In his 34 years of service, Brady found that women had fewer disciplinary problems than men, “but could not carry their load physically – loading litters in choppers, carrying wounded to safety, even lifting tool chests.” He says that left men to cover for them, “often causing us to use two people when one should have done the job – all of which affected readiness.” The general also found women ineffective in the field due to such problems as feminine hygiene, pregnancy, sexual distractions, favoritisms, fraternization and assault.
But Brady sees another big hurdle to women in combat. They’re not designed to kill. “And they will not be good at it,” he says. “God designed them to produce life and nurture it, not destroy it. They don’t belong in the trenches of the NFL or in the octagon in Ultimate Fighting; combat is the ultimate Ultimate Fighting – and they don’t belong there, either.
“Imagine a draft,” he says, “and a nation forcing our women into killing units. Visualize what will happen to women POWs, not to mention homosexuals, captured by our most likely enemies.”
General Brady's logic is sound.
Blah, blah, blah.
Just another bunch of misogynistic hooey.
Things have changed A LOT since the Viet Nam conflict. For example:
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.
