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 think women need to be out of the military. Everything has to be political correctly nowadays and because the military are mostly boys (not men), they tend to do stupid thing and say stupid thing. Been there, done that. Just imagine a WM walking by and you and your buddy was making a sexist joke. You are now in hot water. Probably get a harassment charge.
That was never a problem when I served because there were no women in my battalion. There were only a few women at Group HQ, and they were in a different area. Most of us went into Oceanside in order to harass women.
No, it is not right. Congress must establish a single, genderless, standard for every MOS. That is the only way to maintain morale. As I have said, just knowing that the person next to me went through the exact same training I had to endure would give me confidence in their ability, and hopefully they would have that same confidence in my ability.
In combat everyone should be trainned equally because everyones job (in combat) is pretty much the same
PTSD can affect anyone, and it does not have to be combat related.
The reason that i pointed that out is because there are some things that many men cannot handle in the heat of battle and the mental makeup of most women was never designed for that.
I served with the 1st Marine Division, 1st FSSG, 7th Engineer Battalion, at Camp Pendleton, CA, from 1972 to 1980, except for a tour in Okinawa with the 3rd Marine Division from 1973 to 1974. When I served women served in administrative and non-combat support roles and were trained separately from the men.
I served in the Air Force from 1984 - 2008 with tours in PSAB during Desert Storm/Shield. Since the Air Force training are more cerebral then in other branches their training and what they are expected to do are no different than the men. Even with the two years that I served in the Army, there were noticeable differences between men and women as far as what they could and could not do even during training exercises. No disrespect to you, but things have changed drastically since the last time that you put on a uniform. I can say this because I have seen them from the time that I enlisted to the time that I retired in 2008.
Oh one more thing, when I was stationed at Langley AFB, I had alot of interactions with the Navy, Army and Marines, but what I noticed is that many of the Marines that came up from their detachment were really excited about seeing women in general.....I mean REALLY excited! This holds true after being away for some time from them, so I wonder how that would affect men who are on missions that would isolate them from civilization for weeks/months at a time with one or two women with them.
That depends. As previously pointed out, the draft did not distinguish between conservatives and liberal freaks, both were drafted equally. However, since the draft was suspended in 1974, the all-volunteer military has become entirely conservative. Which is why liberal freaks are always trying to suppress the military vote and get them killed by lowering the standards. The abject hatred of the military by liberal freaks was very apparent when I served during the 1970s, and it has not abated since.[/quote]
That is just crazy talk. The only reason why the draft was abolished was because the wealthy/powerful were finding it increasing harder to "protect" their own kids from being being drafted into wars that they created. As far as the "liberal freaks" as you like to call them of the 1970's, If you looked at the members of the last administration which were all conservative and all were eligible for the draft at that time you do not have enough fingers and toes to count the number of deferments and excuses that those cowards came up with. This includes the likes of Beck and Limbaugh as well. Even the freaking president (Bush) got special treatment to go to the top of the line on the waiting list in order to get into the Texas National Guard. Because of his grandfather's connections someone like yourself was sent to the jungle in his place while he did not even complete his training there or in Alabama.
The reason that i pointed that out is because there are some things that many men cannot handle in the heat of battle and the mental makeup of most women was never designed for that.
I certainly agree that there is a lot of mental conditioning boys experience that women do not. In most cases that makes them mentally tougher and more able to cope with traumatic experiences. However, even the toughest mind is going to be affected in some manner. The degree they are affected depends on how much emotional control they are able to exert. While it used to be traditional to make boys emotionally tough, I am not so sure that is the case today. I would also not exclude females solely on that criteria either.
There were a lot of guys who where not able to emotionally cut it in boot camp and were weeded out. I do not see why that should be any different for women. Those women who are emotionally tough enough to meet the same rigors of boot camp as any guy, should be treated no differently.
Unfortunately, as we both know, that is not the case.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
I served in the Air Force from 1984 - 2008 with tours in PSAB during Desert Storm/Shield. Since the Air Force training are more cerebral then in other branches their training and what they are expected to do are no different than the men. Even with the two years that I served in the Army, there were noticeable differences between men and women as far as what they could and could not do even during training exercises. No disrespect to you, but things have changed drastically since the last time that you put on a uniform. I can say this because I have seen them from the time that I enlisted to the time that I retired in 2008
If things have changed, then why are there still two different standards - One for men, and a much lower one for women?
Affirmative Action political correctness in areas where one's life is dependent upon another is always a very bad idea. That not only includes the military, but also law enforcement, fire fighters, and paramedics. When people's lives are on the line there can only be one minimum standard.
[
If things have changed, then why are there still two different standards - One for men, and a much lower one for women?
There has always been different standards, even when my father was in the military (1963-1974) women have different physical requirements in regards to the military which is understandable but they were not in combat either. I do agree that the standards for combat should be equal, but since men and women bodies are not the same they should not be allowed in those situations anyway.
Affirmative Action political correctness in areas where one's life is dependent upon another is always a very bad idea. That not only includes the military, but also law enforcement, fire fighters, and paramedics. When people's lives are on the line there can only be one minimum standard.[/quote]
Affirmative Action and Political Correctness are not the same. A man is a man regardless of his ethnicity and should be given the same opportunities as anyone else. Political correctness is a notion of fairness regardless of how stupid it may be.
That is just crazy talk. The only reason why the draft was abolished was because the wealthy/powerful were finding it increasing harder to "protect" their own kids from being being drafted into wars that they created. As far as the "liberal freaks" as you like to call them of the 1970's, If you looked at the members of the last administration which were all conservative and all were eligible for the draft at that time you do not have enough fingers and toes to count the number of deferments and excuses that those cowards came up with. This includes the likes of Beck and Limbaugh as well. Even the freaking president (Bush) got special treatment to go to the top of the line on the waiting list in order to get into the Texas National Guard. Because of his grandfather's connections someone like yourself was sent to the jungle in his place while he did not even complete his training there or in Alabama.
The draft was not abolished, merely suspended. Other than referring to the National Guard as "weekend warriors" I do not disparage their service. While their training, when compared to those on active duty, is pathetic, they have in fact served in every major conflict the US has been involved in since the Spanish-American War.
Therefore, I consider anyone who has served in the National Guard to be no less service in the military than anyone who has served in any of other the military branches. They take the same risks and face the same hazards when deployed, and therefore should have the same respect as anyone else in the military.
of course it is out of the question. The marine corps has already established two different standards, one for men, and a much lower standard for women.
the minimum standards for the cft under the pass or fail grading will be as follows:
that depends. As previously pointed out, the draft did not distinguish between conservatives and liberal freaks, both were drafted equally. However, since the draft was suspended in 1974, the all-volunteermilitary has become entirely conservative. Which is why liberal freaks are always trying to suppress the military vote and get them killed by lowering the standards. The abject hatred of the military by liberal freaks was very apparent when i served during the 1970s, and it has not abated since.
Those standards are from 2009. New standards for women in combat are forthcoming:
Under the schedules delivered to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, the Army will develop standards within the next two years to let women train and possibly serve as Rangers. By March 2016, women could begin training as Navy SEALS. U.S. Special Operations Command is working on deciding what commando jobs could be opened to women and when the transition would take place. The plansrequire women and men to meet the same physical and mental standards to qualify for the front-line positions. It is still possible that women will be kept out of some jobs if research and testing find that they could not be successful in sufficient numbers.
Now, I am not so naive as to not think that requirements for males could be lowered. We'll have to wait and see how they arrive at the gender-neutral standards.
While the senior officer corps is reported to be 2/3 conservative, this is not the case with junior officers, who are much more liberal since 2000. A recent scientific study of the rank and file indicates 32% conservatives, 23% liberals, and 45% moderates.
Your mantra about liberals is not only false, but tiresome to hear. Saying it over and over will not make it true.
There has always been different standards, even when my father was in the military (1963-1974) women have different physical requirements in regards to the military which is understandable but they were not in combat either. I do agree that the standards for combat should be equal, but since men and women bodies are not the same they should not be allowed in those situations anyway.
No, there have not "always been different standards." Until recently there was only one standard for the Marine Corps Combat Fitness Test because, until recently, women were not allowed in a combat MOS. Furthermore, the Physical Fitness Tests requirements for women were lowered by Executive Order under Carter in 1977.
Whether they should be allowed or not should be up to the individual. Whether they qualify or not should be up to a single standard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by simetime
Affirmative Action and Political Correctness are not the same. A man is a man regardless of his ethnicity and should be given the same opportunities as anyone else. Political correctness is a notion of fairness regardless of how stupid it may be.
Affirmative Action is not about providing equal opportunity, it is about the government subsidizing opportunities for minorities and women. Liberal freaks think so little of minorities and women that they can only succeed with the help of government intervention. Like lowering the standards for women in the military in order to increase the male to female ratio so the liberal freaks can say, "look how politically correct we are!"
The draft was not abolished, merely suspended. Other than referring to the National Guard as "weekend warriors" I do not disparage their service. While their training, when compared to those on active duty, is pathetic, they have in fact served in every major conflict the US has been involved in since the Spanish-American War.
If it is no longer used since the 70's I look at it as being "abolished" because they will not reinstated unless there is a National emergency. I do agree that there training is not on par with active duty, but when the military was downsized by Clinton your best got out and got positions on the outside in their respective fields. There, they were able to improve on what they knew in leaps and bounds on the outside to the point that the military was stuck with those (in many cases) who were not bright enough to make it on the outside or for whatever reasons could not get out of the military at that time. When the sandbox wars began the best and brightest were already in Reserves and National Guard Units. These were the people that knew all of the latest techie advances, not the active duty folks, thus the reason why many of them had so many repeat tours.
Therefore, I consider anyone who has served in the National Guard to be no less service in the military than anyone who has served in any of other the military branches. They take the same risks and face the same hazards when deployed, and therefore should have the same respect as anyone else in the military.
I never said that there service was cheapened in anyway, I just pointed out what you said about "liberals not serving" was not true and that the biggest cowards were the conservatives that I mentioned
Those standards are from 2009. New standards for women in combat are forthcoming:
Under the schedules delivered to Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, the Army will develop standards within the next two years to let women train and possibly serve as Rangers. By March 2016, women could begin training as Navy SEALS. U.S. Special Operations Command is working on deciding what commando jobs could be opened to women and when the transition would take place. The plansrequire women and men to meet the same physical and mental standards to qualify for the front-line positions. It is still possible that women will be kept out of some jobs if research and testing find that they could not be successful in sufficient numbers.
Now, I am not so naive as to not think that requirements for males could be lowered. We'll have to wait and see how they arrive at the gender-neutral standards.
While the senior officer corps is reported to be 2/3 conservative, this is not the case with junior officers, who are much more liberal since 2000. A recent scientific study of the rank and file indicates 32% conservatives, 23% liberals, and 45% moderates.
Your mantra about liberals is not only false, but tiresome to hear. Saying it over and over will not make it true.
His "mantra" is absolutely accurate. I served 7 years from 1996 to 2003 and the vast vast majority of us were and are conservative. There are very few liberals like you in today's military.
P.S. I was enlisted.
Last edited by CaseyB; 11-24-2013 at 08:48 AM..
Reason: language
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.
