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.
They can, but reality is that some of these women do not. You cannot force them to take the shot. Taking this kind of shot is not mandatory.
Reality for women in combat is this
If on a convoy, women tend to not drink water, as they have no safe place to pee on the side of the road. This often leads to urinary tract infections.
For women who have given birth, another major concern is how to maintain breast-feeding in unsanitary places, such as field exercises. The Canadian military allows women a year after birth before deploying. In the U.S. Army, the deployment-free period has gone from four to six months. Not much more has changed in the last eleven years.
There is widespread recognition that women are in combat, whether or not they are in a combat job. For better or worse, when a woman is wounded or killed, there is not a public outcry.
that the military changes when the media, the Congress and the American people, push them.
Oh, come on, any women who are serious soldiers, behave in the same way as any male soldier. Vanity and embarrassment over universal bodily functions go by the wayside very quickly for either gender. No serious soldier would be pumping milk on a deployment, or refuse to pee along the side of the road. That kind of thinking is archaic.
There are plenty of jobs in the military that are 9-5, in which females are able to lead normal family lives and serve out their careers. Those who chose combat related jobs, need to adjust their lives accordingly, not the other way around.
Not to change the subject, but my former DIL was a soldier in Desert Storm, and she said a lot of the women got pregnant intentionally, so they could go home. They were only in it for the paycheck and benefits, but bailed when they had to actually do their job. Bottom line is the military is like anything else, some people will distinguish themselves and others won't.
Oh, come on, any women who are serious soldiers, behave in the same way as any male soldier. Vanity and embarrassment over universal bodily functions go by the wayside very quickly for either gender. No serious soldier would be pumping milk on a deployment, or refuse to pee along the side of the road. That kind of thinking is archaic.
There are plenty of jobs in the military that are 9-5, in which females are able to lead normal family lives and serve out their careers. Those who chose combat related jobs, need to adjust their lives accordingly, not the other way around.
Not to change the subject, but my former DIL was a soldier in Desert Storm, and she said a lot of the women got pregnant intentionally, so they could go home. They were only in it for the paycheck and benefits, but bailed when they had to actually do their job. Bottom line is the military is like anything else, some people will distinguish themselves and others won't.
bolded is exactly why women shouldn't be put in combat zone. Too many excuses. Obviously. men cannot use pregnancy as an excuse.
Really don't know what you are arguing about here, this thread is about putting women in special forces. Special operations are serious businesses, if one of these ladies get pregnant, then what? Like you said, there are other jobs in the military. Other jobs are more suitable for women, special forces is not one of them.
If Army truly believed these two women could be serving as male rangers, then how come
Unlike the male graduates, the two women can't apply to join the 75th Ranger Regiment, an elite special operations force.
"On average, more than 37 percent of Ranger School graduates recycle at least one phase of the school. The Darby recycle rate is about 15 percent.
The soldiers being recycled 'failed to meet the standards of the Darby phase of Ranger School for a variety of reasons,' said Col. David Fivecoat, commander of the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade, which runs Ranger School. This could include patrols, peer evaluations, spot reports, or a combination of the three, he said.
'The vast majority, however, failed several opportunities as a squad leader or team leader to lead a patrol successfully,' Fivecoat said.
All of the recycled students have been checked by medics to make sure they don't have serious injuries, he said.
About 35 male Ranger students failed to meet the standards and will not be recycled. They will return to their units, officials said."
Let's see how many women can make it without a do-over, then. So far......zero.
Just so you know, most of the men take two or three tries also. This is not so much because they are not up to the tasks, it is more about learning about the best way to prepare. By the second or third attempt they know how best to attack the course in order to finish.
Like, one story I heard from one of my sons was about "water moccasin balls" in the everglades component of training in FL. If I'm remembering the story right, mating water moccasins form into a writhing ball of snakes. I guess a person could freak out the first time he had to jump into a swamp full of mating water moccasins. If he was expecting this, and knew that when this is going on they are too busy to bother with anyone in the water, they might get through it better the second time.
"On average, more than 37 percent of Ranger School graduates recycle at least one phase of the school. The Darby recycle rate is about 15 percent.
The soldiers being recycled 'failed to meet the standards of the Darby phase of Ranger School for a variety of reasons,' said Col. David Fivecoat, commander of the Airborne and Ranger Training Brigade, which runs Ranger School. This could include patrols, peer evaluations, spot reports, or a combination of the three, he said.
'The vast majority, however, failed several opportunities as a squad leader or team leader to lead a patrol successfully,' Fivecoat said.
All of the recycled students have been checked by medics to make sure they don't have serious injuries, he said.
About 35 male Ranger students failed to meet the standards and will not be recycled. They will return to their units, officials said."
As I said, so far, zero.
But let's not let that deter us from further diluting the true purpose of our military, which is to engage and kill the enemy. Continue with the social engineering. Prepare the JAG folks for the flood of lawsuits based on sexual harassment which are the inevitable result of mixing young men and women together under the pretence that warriors ought to be asexual.
Ever been in a combat unit, suzy? It's not even remotely like college. No amount of political correctness will impress the enemy or keep young men from acting in cruel and vicious ways -- which is, after all, their mission. Put a few heterosexual women in a real rifle squad and watch it deteriorate. Is that really what you want? To put our young people even more at risk than they already are, having been tasked to achieve nation-building for barbarian tribes, engage yet again in asymmetrical warfare without having been informed of their strategic mission, and cohabit with people to whom the same sex is the desirable one?
The moronic nature of the civilian meddling with our military, in the guise of achieving some sort of cockeyed social justice and evening the score in the gender wars -- as if sexual difference were some sort of correctble flaw, rather than the nature of human beings -- is stupid and pernicious.
Just so you know, most of the men take two or three tries also. This is not so much because they are not up to the tasks, it is more about learning about the best way to prepare. By the second or third attempt they know how best to attack the course in order to finish.
Like, one story I heard from one of my sons was about "water moccasin balls" in the everglades component of training in FL. If I'm remembering the story right, mating water moccasins form into a writhing ball of snakes. I guess a person could freak out the first time he had to jump into a swamp full of mating water moccasins. If he was expecting this, and knew that when this is going on they are too busy to bother with anyone in the water, they might get through it better the second time.
Okay, if we're talking about a triathlon with a little Crocodile Hunter thrown in, fine and good. Officers of both sexes covet that patch to move up the corporate ladder and someday go for a star. Understood. But let's keep our eye on the ball. If we're talking about real small unit combat, the idea of attempting to integrate heterosexual women into rifle squads is a recipe for disaster. Even one incident -- and there would be many -- risks the safety of our fighting forces. The question we need to be asking is whether political correctness and "gender equality" are worth the lives and safety of our troops. The current administration, which holds the military in barely disguised contempt, is willing to sacrifice additional young lives to please its political constituencies. I find that unacceptable. I am surprised to find that so few in this thread express similar views, though given the fear of the feminist gender police which infects our national discourse, perhaps I am just being naive.
But let's not let that deter us from further diluting the true purpose of our military, which is to engage and kill the enemy. Continue with the social engineering. Prepare the JAG folks for the flood of lawsuits based on sexual harassment which are the inevitable result of mixing young men and women together under the pretence that warriors ought to be asexual.
Ever been in a combat unit, suzy? It's not even remotely like college. No amount of political correctness will impress the enemy or keep young men from acting in cruel and vicious ways -- which is, after all, their mission. Put a few heterosexual women in a real rifle squad and watch it deteriorate. Is that really what you want? To put our young people even more at risk than they already are, having been tasked to achieve nation-building for barbarian tribes, engage yet again in asymmetrical warfare without having been informed of their strategic mission, and cohabit with people to whom the same sex is the desirable one?
The moronic nature of the civilian meddling with our military, in the guise of achieving some sort of cockeyed social justice and evening the score in the gender wars -- as if sexual difference were some sort of correctble flaw, rather than the nature of human beings -- is stupid and pernicious.
You know Yaledef, once upon a time people claimed allowing Blacks to fight was "social engineering" ... as was allowing Puerto Rican soldiers to serve overseas. "Rum and Coca Cola soldiers" they were called. They insisted that Puerto Ricans were too lazy to fight, the Asians werent loyal enough to fight, and Blacks were Blacks so they couldent fight either.
They were wrong. And they will be proven wrong about female soldiers too.
You know Yaledef, once upon a time people claimed allowing Blacks to fight was "social engineering" ... as was allowing Puerto Rican soldiers to serve overseas. "Rum and Coca Cola soldiers" they were called. They insisted that Puerto Ricans were too lazy to fight, the Asians werent loyal enough to fight, and Blacks were Blacks so they couldent fight either.
They were wrong. And they will be proven wrong about female soldiers too.
Did they let black, Puerto Rican, Japanese women to fight? They eventually allowed Japanese men, black men, Puerto Rican men to fight, not women.
It was decided they would pass before they ever entered the program
They will be paraded before the media 24 -7
The next 10 thousand female applicants will fail
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.
