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.
Well, I am sure these two women are outstanding. Like I said earlier, As a former athlete who played water polo pretty much my whole life, I was a good swimmer, but I have no upper body strength, and i couldn't run to save my life. So these two women must have what it takes to be in one of the elite team.
This being said, my friend once posted this
There is also the factor of being reduced to base creatures, under going immense combat stress, and being in country for an extended period. Human beings will be human beings and seek the comfort of those around them. Basically men and women alike will find a way to physically ease there stress, especially after moral erosion. I have heard of to many co ed units issuing Non-Judicial Punishments out for infidelity during deployment. Not to mention females getting shipped back for becoming pregnant during deployment. This totally compromises mission readiness, presents a grievous logistical challenge, and the unneeded allocation of wartime resources.
You must also factor in man's primordial nature to protect his female counter-part. Whether they are physically involved or not, men have the natural urge to protect the female at all cost, by instinct. This instinctual urge does not make it fair on the battlefield at all and actually clouds sound judgement and the decision making process.
All in all, females should not be allowed to participate as combatants not merely because of their flaw, but because man's flaws as well. Flaws that are a by product of human nature. No matter how much we try to fight it there is still that chance. In war we should not risk the lives of fellow service members, men and women alike. As service members of this country, we should focus on defending the constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic. We do this by excelling on the field of battle...
By the way, he was a combat Marine served 3 tours in ME.
See my post above. How is it that the Kurdish YPJ can do it, but not us? Again - this guy is speculating, whereas the YPG/YPJ, in real life, are proving otherwise.
See my post above. How is it that the Kurdish YPJ can do it, but not us? Again - this guy is speculating, whereas the YPG/YPJ, in real life, are proving otherwise.
because in America, to put women in combat zone is all about politics. I am sure you can do it, do you need to though?
because in America, to put women in combat zone is all about politics. I am sure you can do it, do you need to though?
but your post wasn't about politics, was it? If you are insinuating that America politically "can't handle" women in combat, I think you are wrong. Would I want my daughter in combat? No, but most fathers/mothers probably don't want their sons in combat either, but that aside, I think we as a country can handle both. In a sense, we already do. In today's "terrorist/roadside-sucide bomber" environment, military personnel in non-combat roles are almost at much risk as those in combat.
but your post wasn't about politics, was it? If you are insinuating that America politically "can't handle" women in combat, I think you are wrong. Would I want my daughter in combat? No, but most fathers/mothers probably don't want their sons in combat either, but that aside, I think we as a country can handle both. In a sense, we already do. In today's "terrorist/roadside-sucide bomber" environment, military personnel in non-combat roles are almost at much risk as those in combat.
well, I was answering your question "If so and so can do it, why can't we do it?"
My answer is "because putting women in combat is all about politics."
No more no less.
and my friend gave the best answers why women shouldn't be in combat zone. and I happen to agree.
well, I was answering your question "If so and so can do it, why can't we do it?"
My answer is "because putting women in combat is all about politics."
No more no less.
and my friend gave the best answers why women shouldn't be in combat zone. and I happen to agree.
at this point, let's just agree to disagree.
OK, but I don't think you were responding to my post, but someone else's. I can agree to disagree, but there is living proof, going on right now, that women can be extremely effective in combat.
OK, but I don't think you were responding to my post, but someone else's. I can agree to disagree, but there is living proof, going on right now, that women can be extremely effective in combat.
I wasn't responding to anybody's post if post 50 was what you were talking about.
Ranger school is a leadership course designed to teach the subject while running infantry patrols. Women can't serve in the infantry. They can't serve in the Rangers. In fact, they are barred from most combat MOS's. Total waste of money.
Not to mention that they did lower the standards. They had to pass the female PT test, not the male test. The female version is MUCH easier, as it should be. They were given special "accommodations" while in the field. I spoke with my old CSM and he said the official line is that they were treated the same, but in fact they weren't. Even one "accommodation" is too many, but apparently there were several. I call BS. Welcome to the politically correct military.
Now let's see what happens when a 265lb soldier gets hit and one of these ladies has to carry him 3 kilometers off the battlefield to a MEDEVAC point. Will the enemy make "accommodations" too? The military isn't the place to play with social experimentation. It makes me sick to think that good men will likely die because some PC policy made everyone feel good in Washington.
but your post wasn't about politics, was it? If you are insinuating that America politically "can't handle" women in combat, I think you are wrong. Would I want my daughter in combat? No, but most fathers/mothers probably don't want their sons in combat either, but that aside, I think we as a country can handle both. In a sense, we already do. In today's "terrorist/roadside-sucide bomber" environment, military personnel in non-combat roles are almost at much risk as those in combat.
I don't care about politics. There are no politics downrange. Women aren't as strong as men. They have periods and blood smells. Especially after you've been in the bush for a week or more, it's pretty easy to smell people, especially one who is bleeding and carrying around a backpack full of rotting tampons in 120 degree heat. They can't spend weeks in swamps without bathing and taking care of themselves. Combat is unforgiving. I was in a Recon team in the infantry. We went out on patrol for weeks at a time. We didn't bathe for almost 1 month in Iraq at one point. What happens then?
What happens when a female gets pregnant and you lose 1/5 of your fire team? We are talking about mostly 18-20 year old men and women. Does anyone really think they won't hook up after being alone in the desert for several months? Then what? And what does that do to unit cohesion? Does anyone really think the 21 year old sergeant is going to tell his 19 year old girlfriend to walk point on a movement to contact?
A little common sense is all you need to know that women in combat is a stupid idea.
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.
I spoke with my old CSM and he said the official line is that they were treated the same, but in fact they weren't. Even one "accommodation" is too many, but apparently there were several. I call BS. 
Welcome to the politically correct military. 
