Women in Combat? Why? (Part II)

Discussion in 'Warfare / Military' started by Herkdriver, Sep 21, 2011.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Herkdriver

    Herkdriver New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 6, 2007
    Messages:
    21,346
    Likes Received:
    299
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I suppose I'll begin the new thread for those interested in carrying on the debate.

    This debate concerns a Department of Defense policy going back to 1994, which bans
    women from serving in direct ground combat units of the infantry, armor and artillery.

    "women shall be excluded from assignment to units below the brigade level whose primary mission
    is to engage in direct combat on the ground."


    The policy states that... "direct ground combat takes place well forward on the battlefield."


    Should the ban be lifted?

    or

    Should the ban remain?

    Discuss.
     
  2. talonlm

    talonlm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    777
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I dodged most of the earlier debate; too busy to really dedicate much time to it. Forgive me if I hit on points already made.

    Lift the ban--just don't lower the standards solely to permit female entry into a career field.

    I'm all for women doing whatever they are qualified to do in the military. Fighter pilot, submariner, infantry or specops, whatever they want--so long as the standards are not lowered to permit a woman entry into those career fields. A firefight is not the place to discover your fireteam partner can't drag you out of harm's way when you've been hit. Man or woman, if they can't carry their end of the load, they don't need to be there.
     
  3. waltky

    waltky Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    30,071
    Likes Received:
    1,205
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Uncle Ferd says he wouldn't mind bein' inna foxhole with an Aussie woman like dat one dat was in Crocodile Dundee...
    :-D
    Women soldiers in Australia to get front-line roles
    Sep 28, 2011 - Australia will remove all gender barriers in its military over the next five years, opening up positions that had previously been considered too dangerous for women, including front-line combat roles.
     
  4. Mushroom

    Mushroom Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2009
    Messages:
    13,153
    Likes Received:
    2,922
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    And that is fine. Personally, I never accepted the concept that "this country does it, so we should do it too" as a valid argument.

    After all, the age of conscent in Zimbabwe is 12. And in Tanzania a girl can be married before she reaches the age of 12.

    And in China, Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, and 8 other countries all have Death Penalties related to Marijuanna.

    So if you think the US (or any country) should follow a countries laws because you like them, then you should also be prepared to follow all of them, even if you do not like them.
     
  5. krunkskimo

    krunkskimo New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    4,219
    Likes Received:
    30
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think women in combat in general is fine but there's a big difference between infantry and the support roles they are currently in that see combat.

    Women thrive (generally) in postions that are not intended to be directly enganged in combat. Whether it's engineer, linguistics, supply, MPs, and ect. Those postions women can already join end up operating in bases that is of decent enough size which can accommodate their needs.

    that expectation does not exisist in the infantry and it would be nearly impossible to provide.
     
  6. Dware

    Dware New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think its wrong to put women in danger in combat, not because i think they can do it, some of them clearly can.

    I just think we should cherish women and have more respect for them as "women" than to get them killed in combat.
     
  7. Up On the Governor

    Up On the Governor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,469
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I just threw up in my mouth. Not a little. Do you write greeting cards? If I want to get killed in combat, then I should be more than able to. I am not worth anything more than you or any other guy.
     
  8. Dware

    Dware New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's a little more complicated than that im afraid.

    Sure there will always be hardcore butch types that are all gun ho to get themselves killed, but alot problems come up or it would have been done a long time ago.

    If a woman is captured in combat people freak out, it causes problems and puts other people in danger.

    Can "some" women do it? Sure they can... Should they? Personally i dont think it's a good idea for a dozen various reasons, but whatever, not for me to decide anyway.
     
  9. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,299
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    words from the prophet-

     
  10. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,299
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    you do not have permission to die.
     
  11. Up On the Governor

    Up On the Governor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,469
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    It is not.

    I am not a butch type nor do I want to get killed. It is a possibility that I do not dwell on, but it can happen. If any other woman wants to follow in this career, the door should not be closed on her because you think she is to be "cherished" instead. And what problems come up with women in their current roles in the military? I have flown with a few different squadrons and never had a problem.

    If I am captured in combat, I can guarantee you the SOF guys are going to respond in the same way they would if I were a man. The same goes for all women in any AFSC or MOS. The civilians might lose their (*)(*)(*)(*), but they are not involved in the SAR operation now are they?

    Noted.
     
  12. Up On the Governor

    Up On the Governor Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    4,469
    Likes Received:
    164
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Haha. This maggot understands.
     
  13. Dware

    Dware New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Look Gov, Americans do not want to see females dieing or getting gang banged in some foreign prison or dragged through the streets.

    You can get up in arms over that fact all you want, whatever, but the average joe just doesnt want to see it or hear about it.

    I understand your a feminist and thats cool, what do i care, im just letting you know why, it really has nothing to do with their "abilities"
     
  14. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,299
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :omfg: you did not just post that! :shocked:
     
  15. Dware

    Dware New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Sure did its a fact man.

    I know i wouldnt want a women on my squad for a whole host of reasons, and can think of zero reasons why i would want one, too many negatives.

    We werent trying to be PC,we were trying to secure the mission, no time for that crap.

    Not to mention it would be virtually impossible for a female to carry all the gear we had to carry, there were times i personally had 150 pounds of gear on me. How many females do you know that could do that?

    News flash....men and Women are different.


    Gov thinks because she flies a airplane 30,000 feet in the sky she could be a warrior on the ground, lol, doesnt work that way im afraid.
     
  16. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,299
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    most soldiers are too busy completing their current mission to go trying to secure another one, but hey! the mop squad has to keep busy.

    methinks you either are a bad judge of weight or you were close to 300lbs yourself, or you should have used the wheels on that floor buffer. :roll:


    woman have faster reaction times, and are much more vicious. don't (*)(*)(*)(*) them off.

    no (*)(*)(*)(*), Sherlock. they're different skill sets. i can kill a tank with the contents of the cabinet under my bathroom sink, but that doesn't mean i could get a modern jet off the ground.
     
  17. talonlm

    talonlm New Member

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2010
    Messages:
    777
    Likes Received:
    6
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What makes you feel women are so special as to be singled out for protection? Do you beleive it is tolerable to have male soldiers "dieing or getting gang banged in some foreign prison or dragged through the streets?" Why?


    So long as a person has the ability to do a given job, why should they not be permitted to do it? Why?
     
  18. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Why?
    That implies a responsibility on the part of the American citizenry to provide you with that opportunity, which responsibility is of course purely chimerical.
    You're dumbing it down way too much. It's not that women are worth more, but that they are worth more playing the roles women are cut out for than they are playing roles men are cut out for.
     
  19. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Weapons guys can easily have a loadout in excess of 100 pounds.

    Can I see some evidence backing up your claim that women have faster reaction times and are more vicious? Also, visciousness isn't neccessarily a trait you want on the battlefield.
     
  20. IgnoranceisBliss

    IgnoranceisBliss Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2009
    Messages:
    5,201
    Likes Received:
    41
    Trophy Points:
    48
    I think you misunderstand Gov's position. She was pretty active in the previous Women in Combat thread. My understanding is that she doesn't agree that women should be in Infantry/SF roles, but are more than capable of performing in flying/every other role. Chances are you implied that women didn't belong in "combat" when you meant to imply that women don't belong in ground combat. That's an important distinction to remember.
     
  21. mikezila

    mikezila New Member

    Joined:
    May 30, 2009
    Messages:
    23,299
    Likes Received:
    250
    Trophy Points:
    0
    60 was the standard, 101-120 is possible, 150 isn't unless you're putting it on a pack mule.

    the quick answer on reflexes. as for viciousness, have you met any women?!?! :omfg:
    don't (*)(*)(*)(*) them off.


    for what it's worth, i never said women should be in frontline ground combat. read my previous posts in this thread for a read in.
     
  22. yguy

    yguy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2010
    Messages:
    18,423
    Likes Received:
    886
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Gender:
    Male
    Anonymous comment on chacha.com??

    You need to slow down and try again.
     
  23. wezol

    wezol New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 18, 2011
    Messages:
    719
    Likes Received:
    12
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Is this from first hand experience in combat? I've had a load out of 135lbs a few times, and I know for a fact it was because we had to weight ourselves cause we were air assaulting on a Polish bird, with a weight limit.
     
  24. Dware

    Dware New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2010
    Messages:
    5,130
    Likes Received:
    46
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I assure you i can carry 150 pounds son.:mrgreen:
     
  25. signcutter

    signcutter New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 21, 2011
    Messages:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    93
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yep.. if a women is stupid enough to want to go to war along with the other monkeys.. so be it.. its their right. But the should be able to pefform every single part of the training their counterparts do and handle the same physical loads their counterparts do.

    I served in the military and currently am a LEO. I'll tell you right now that 90% of the women I have worked with I would not want as a partner if given a choice.... more of a liability than real back up. There are a few women that would have worked with that I would absolutely want as back up .. but those women werent your typical 120 pound female.

    As stationary snipers, assasins.. pilots.. tank drivers women can excell as much as any man..but in any role that requires physical stregnth and natural aggression.. you typically cant replace a man with a woman.

    As far as women having faster reaction times than men.. thats laughable.. that comes from natural apptitude and training. Women have less muscle mass than men and more bodyfat.. how that translates into faster reaction time, I dont know...The only thing I can see women that women usually have over men is flexibility.. and I have never seen a female drop out of training because of dehydration.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page