Women in Combat? Thoughts?

I have served. SAME requirement for the SAME job. No reduced requirements just because of sex!

If you never volunteered, then dont judge. they already have more balls than you do.I wish they came up with a program called one man for one woman, which men would volunteer to replace women in combat roles and we could see how many of us against this would volunteer to replace them on the front lines:whistle: I have served with men who should have never been in, and did not measure up and they knew it. give me specific reasons for your reasons why they should not be on the lines. (ex) their cycle may get in the way, sex with others troops, rape after capture, Stinky puss on a hot day , hell most of these things happen with male soldiers. I just think our society is raised to protect our women, or to make them think we as men are the hunters and providers, problem is some of us men are not living up to our roles as the traditional man, so I guess baby girl has to step up and do what some of us aren't wiling to do, look in the mirror, sign up my brothers. I'm sure some of us would put our ex wife's or some ex girlfriends in the very front of the lines:whistle:
 
None. I got recycled. Same question for you.

I seen some get recycled, and went threw with some that i wouldn't want to be in combat with also in 1986, and I didn't protest to drill instructors , but most certainly to my fellow soldiers and the bums I speak of. even went to AIT with them after boot camp , and into the field , but I always tried to either help or change their attitude or tried to help them work harder to become better, some tried, some didn't, and some I just couldn't even stand to try to talk to. wasn't as many as I make it seem though. We all needed some molding, but you know the ones I'm talking about, you still work with some to this day
 
Most people get emotional about this kind of discussion but the truth of the matter is all Phsychological..............Men are Programed to protect the female. If one is Injured in combat. They want to fix the problem which gets in the way of the Mission. A soldiers job is to Complete the Mission !!!!! Thats it :rulez:
 
i am a vet as well and from my experience they have no place in combat period. Its not that they get periods or anything else. Its that they are not as physically designed for combat nor are they generally as strong as the male counterparts.
If they were to start something like this then they should have to pass the same required elements that the men do no exceptions. All in all its a bad idea but hell leave it to our retarded government officials most of whom have never seen a day of combat in their lives to make and push bs like this out there.
 
My only point is make a specific argument, give some reasons why you feel the way you do. thanks for your opinion
 
I'm sex blind as far as combat soldiers go. If she can carry/drag a large equipped injured fellow out of the line of fire then ok. If she doesn't mind being dirty for weeks at a time in country then fine. If she can handle weapons as good as others then fine.

For me the question has always been: can a giver of life take life as quickly and efficiently as a man?

you can't really say that tho bud, there are "men" and by men I really mean boys, who are in the army who couldn't drag me out of a building if i was wounded. if you're going to impose a standard like that on females, start first on the males. the army wants you to be able to do tons of pushups and situps, and run like a flipping gazelle, but they don't put much credence in heavy lift capability. i can pick up a 185 lb soldier and toss them over my shoulder, and still maintain a decent pace for a short distance, but switch roles, and that same soldier would be better off putting a bullet in my head and then sprinting off. i mean with a full combat loadout, i'm well over 300 lbs. i know i'm not in a combat arms MOS, but i think the grunts should all be able to physically move each other in a situation like that. hell, we all should, but the army keeps recruiting skinny people who can run. hopefully the new PT test will equalize things a bit.
 
If im stuck in hole gettin shot at, I dont care what equipment ya got, just be a good shot and dont get me killed!!
 
There are certainly women that can handle being on the front lines, perhaps more than some of the men. The issue IMHO is not that women cannot or would not make good front line soldiers. The biggest concern is what happens when one of the women are captured or killed. I don't think the US is ready to see their daughters tortured, raped, mutilated or killed on some webcast by some terrorist. Its just the way people are wired, in general men are the hunter/gatherer of the species and women are the nurturing/care giving side. In time as that perception changes perhaps it will be more widely accepted but for now, I think it causes too many distractions that could negatively impact our ability to carry out missions. For proof, I offer the Jessica Lynch saga and all the media drama focused on that during the time she was missing as well as the months following.

The real issue underlying all of this is that instead of letting the politicians decide when/if we go to war, we have let them now dictate how we fight the war instead of our military leadership. All of this comes from political pressure on military leaders. I've said for a long time if we had to fight WWII the way we have to fight wars now, we'd all be speaking German. :banghead:
 
Most people get emotional about this kind of discussion but the truth of the matter is all Phsychological..............Men are Programed to protect the female. If one is Injured in combat. They want to fix the problem which gets in the way of the Mission. A soldiers job is to Complete the Mission !!!!! Thats it :rulez:

That was one of the main things our last Sergeant Major OTMC stated as to why he was against it.
 
Everyone in my family has or is doing service now including my daughter ( E-6 army airborne ) . I believe women have the right but would be a huge distraction and liability during a combat situation . Sorry to say but they are not built for it (most women ) .





Against

Woman can do anything a man can, I'd rather not get into the specifics about why I don't want them in the front line.
 
:poke: ok here my 2 cent woman in combat bad idea i was in the air force that was ok cause i wasnt on the front line but my hubby who was in the army have told me story about training with and training woman and he was a m1 tanker but when he was in basic and was on the shooting range the guys who can shoot well was told to give up rounds so the woman can qualify you get 40 round he have to give up 15 and place them in front of the fox hole so the woman coming behind could have them and yes she or them shoot better then the guys so that is what it is and again when with the tanks that was a real bad idea and i know all thing on tanks or heavy(been there) he want to show me what he do so on this day rotc come down for the summer training and 20 woman want to try the tank fields after 3 days they was done the loading/unloading maintenance and been dirty all the time and thought they could be off after 5 lol dont work that way :cheerleader:
 
i see this turning into a huge debate lol russell:laugh: you pot stirrer, but i agree with you man......you shouldn't put females in combat:rulez: deployed twice and there nothing but a distraction and i know you could carry my 225lb big arse if i went down, but i know some 115lb woman couldn't and it's not a sexist thing at all......i agree with everything yall are saying about woman in a COMBAT SITUATION. theres nothing wrong with women in the military. theres my 2 cents:beerchug:
 
Aw hell, if I'm a distraction, that ain't my fault. Takes only a few pounds of pressure to pull a trigger so set me up 1000 yards away with my 338 Lap Mag and several hundred rounds of ammo, and I'm a happy girl. I've been in and around military my whole life and I have seen women I wouldn't take the time from, and guys who can hardly open a door. In general, I think if you can pass standards (GETTING RID OF MALE/FEMALE standard differences) then you get a chance at combat. Guys, I know you are "supposed to protect, etc" but really, if there was a soldier down wouldn't you help them regardless of their sex? As far as if a female is captured, yup, there are some horrific things that can happen. If a female chooses to be in combat, guess what, they accept that this might happen. I don't think it is any less horrific than what happened to the pilot (I think) whose body was publicly dragged around a town years ago, mutilated and set on fire and broadcast. I think this will be a debate for a long time but there are already armies that have had women in combat for decades. I was on armed boarding parties in the Coast Guard and had to earn my respect like the others but I did. Sorry to have rambled so long!

Rio
 
If it does pass it probably will not last once pictures are released of what happens to the ones that are captured. That will be a horrible sight for sure! My ex daughter-in-law is forward deployed in Afghanistan right now and I would be going completely insane if she was in a combat role....we worried plenty when she was in Baghdad last year.

My daughters going in August...
 
Back
Top