Female soldiers eyed for combat

[Cate]

Patmack makes a good point - there is certainly a difference between a chauvanist and a pragmatist. That having been said, there are definitely a few of each on this thread.

 

[VetteMuscle427]

This is probably the best statement in this thread and the best arguement for not having women in combat. By combat, I mean on the ground, slinging bullets in downtown somewhere Iraq. Pick your battle. Why do you think we have different standards for PFT/PFA's. Woman just CAN NOT perform on the same level as men.

Playing Devil's advocate; Women are in Army MP units, and MP units are seeing a good amount of fighting over in Iraq. We haven't heard a single word that women aren't holding up their end of the bargain. Abu Gahrib aside.

 

[kevin]

"Although I agree on a matter of principle that we shouldn't really say that women can't do certain things b/c of how the men will react...I think that's reality. It IS F-ed up, but it's also reality. Accomodating dreams are nice, but the military is a mission oriented organization...you've got to make sure that whatever changes you make are POSITIVE one's that improve the Navy's ability to wage war as a whole. So I think introducing into support and aviation was a good move. By opening up recruiting to a different group, I'd guess that you get to be a little more picky in the quality of individual... But no matter how cruel it is, if the action doesn't improve our effectiveness, it's not a necessary change."

I don't think anyone would disagree with you....the disagreement is whether introducing fully qualified women into combat would make those units less effective. and as i said before...all that exists are opinions about it. talking about women crying, etc etc is over-generalizing. yes, most women would be unable to do it (mostly physically)....but we're talking about that percentage that IS fully capable.

 

[kevin]

"This is probably the best statement in this thread and the best arguement for not having women in combat. By combat, I mean on the ground, slinging bullets in downtown somewhere Iraq. Pick your battle. Why do you think we have different standards for PFT/PFA's. Woman just CAN NOT perform on the same level as men. Equal rights or not, it's just nature. And when you get down to it... do you think the enemy has women on the ground fighting? Anyone NOT get where I'm going with this? I'm not a chauvanist, but a realist... something some people have difficulty grasping."

--once again, youre talking about the MAJORITY of women....im talking about a small percentage. why do you have different standards for pft, etc....because it reflects the difference in men and women (true), and because those differences aren't manifested in the job description. that completely changes when you're talking about forward-type ground combat. in this area, there is no place for seperate standards.

 

[Clux4]

I just have one last thing to say, how many of you were pleased with the Jessica Lynch incident ?

 

[EngineGirl]

I just have one last thing to say, how many of you were pleased with the Jessica Lynch incident ?

WTF?? She was one women..... she does not represent all women in the military. In fact, she is a horrible representation of what any military person should do. Yes, she was weak and just broke down and cried and didn't do anything, but there are also accounts of women fighting until the very end (either captured or die). Not all women are Jessica Lynch, so please don't say that we are.

EngineGirl

 

[rare21]

A woman that i wouldnt mind going to battle with...and she was in the Navy.....haha

To all women wanting to go into real ground combat, I better see you in an Army/Marine Corps INFANTRY uniform the day after they pass it.

 

[Clux4]

What is up with the bad rep. points? I have 22 of them already!!
I am not stopping you from being a part of the action. I am only trying to remind you of the situations in the past and how everyone felt about it.
Eventually your wishes would come to effect, so there is nothing this chat on airwarriors will do to affect it in any case.
I am still wondering why naval aviators and flight officers are getting so unhappy about the whole issue. You not on the ground in any case and you probably do not have intentions to go ground side.

For the record I am not against women in the Armed forces or women playing around in mud. By all means take my spot because I don't want it.

 

[VetteMuscle427]

I believe this is the point where you are supposed to leave, gracefully.

 

[manny7_99]

::sighs::

the problem is, i dont think there ARE many facts. im not disagreeing with you about growing pains, but i doubt you'd find many people who believe aviation is less effective now because we have women in that community. how do you know it would be any different with any other community? and i realize fraternization happens (both in civilian and military), but i dont see this as a good enough reason to keep fully qualified women from engaging in a community. if these problems occur, maybe there are some MEN (and women as well) who shouldnt be there. as far as civilian environments, i agree with you...but would point out that it's already happened. just look at women in firefighting, law-enforcement, construction, etc. also keep in mind that most of those environments have SEPERATE physical standards for men and women. im talking about military units where physical standards are identical.

I am a firefighter, and I have to tell you that the wash-out rate (at my station) for women due to not meeting the physical requirements is around 400% in comparrison to the guy's rate. We are DIFFERENT physically. You have to be an idiot or fully blinded by your emotions to say different. Yes, some women are quite amazing, and if a girl can do the same things I can I am quite amazed and give her my respect and even admiration. Yet, In the Infantry ( I dont care about indirect-combat jobs) women will be a distraction and more likely affect the outcome. IT is not about who dreams to be what, it is about who can do the best job on a mission. Aviation is a COMPLETE DIFFERENT matter than ground combat; you guys should know that. I know guys in Ranger Units that have been discharged for not been able to "cope with the environment", and I am not talking about homosexual dudes. Just think what would happen if you throw women in there, definitely not pretty.

Engine girl, you say Jessica Lynch doesnt represent all women. Guess what, NO WOMAN DOES. Why should we change the law for that, may be 1%, that may be able to keep up with the operational tempo and lifestyle? Also, why should we filter out that majority of male GIs, that though not bright, moral or ethical, get the job done and are willing to risk their life for our country. Guess what guys, if those dudes are willing to put their lifes on the line for our nation I dont care about where they put their "winkies." If you want respect, fairness and etiquette, try diplomacy. Last time I checked, that was the place to be nice.Remember that the military back in the day use to be a bunch of criminals, it has change over time, but the best fighters are those who want to fight (being redundant here.) Dont get me wong, I am TOTALLY against rapes and women abuse, like it happened in Panama; but stuff happens. Life is not perfect, war is definitely not fair or nice (people die remember?), yet that's what the military is designed for, to go to war when needed and defend our nation and values. Give me a good argument for sacrificing a great number of Male GIs for may be a couple females that can do the job. Do that and I'll respect your opinion. Otherwise, please dont keep on making "progressive" arguments plz (i.e. Is not fair, I dont like that, we are equal, there is a tiny percentage who are superwomen,etc, and all that bluffing.) About the nose-breaking incident with your bf, He was either "wimpy", a "gentleman" that wasn't gonna fight back or a mixture of both. Try doing that to somebody who doesnt really have any attachments to you (random Infantry guy) and tell me what you would do when he puts a blade to your neck. Lastly, I'd like to see you in an Infantry unit for a day or in Jessica's situation( Not literally, I really wouldnt want anyone in that situation) and see how you would handle it.

MODERATORS: Though this is a free-posting forum, can we please LOCK this thread up. It will go forever and people will argue the same thing over and over without acomplishing anything. IT IS POINTLESS.

 

[Cate]

Although I disagree with just about everything that Manny says and most of the things that he's thinking, I do agree that no one is going to change anyone else's mind on this particular topic.

 

[EngineGirl]

Engine girl, you say Jessica Lynch doesnt represent all women. Guess what, NO WOMAN DOES. Why should we change the law for that, may be 1%, that may be able to keep up with the operational tempo and lifestyle? Also, why should we filter out that majority of male GIs, that though not bright, moral or ethical, get the job done and are willing to risk their life for our country. Guess what guys, if those dudes are willing to put their lifes on the line for our nation I dont care about where they put their "winkies." If you want respect, fairness and etiquette, try diplomacy. Last time I checked, that was the place to be nice.Remember that the military back in the day use to be a bunch of criminals, it has change over time, but the best fighters are those who want to fight (being redundant here.) Dont get me wong, I am TOTALLY against rapes and women abuse, like it happened in Panama; but stuff happens. Life is not perfect, war is definitely not fair or nice (people die remember?), yet that's what the military is designed for, to go to war when needed and defend our nation and values. Give me a good argument for sacrificing a great number of Male GIs for may be a couple females that can do the job. Do that and I'll respect your opinion. Otherwise, please dont keep on making "progressive" arguments plz (i.e. Is not fair, I dont like that, we are equal, there is a tiny percentage who are superwomen,etc, and all that bluffing.) About the nose-breaking incident with your bf, He was either "wimpy", a "gentleman" that wasn't gonna fight back or a mixture of both. Try doing that to somebody who doesnt really have any attachments to you (random Infantry guy) and tell me what you would do when he puts a blade to your neck. Lastly, I'd like to see you in an Infantry unit for a day or in Jessica's situation( Not literally, I really wouldnt want anyone in that situation) and see how you would handle it.

If you want to attack me personally and call me out, thats fine. I never, ever said that we should sacrifice many great male GI's so that a few women can get the job. Did you not read earlier where I said that I don't think women should be in that job to begin with. And when it comes to my ex-fiance, you don't know the situation (and I was just putting that up for the guy who gave me the negative rep points yet lacked the balls to put there name on it). And is for doing that to someone who doesn't have any personal connections to me, I would never, ever hit someone unless it was an extreme situation (and that was). You don't know me and you don't know where I come from or what I've been through, so don't assume I would act a certain way in a situation. And please, if you have a personal attack on me, I'd prefer it if you PM'd it to me.

EngineGirl

 

[manny7_99]

::sighs again::

If you want to attack me personally and call me out, thats fine. I never, ever said that we should sacrifice many great male GI's so that a few women can get the job. Did you not read earlier where I said that I don't think women should be in that job to begin with. And when it comes to my ex-fiance, you don't know the situation (and I was just putting that up for the guy who gave me the negative rep points yet lacked the balls to put there name on it). And is for doing that to someone who doesn't have any personal connections to me, I would never, ever hit someone unless it was an extreme situation (and that was). You don't know me and you don't know where I come from or what I've been through, so don't assume I would act a certain way in a situation. And please, if you have a personal attack on me, I'd prefer it if you PM'd it to me.

EngineGirl

You are flip-floping. First you get bothered by the "excuses? for keeping women out of combat, then you never agreed with it. Also, It's not personal at all, and I am not attacking you either. Just dont try to argue both sides, that is really pointless...thighs are the way they are and that's it, no necessity to complicate them because of liberal thinking. I was not referring to the "Great GIs" that you mention, I was referring to those who have committed "atrocities, rapes, etc" yet got the job done when it came to fighting.

Btw, I dont waste my time giving rep points, lol. Just dont have time for it. How do you know it was a guy if it didnt give you a name? Are we predisposed here? lol

you are right, I dont know you, dont have to, dont want to (may be debatable ) I can only reply in base of what you post. I am not assuming anything. you say you hit somebody, it usually means you did hit somebody. If you didnt, then why post it? If you did, then there are those scenarios that I did mention. It s not that complicated really.

As I said before, it is not personal. Nor did I intent to offend you. I just strongly disagree with any argument of puting women into Infantry Units -Period.

S/F

 

[manny7_99]

Good!

Although I disagree with just about everything that Manny says and most of the things that he's thinking, I do agree that no one is going to change anyone else's mind on this particular topic.

Best post on this thread!!! short , concise, and to the point! Gotta love a girl like that

MODERATORS, this is two people hoping to get this topic LOCKED. Please do so.

P.S. I am not thinking much more, lol. Everything was spelled out.

 

[EngineGirl]

I'm not pulling John Kerry and flip flopping here. All I wanted to say on this thread was that 1) for several reasons I don't beleive women should be in combat units (see my first thread on here....so long ago) but that said 2) I don't beleive rape/harresment should be a reason. Yes its idealogical and maybe a little to "perfect" for this world right now, but it is what I beleive is right. But, I never, ever was meaning to come out and make the argument that women should be in combat units. I just don't think that fact that women might be abused is a good reason to keep them from doing anything. Other reasons yes.

I'm tired of aruguing this point...apparently everyone else has left also.

EngineGirl