Guess Who's Very Quiet About The War in Iraq?

[Bruzilla]

I went to day two of a military affairs forum yesterday, and I noticed something very interesting. This is the seventh year that I've attended these meetings, and there are several very vocal groups. There are the obvious ones... Navy/Marine Corps, Air Force, Army, and to a lesser extent the Coasties, but there are also a lot of crusader groups like those pushing for Gays in the military, etc. One group in particular, that used to be one of the most vocal, has been dead silent for two days. It was like they weren't even there. I thought this might just be a local thing, but a check of news bits on the Internet shows that this group has gone silent across the board. Can you guess who they are?

If you need some clues, here are some of their past issues:

1. They are bright, capable, individuals and there's no reason they can't serve in all roles of the military.
2. They are constantly denied consideration for higher command because they are excluded from combat duties.

It would seem that when there was no fighting going on, they were screaming and hollering to get into combat, but now that the bullets are flying and troops are dying, they have suddenly re-thought their desire for combat and are willing to forgo higher command... at least until the fighting stops.

 

[Dixie]

Females maybe? Senator's kids?

 

[AC/DC]

Females maybe?

What gave it away??

 

[Dixie]

What gave it away??

Excluded from combat duties. I'm female by the way and did my twenty. And for the record think all females should be made to register for selective service same as the men.

 

[vraiblonde]

Bru, does this really surprise you? If the federal government passed a law that said women were barred from becoming garbage guys, suddenly you'd see this rash of women protesting and crying about "discrimination" - never mind that none of them wanted to be garbage guys in the first place.

 

[AC/DC]

Excluded from combat duties. I'm female by the way and did my twenty. And for the record think all females should be made to register for selective service same as the men.

Good job I say!!

I think women SHOULD be put into combat, nothing is more ruthless than a woman, while PMS’ing she could concur the world in less than 24 hours, given the right materials and they make great pilots.

 

[vraiblonde]

The problem with women in combat is that there's a certain amount of physical strength required to do the job. If a woman can do the job, great - let her in. But those chickies would be few and far between.

It's like the movie G.I. Jane, where they've not only got tiny little Demi Moore going through SEAL training, but they have her insist on doing it the exact same way the guys do. Completely unrealistic - there's no way a woman could hang physically with the SEALs.

 

[Bruzilla]

I'm all for putting women into combat and treating them as 100% equals. It worked out great for the Israelis... heck, Dr. Ruth Westheimer was one of their best snipers!

What bugs me is that now that the bullets are flying, the women in combat lobby is saying nothing... just laying low and hoping to not be noticed, where before they had been jumping up and down to get combat billets. What'll really bother me is after the fighting stops and they're jumping up and down again.

 

[AC/DC]

The problem with women in combat is that there's a certain amount of physical strength required to do the job. If a woman can do the job, great - let her in. But those chickies would be few and far between.

It's like the movie G.I. Jane, where they've not only got tiny little Demi Moore going through SEAL training, but they have her insist on doing it the exact same way the guys do. Completely unrealistic - there's no way a woman could hang physically with the SEALs.

Agreed, woman can't do what most men can do physically. BUT, it doesn’t take much to pull a trigger. Women are going to obviously be put through more rigorous assaults when captured, for this; they need to go in to combat knowing the huge cost of capture.

 

[vraiblonde]

Women are going to obviously be put through more rigorous assaults when captured

There's another problem - see, these chicks just aren't thinking this through.

 

[Dixie]

I'm all for putting women into combat and treating them as 100% equals. It worked out great for the Israelis... heck, Dr. Ruth Westheimer was one of their best snipers!

What bugs me is that now that the bullets are flying, the women in combat lobby is saying nothing... just laying low and hoping to not be noticed, where before they had been jumping up and down to get combat billets. What'll really bother me is after the fighting stops and they're jumping up and down again.

It's amazing how far this country has progressed on women's rights yet remained so antiquated on the subject of selective service. I think as a country we're not ready to accept the idea of women dying in combat. Look at all the publicity Jessica Lynch received, not that what happened wasn't newsworthy but lately it's seems like we've become blase about the number of dead servicemen in Iraq, the seriously wounded, those maimed for life.
There are so many young people. I'm way off the topic I only meant to ask you what was on the agenda for your meetings, anything interesting?

 

[AC/DC]

There's another problem - see, these chicks just aren't thinking this through.

They need to talk to the woman that had her chopper shot down in the first Iraq war.

 

[itsbob]

Good job I say!!

I think women SHOULD be put into combat, nothing is more ruthless than a woman, while PMS’ing she could concur the world in less than 24 hours, given the right materials and they make great pilots.

Why woud we care if they agreed with the world?? DOn't we want them to be bi1tchy?? Maybe it would be best if they non-concurred

 

[Kizzy]

Good job I say!!

I think women SHOULD be put into combat, nothing is more ruthless than a woman, while PMS’ing she could conquer the world in less than 24 hours, given the right materials and they make great pilots.

Conquer the world or piss everyone the hell off?

I could not imagine being in combat yesterday and today. Actually, I have no desire to be in combat, period.

 

[Mikeinsmd]

Concur the world or piss everyone the hell off?
I could not imagine being in combat yesterday and today. Actually, I have no desire to be in combat, period.

I can't stand it... it's conquer

 

[itsbob]

Why woud we care if they agreed with the world?? DOn't we want them to be bi1tchy?? Maybe it would be best if they non-concurred

Guess they didn't get the sarcasm?? Maybe I need to dull the blade on my rapier wit!!

 

[Kizzy]

I can't stand it... it's conquer

:fixed:

 

[Toxick]

I think women SHOULD be put into combat, nothing is more ruthless than a woman, while PMS’ing she could concur the world in less than 24 hours, given the right materials and they make great pilots.

Point at random enemy:

"See that guy over there. He called you the 'C' word."
"WHAT?!"
"And all those guys around him laughed and agreed"
YAARRGGGHHH


*Dead enemies everywhere. Disemboweled, dismembered, decapitated and de-anything else you need done.*

"Way to go marine"
"Oo-RAH!"

 

[dmc854]

Point at random enemy:

"See that guy over there. He called you the 'C' word."
"WHAT?!"
"And all those guys around him laughed and agreed"
YAARRGGGHHH


*Dead enemies everywhere. Disemboweled, dismembered, decapitated and de-anything else you need done.*

"Way to go marine"
"Oo-RAH!"

Sounds like first hand experience to me...

 

[Bruzilla]

It's amazing how far this country has progressed on women's rights yet remained so antiquated on the subject of selective service. I think as a country we're not ready to accept the idea of women dying in combat. Look at all the publicity Jessica Lynch received, not that what happened wasn't newsworthy but lately it's seems like we've become blase about the number of dead servicemen in Iraq, the seriously wounded, those maimed for life.
There are so many young people. I'm way off the topic I only meant to ask you what was on the agenda for your meetings, anything interesting?

The issues have gone well beyond not being able to deal with women killed in combat. The loss of the women troops in Iraq has shown to be no big deal, or more properly said, no bigger a concern than the loss of male lives. Another issue was men taking unnecessary risks to protect women, but from what I read of the first MOH recipient in Iraq, he lost his life providing cover for all guys. Also, that guy who did all the shooting during the Lynch affair, who I think should also get a medal, didn't do it to save some women, but to save his group. I doubt he would have fought any less harder if there were no women about. As for rape, male prisoners stand about just as good a chance of getting raped in the Middle East as females.

So, the debate comes down to physical stength and stamina, and as the Left have so elequently stated, everybody in Iraq seems to make their way about in an under-armored HUMVEE, so who cares about strength and stamina? Also, I don't think that you can effectively measure someone's strength and stamina during peacetime exercises and compare that to values found during actual combat. Some gal who may not be able to run the 100-yard dash in under ten seconds during a drill might find herself breaking the sound barrier when someone's shooting at her for real.

So it seems to me that the cliches and false preconceptions of women in combat are falling over dead faster than the insurgents, so coupled with the need for soldiers in the field it would seem that there would be no better time for the Xena Crowd (as we call them) to be hammering away hard. Instead they're hiding in their chairs and not saying a peep. I hope they know how much credability they're flushing down the ladies' room toilet.

As for issues discussed, the ranged from the need for more unmanned surveillance and attack aircraft; the need to develop unmanned fighters (which the USAF opposes strongly); decommisioning the USS Kennedy; upgrades in personal armor (a big deal here in Jax where most of the stuff is made); the proposed increases for survivor benefits; gays in the military (as always); and training and readiness requirements so far.