Military to allow women in combat

acommondisaster

Active Member
Women already serve several countries in combat roles, notably in Israel and Canada. In 2010, Britain decided it would not change rules excluding women from infantry and combat teams. Officials say demand from women for jobs in the military alliance NATO remain very low.

Women in combat roles to become US norm | News | DW.DE | 24.01.2013

Misconception - women TRAIN for combat roles in Israel, but do not participate in front line combat. Women in idf

And name one battle that included Canadian women in the infantry. It hasnt happened and they've abandoned the possibility in all but theoretical terms.
 

Bann

Doris Day meets Lady Gaga
PREMO Member
I'm of the opinion that women should not be on the front lines. It's not like you can call in when you're menstrual. dumb ####s.

I am of the same opinion. I've been waiting to post in this thread because I didn't have time yesterday, and I also wanted to be able to formulate a thoughtful reply.

It doesn't have anything to do with how smart or physically strong women are or can be. I am not sure it really comes down to that, although there are certainly arguments to be made on both sides for those reasons. It just seems wrong to me, and I feel the same way about women on ships.

I just don't think it's something that should be.
 

Bann

Doris Day meets Lady Gaga
PREMO Member
more than this. What's a woman supposed to do when she needs to deal with her feminine hygiene issue, dive behind a tree and remove 90 lbs+ of war gear? Good luck with that ####, especially in the desert.

I don't know about your other points, but I just can't see myself handling the feminine necessities while having a shoot out the desert palms social club.

:yay:

Yeah, isn't that the truth?
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
CARDIN APPLAUDS MOVE TO OPEN COMBAT JOBS TO WOMEN
U.S. Military Fully Embraces Equal Opportunity for Women

Washington, DC -- U.S. Senator Ben Cardin (D-MD) praised Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta for overturning provisions that kept women from serving in front-line combat positions.

"Yet another glass ceiling is about to be shattered. I applaud Secretary Panetta's actions that will open up thousands of front-line combat positions to America's brave military women, giving them an equal opportunity to serve their nation, earn promotions and move up through the ranks as their male counterparts. America's military is the greatest in the world and it has been made stronger today with the promise of equal opportunity for women and men.

"Every day, we honor the service of our men and women who volunteer to protect our nation. Maryland is home to nearly 30,000 Active, 16,000 Reserve and hundreds of thousands of veteran Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, Marines and Coast Guardsmen. These Marylanders have our utmost respect and appreciation."

If the demon-rats are for it, I'm against it.
 

BOP

Well-Known Member
Hoyer Statement on Defense Department
Lifting Ban on Women in Combat


WASHINGTON, DC - House Democratic Whip Steny H. Hoyer (MD) released the following statement today after Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced the military will be lifting its ban on women serving in combat roles:

“I’m pleased by Secretary Panetta's announcement, in conjunction with the Joint Chiefs' decision, that women will be allowed to serve in combat roles. This is a long awaited change in policy, and reflects the fact that women have courageously served in our armed forces for years. As I said when the discriminatory ‘Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell’ policy was repealed, our military is made stronger when it welcomes the service of all brave Americans willing to fight for their country. This is another step toward a fully inclusive military, and our nation will be better for it.”

If the demon-rats are for it, I'm against it.
 

acommondisaster

Active Member
I'm not in the military, but I am retired Navy. I joined knowing that women were not allowed shipboard, so it never was an issue with me. When women were finally allowed shipboard, my rate was only onboard combatants, so it was still a moot point.

I was always aware that I had physical limitations - that I didn't have the upper body strength of my male counterparts, that they could (generally run faster, carry more, etc.) I like being a female and never have felt the need to "compete", nor have I felt less than equal to a man. I know that as a woman, my strengths lie in that I am generally more detail oriented and better able to multitask than the average guy - and I was able to put that to good use during my career in the Navy (cryptology). I never felt limited, I guess because I think I'm aware of my weaknesses as well as my strengths, and never got frustrated by what I couldn't do when there were so many things I could do.

My concern in this PC world, that standards will get lowered so that the military can meet some stupid threshold that the government will no doubt put in place, requiring that each service have xxx number of females in combatant roles. It's bound to happen, because some female somewhere will cry discrimination when she's dropped from a career field that she washed out of for not being able to meet the requirements. They'll make different standards for women than for men (just like PT) and women will be more vulnerable to the inherent dangers on the battlefield.
 

MMM_donuts

New Member
BLACKFIVE: Get Over It! We Are Not All Created Equal

Straight from a hard core female Marine who has the chops.:patriot:

1) This is written from a female that found herself physically incapable to endure a deployment and is self-admittedly largely basing her opinion on this while citing a lack of data to support it.

2) She thinks the answer is to designate a female only secondary MOS in which females train to a modified program to fit their physical capabilities so that they are useful in combat (Female Engagement Team, which already exists). Let me tell you how well that would go over for a female that out ranks a man.....It'll easily be more divisive - no respect whatsoever. And why should there be? Plenty of people often look for all the reasons they can to take away from the accomplishments of others. We all know that some just automatically assume women are promoted based on their looks or sexual favors. If not that then because the standards are lower for them. I came from a MOS with less than 100 Marines so it was automatically assumed that we were just lucky since we were in such a small MOS, so we didn't have to work as hard. So now she wants to add a specialized bullet on a female's fitrep (or whatever the equivalent promotional documentation officer's use) that will undoubtedly aid in her promotion? Especially one in which females train to a MODIFIED program and spend less time on deployment?

It's not easy to figure out why men don't want us out there trying to do their jobs when the standards are lowered and accommodations made for us when they are not made for them and then we are promoted off that standard. If we were just held to the same standard and expected to accomplish the same level of work, being evaluated strictly on our performance and not on our gender, this would be an entirely different conversation.
 

Bann

Doris Day meets Lady Gaga
PREMO Member
This is a very telling article.

In the end, my main concern is not whether women are capable of conducting combat operations, as we have already proven that we can hold our own in some very difficult combat situations; instead, my main concern is a question of longevity. Can women endure the physical and physiological rigors of sustained combat operations, and are we willing to accept the attrition and medical issues that go along with integration?

As a young lieutenant, I fit the mold of a female who would have had a shot at completing IOC, and I am sure there was a time in my life where I would have volunteered to be an infantryman. I was a star ice hockey player at Bowdoin College, a small elite college in Maine, with a major in government and law. At 5 feet 3 inches I was squatting 200 pounds and benching 145 pounds when I graduated in 2007. I completed Officer Candidates School (OCS) ranked 4 of 52 candidates, graduated 48 of 261 from TBS, and finished second at MOS school. I also repeatedly scored far above average in all female-based physical fitness tests (for example, earning a 292 out of 300 on the Marine physical fitness test). Five years later, I am physically not the woman I once was and my views have greatly changed on the possibility of women having successful long careers while serving in the infantry. I can say from firsthand experience in Iraq and Afghanistan, and not just emotion, that we haven’t even begun to analyze and comprehend the gender-specific medical issues and overall physical toll continuous combat operations will have on females.

I was a motivated, resilient second lieutenant when I deployed to Iraq for 10 months, traveling across the Marine area of operations (AO) and participating in numerous combat operations. Yet, due to the excessive amount of time I spent in full combat load, I was diagnosed with a severe case of restless leg syndrome. My spine had compressed on nerves in my lower back causing neuropathy which compounded the symptoms of restless leg syndrome. While this injury has certainly not been enjoyable, Iraq was a pleasant experience compared to the experiences I endured during my deployment to Afghanistan. At the beginning of my tour in Helmand Province, I was physically capable of conducting combat operations for weeks at a time, remaining in my gear for days if necessary and averaging 16-hour days of engineering operations in the heart of Sangin, one of the most kinetic and challenging AOs in the country. There were numerous occasions where I was sent to a grid coordinate and told to build a PB from the ground up, serving not only as the mission commander but also the base commander until the occupants (infantry units) arrived 5 days later. In most of these situations, I had a sergeant as my assistant commander, and the remainder of my platoon consisted of young, motivated NCOs. I was the senior Marine making the final decisions on construction concerns, along with 24-hour base defense and leading 30 Marines at any given time. The physical strain of enduring combat operations and the stress of being responsible for the lives and well-being of such a young group in an extremely kinetic environment were compounded by lack of sleep, which ultimately took a physical toll on my body that I couldn’t have foreseen.

By the fifth month into the deployment, I had muscle atrophy in my thighs that was causing me to constantly trip and my legs to buckle with the slightest grade change. My agility during firefights and mobility on and off vehicles and perimeter walls was seriously hindering my response time and overall capability. It was evident that stress and muscular deterioration was affecting everyone regardless of gender; however, the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines and further compounded by gender-specific medical conditions. At the end of the 7-month deployment, and the construction of 18 PBs later, I had lost 17 pounds and was diagnosed with polycystic ovarian syndrome (which personally resulted in infertility, but is not a genetic trend in my family), which was brought on by the chemical and physical changes endured during deployment. Regardless of my deteriorating physical stature, I was extremely successful during both of my combat tours, serving beside my infantry brethren and gaining the respect of every unit I supported. Regardless, I can say with 100 percent assurance that despite my accomplishments, there is no way I could endure the physical demands of the infantrymen whom I worked beside as their combat load and constant deployment cycle would leave me facing medical separation long before the option of retirement. I understand that everyone is affected differently; however, I am confident that should the Marine Corps attempt to fully integrate women into the infantry, we as an institution are going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.

:yay: She's 100% correct, IMO. Female beings are not designed for it. Physiologically speaking, it's not natural. It just isn't.
 

acommondisaster

Active Member
She brags about what she could bench. There's more to a PT test than lifting.
I also repeatedly scored far above average in all female-based physical fitness tests (for example, earning a 292 out of 300 on the Marine physical fitness test).
Women are still not required to perform pullups in the Marines. In 2014, they'll be required to do 3 to pass; 8 for a perfect score. Men need 20 for a perfect score. The women also have an additional 3 minutes for the 3 mile run. Getting a score of 292 with no pullups required and a slower run time is an impressive score - but it still can't compare with the male qualifications.
 

abcxyz

New Member
This has nothing to do with actual women in the military and all to do with the "war on women" the Republicans are in (NOT!).
 

GURPS

INGSOC
PREMO Member
It's bound to happen, because some female somewhere will cry discrimination when she's dropped from a career field that she washed out of for not being able to meet the requirements.


didn't that happen with the 1st Female Pilots ?

and it was later found our when the female(s) couldn't hack it - someone pencil whipped the tests ?
 
Top