Should Women Be Allowed in Ground Combat

[IHL]

Should women be allowed in direct fire combat roles?

[God v2.0]

Absolutely,

If a woman wants to serve her country by being on the front lines, who are we to say they are not allowed? As long as they are 18 and made the decision to serve, they should fight.

[Wadi66]

IHL how is this thread different than "women in combat"??

[Wadi66]

If a woman wants to serve her country by being on the front lines, who are we to say they are not allowed? People with a good deal more common sense. The human brain doesn't fully mature until age 25. These young women have absolutely no idea what awaits them. All the training in the world doesn't come close to reality.

[God v2.0]

But are you against men volunteering at 18?

If so , then I agree with you.

If not <witty comment about some great argument>

[Wadi66]

But are you against men volunteering at 18?

If so , then I agree with you.

If not <witty comment about some great argument>As a matter of fact I am against it. Having raised 3 sons and 2 daughters past age 18 I feel I know the maturity level they possess. At 18 you're still a kid, enjoy the sense of freedom and levity. Draft at 18? Not at 18 or 118.

[IHL]

IHL how is this thread different than "women in combat"?? It isn't. It's just the poll section of the same thread really. I shouldn't have added the 'disccussion' option I suppose.

[Hillrunner]

I am going to have to strongly disagree with all of you who say that women should be allowed to serve in combat if they can pass the same physical test as a man. Spare me the feminist babble of men and women being equal in every aspect emotionally and physically because i don't buy it. Men and women are different and this is why throughout history we have never read of the women going off to war and the men raising the kids. REGARDLESS women should not be allowed in combat for the same reason gay men should not be allowed in combat. I don't have to point out the obvious problems this would create. It would create unnecessary complications. We should not allow the security of our troops to be jeopardized by creating such a scenario. If you are in love with the soldier next to you than you have duel loyalty and it is very possible a case could come up where you would have to choose between the two. Why can't we stop trying to be politically correct and use some common sense?

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

The problem isn't the women.

It's the men.

From first hand experience, woman have tons more endurance than men, and for the most part can handle a lot more than men can deal with.

The problem with women in combat is that men, for what ever reason, feel that they have to protect the women.

Thus, when a woman is injured or killed, the man's focus shifts from soldier and responding like one, to protector and avenger. The instant his focus shifts, everything goes down the shitter.

Israel has had women in combat for decades and it works.

Instead of placing men with women in combat, the women should be forming units of their own. Of course a woman should be able to complete the exact training a man can with no exceptions.

We had 5 women join us in jump training back in '94, at that time no women had ever completed jump training, and the CO was hell bent on not letting them through under his watch.

The jump course had a 70% failure rate, and it begins by a 3 day PT phase where a candidate does not eat, sleep or stop moving for 3 days straight.

At the end of Day 1 the PT Phase was on target for a 70% fail, about 20 guys had dropped off, and none of the women had.

Middle of Day 2 the Col. wanted to know why no women had dropped off, and the instructors showed him that they were bang on target for a 70% fail.

So the Col went to the local Infantry HQ unit, got 3 femal instructors, ordered them to have the women off by the morning of day 3. The female Instructors seperated the 5 women, and within 10 hours all 5 had dropped off.

Which brings me to another point about women in combat. You DO NOT want to be taken captive and have a woman as an interrogator. In Escape and Evasion training, we were told that women are by far the most rutheless persecutors on the face of this planet.

Nothing against females, I love 'em and I'm the only one in my house that pee's standing up, but there's a viscious tendancy deep within a woman. If you don't believe me, try get in between a mother and her child and see what happens.

[Madcowhunter]

The problem is placing women with men, I was always taught never to hit a women, so I'm thinking killing women is wrong, it's just something you don't do. I'm not sure in combat, men could stand watching women die like that.

So placing women with men is a bad idea. But you can't just say, "OK, this battle will be fought by women, and THIS battle will be fought by men."

[idontcarewhatuthink]

White African American,
in Israel, they force all males of the age of 18 to join the military for at least two years. If women are just as good at and possibly better than men on an endurance level and at handling situations better, then shouldnt they be forced into the army before the men or along with the men? and maybe the responsibilities of the two sexes should shift?
I personally, do not believe that all women are better than all men at such things as war. Women have their stronger suits and men have theirs.

[CognitiveTruth]

Why do some women insist on engaging in direct combat? There is one reason and one reason alone you should join the military - to serve your country. You don't have to fire a gun to serve your country, you can be a cook, a surgeon, a secretary, a medic. You do what you give the most at. I don't know what kind of women we're dealing with here, but most if not all the women I know would not be able to handle the carnage of battle.

Just because men and women are different and have different physical limitations does not mean we have to adjust to these limitations. You can be sure the enemy won't. I believe to pass basic training women have to do 17 pushups in 2 minutes while men have to do 42. That means that with these particular requirements the women are half as capable as the men.

This is war. This is hell. This is no place for petty politics. A life is no fair price for equality.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

in Israel, they force all males of the age of 18 to join the military for at least two years

Actually, the women are drafted too. Women just have a lot more exceptions when it comes to national service. Marriage, pregnancy, religious convictions, and lack of education are all reasons for exempting women from this obligation. It is significant that about 18 percent of the women are excused because of their orthodox religious practices and another 19 percent do not enter the services because they lack the ten-year minimum educational requirement.


If women are just as good at and possibly better than men on an endurance level and at handling situations better, then shouldnt they be forced into the army before the men or along with the men? and maybe the responsibilities of the two sexes should shift?

Well, if your talking about the US, the military here remains a volunteer military. Which btw is the best thing in the world, that the people that are there, typically WANT to be there.

So, I don't think that women should be forced into anything. What I do think is that they should operate in their own units, and carry out operations too.

Keep in mind that I was pointing out that the problem with women in combat is the men next to them. Hell, your brain turns to mush when a woman walks near you, how the hell do you think you'd react if she is wounded?

I'd suggest, you'd focus on getting her out of harms way instantly. Therein lies the problem. While reasonable attention should be given to an injured buddy, you primary focus must remain on the situation at hand, that after all is why there are medics. Any deviation from the plan could result in catastrophic losses, all because you wanted to be knight in shining armour. (Watch the Chia Pet rip me about how I spelled colour now :icon_twis ).


I personally, do not believe that all women are better than all men at such things as war. Women have their stronger suits and men have theirs.

I don't believe that I said they were better exclusively. I knew plenty female soldiers that could out shoot, out run and out think myself and many other males I knew. I also knew a lot of females that were suited for nothing more than sitting behind a desk pushing a pen. Then again I knew alot of men that were only suited for that too.

My point is that women should be allowed to serve in combat if THEY so choose, and if they can pass EXACTLY THE SAME requirements the men have.
In addition women should have their own self sufficient units and carry out their own mission.

This will never happen though. I don't think the American people are ready to see their daughters come home in body bags en masse That and the politcians would use their deaths to make political hay with who ever is in office and instituted a woman combat role policy.

Hell, look at how the left has tried time and time again to use the deaths of male troops to bring down Bush.


There is one reason and one reason alone you should join the military - to serve your country.

Yes and No, keep in mind that many countries like Israel, don't have a 240 million population that the US has or the budget for that matter, to attract volunteer troops. National Service (a draftis tyoe of arrangement) is necessary to muster enough troops to effectively defend yourself.

THat's what happened to me after high school.


You don't have to fire a gun to serve your country, you can be a cook, a surgeon, a secretary, a medic. You do what you give the most at.

Actually if you're serving in the military you have to be able to fire a gun. One is a soldier first, then a cook, doctor, pen push second. But you are right in your assesment though.


I don't know what kind of women we're dealing with here, but most if not all the women I know would not be able to handle the carnage of battle.

Do you think the carnage of the battle field is any different than a train hitting a school bus full of kids? Yet there are plenty medic's, emergency nurses and doctors that are all women.

You underestimate a woman my friend. I think Shakespeare said it best
"Hell hath no fury than a woman scorned"

Seriously though, if you look in nature, you'll find that the female of the species are the most dangerous. Particularly if you threaten her kids.

Women are tough, and by virtue of the fact that God endowed them with pregnancy, tells me they have more endurance than men.

Now, let me say this, Not all women are so inclined, but I have a serious amount of respect for the female of the species, and I have learned never to underestimate them.

[ptruble]

The problem isn't the women.

It's the men.

From first hand experience, woman have tons more endurance than men, and for the most part can handle a lot more than men can deal with.

The problem with women in combat is that men, for what ever reason, feel that they have to protect the women.

Thus, when a woman is injured or killed, the man's focus shifts from soldier and responding like one, to protector and avenger. The instant his focus shifts, everything goes down the shitter.

Israel has had women in combat for decades and it works.

Instead of placing men with women in combat, the women should be forming units of their own. Of course a woman should be able to complete the exact training a man can with no exceptions.

We had 5 women join us in jump training back in '94, at that time no women had ever completed jump training, and the CO was hell bent on not letting them through under his watch.

The jump course had a 70% failure rate, and it begins by a 3 day PT phase where a candidate does not eat, sleep or stop moving for 3 days straight.

At the end of Day 1 the PT Phase was on target for a 70% fail, about 20 guys had dropped off, and none of the women had.

Middle of Day 2 the Col. wanted to know why no women had dropped off, and the instructors showed him that they were bang on target for a 70% fail.

So the Col went to the local Infantry HQ unit, got 3 femal instructors, ordered them to have the women off by the morning of day 3. The female Instructors seperated the 5 women, and within 10 hours all 5 had dropped off.

Which brings me to another point about women in combat. You DO NOT want to be taken captive and have a woman as an interrogator. In Escape and Evasion training, we were told that women are by far the most rutheless persecutors on the face of this planet.

Nothing against females, I love 'em and I'm the only one in my house that pee's standing up, but there's a viscious tendancy deep within a woman. If you don't believe me, try get in between a mother and her child and see what happens.
I have hard time beleiving that you believe that women have more endurance than men. You have obviosly been spoiled or programmed by all those women around you. I have never seen a woman that could physically compete with of the same man and same training. For me to sight personal experience would be pointless, but look to marathons that are run in every city every year or triathalons. Men and women may start at the same time but men always, always finish first. You may want to get out of your house a little more and go play basketball or something that involves being around other men, not in a gay way -- just for the comraderie of being with your own kind a little more. Also, I wouldn't take the peeing standing up thing for granted. I know one poor slub that is the only guy in the house, and he has been so feminized that he has to sit when he pees. Now Thats just sad!

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

I have hard time beleiving that you believe that women have more endurance than men. You have obviosly been spoiled or programmed by all those women around you. I have never seen a woman that could physically compete with of the same man and same training.

I'd love to see you try to give birth to a 10lb, 21" piece of meat through your ass. Women haven't as much endurance as men????? Give me a break

And no, I have not been brainwashed or pussywhipped. These are my experiences FIRST HAND!

I wonder if you have any such experiences, or if this is your fragile version of the male ego speaking? My money is on the latter.


For me to sight personal experience would be pointless,

Probably because you have none.


but look to marathons that are run in every city every year or triathalons. Men and women may start at the same time but men always, always finish first.

The time difference between the first man over the line at the boston marathon and the first woman was TWELVE MINUTES!

I'd bet 100:1 odd against you in a race with that female winner. That woman would run circles around you. So, according to your logic, the fact that this woman would utterly thrash you must mean that you're not a man?


You may want to get out of your house a little more and go play basketball or something that involves being around other men, not in a gay way -- just for the comraderie of being with your own kind a little more.


Ok monkeyboy, you've just crossed a line. I have 5 years of operational experience, I was also a paratrooper. I have been around real men and I've been around egotistical men, and you're starting to strike me as the latter.

Do not presume to lecture me about what a real man is or is not.

Endurance has nothing to do with speed. Endurance is the ability to complete something that is either mentally, physically or emotionally gruelling.

Are you going to argue then that the marathon winner is somehow more of a MAN because he beat other men across the finish line? Give me a break.



Also, I wouldn't take the peeing standing up thing for granted. I know one poor slub that is the only guy in the house, and he has been so feminized that he has to sit when he pees. Now Thats just sad!

A few days ago, I would have ripped you a new asshole, but for now, I'll have to be satisfied with not diginfying your insinuation with an answer.

I will say this though, I have been through and seen more shit than you have your entire life. Do yourself a favor and take your foot out of your mouth before you choke on it.

[CognitiveTruth]

Just plain endurance is not the one deciding factor in the effectiveness of an individual in war. War is just as much emotionally trying as it is physically. I realize there is an exception to every rule. But there is the rule.
Another important factor is the effect women would have on the male soldiers. Someone would be more inclined to care for someone they love than to follow through their objective.
Women do not need to serve in direct ground combat! There is no need! You don't get everything you want. It is just too much hassle to involve the ethical and personnal when something so important is at stake.

(p.s. - Who do you know that's had a baby out of her ass?)

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

Just plain endurance is not the one deciding factor in the effectiveness of an individual in war. War is just as much emotionally trying as it is physically. I realize there is an exception to every rule. But there is the rule.

I bet there are as many men that are not 'made' for combat as there are women. As such your point is moot.


Another important factor is the effect women would have on the male soldiers. Someone would be more inclined to care for someone they love than to follow through their objective.

Uhhhhh, That's what I've been saying all along. Perhaps if you actually read the ENTIRE thread, you wouldn't be making redundant statements.


Women do not need to serve in direct ground combat!

Says who? YOU!!!?

Who died and made you the collective decision maker for all female's?



There is no need! You don't get everything you want. It is just too much hassle to involve the ethical and personnal when something so important is at stake.

I know some women soldiers back in South Africa, that would put hundreds of men to shame physically, mentally and practically in all the miltary crafts.

I would go as far as to say, I"d rather have them in my platoon than many men that I know.

You're sweeping statement shows how shallow your perceptions are about this subject matter. The only accurate thing you've said, is the corroboration of my point all along. The problem is not the women, it's the men serving along side them.


(p.s. - Who do you know that's had a baby out of her ass?)

Well, seeing as how the true comparisson should have been a male giving birth through his dick, I did realise the size of the male urin tract, in addition the lack of flexibility of the tract. SO I chose to compare the female's birthing process with something in the male anatomy that is more flexible than the dick.

But once again you miss the point. I don't think there is any man alive that could endure the birthing process, let alone do it by choice.

[smackmybongos]

:icon_surp women should definitely be ALLOWED in the military(yes, i am a liberal); however, their should be no damn quotas on the amount of women in the military. If the government does decide to say " women cannot join the military, we are PROTECTING THEM," the moral majority will say " HORRAY" while the women who are either fit or unfit for combat will be up in arms. If their are at least 1000 women suited for combat in America, who are better than some of the males currently in the military, then i would like to see them join.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

the moral majority will say........

So, are you saying that you recognise that you libs are a minority, and without morals?

[CognitiveTruth]

I would fight you until the end of time, but it is pointless and would cause the forum to be clogged in hindrance to all others. This is not something that can be definitively proved anyway. So instead let's try to find something we agree on.

1. The social and moral ramifications of integrating the army would be detrimental to the overall situation.
2. If women are so capable, they obviously do need need relaxed requirements.
3. Women do have great physical endurance, but nothing says that men can't have endurance either.

A rather pitiful list. This topic is not high on my agenda right now. I do not have the motivation to keep fighting you. But if you insist on continuing impugning my honor I will find it.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

But if you insist on continuing impugning my honor I will find it.

OH PLEASE!!!! Save me your prima donna theatrical b/s would you? Get a grip already.

Let me see if I understand you, you're saying that by critiquing your points and debunking them, you percieve that as impugnment of your honor?

Hmmf, you must have a really fragile ego.

Either that, or you're so insecure about yourself and you opinion, that you cry like a little girl the instant someone disagrees with you. (See, there I might be impugning your 'honor')

Your attempts to 'fight me', as you so quaintly put it, would be a bit of a bore. Particularly if you're last post is anything to go by.

I'd suggest, you actually read everything in a thread before you run off half cocked and shove your foot in your mouth.

Your argument amounted to nothing more than ramblings of an insecure male with a fragile ego, that is threatened by the fact that someone is suggesting there are a ton of women out there that are just as capable, if not more capable to wage war than a lot more men.

BTW, the reason there are double standards in the military as it pertains to women, is because of people like you that make the assumption that, just because a recruit is a female, she has to be weaker than the man, therefore the requirements need to be adjusted down to accomodate them.

So, in closing, I'd suggest that you and ptruble and all the other "Men on top" minions, get used to the idea that women are just as capable as men in any endevour. Because once you kids actually get out of high school, that fact is gonna be in your face so quickly, it will make your head spin.

[idontcarewhatuthink]

Either that, or you're so insecure about yourself and you opinion, that you cry like a little girl the instant someone disagrees with you.

That should not be an insult since everyone is equal at everything. Or are you admitting that most females emotions are more fragile than most males emotions? Women are instinctively better at some things and men are instinctively better at others.

[WhiteAfricanAmerican]

I see yet another comment flew over your head.

The reference to the little girl was intentional, seeing as our boy is so insecure about the abilities of women/girls it seemed fitting to 'push his buttons', so to speak.

Seems your sensibilities are just as fragile, no?

[LiberalsAreBabyKillers!]

Maybe they are too immature to relize exactly how war is, but A. Women mature faster than guys, don't forget, and B. At 18, I'm sure that they are mature enough to grasp the concept of dieing [did I spell that right?] and If they want to die for this country, god bless them and let them defend us, we need more people like that. I know I'm willing. Are You?

[14edsullivan]

Answer me a few questions here bud...Why are there seperate leagues for boys and girls in every level of contact or even non contact sports? Why do most highschools and colleges NOT have a girls football team? Whens the last time your saw man on women boxing? Why in physical training requirements acrossthe nation....even for the presidential fitness award...there are differant requirements for men and women. Given the same training the man will be stronger then the woman 99% of the time...theres always a select few exceptions do to medical issues. Men and Women ARE differant....how hard is that to see? Women shouldnt be out there fighting and dying...thats the way I feel and a hell of a lot of other people feel. Next you will be saying lets let them in as special ops operators. Do you think that the strongest women could take on the strongest man? Do you think that even the 6foot almost 200 pund women could take on the 6foot 200 pound man? How do you think they will fare in battle? Thats just the physical aspect...Men are by nature more aggresive and violent then women. They also have a inborn trait to protect women...and the list goes on....