Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 73

Thread: Women May Now Serve in Combat (U.S. Millitary)

  1. #41
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    I don't know how some even make this an "equal rights" issue. We should not be putting our women in situations like this.

  2. #42
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    22,376
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    I don't know how some even make this an "equal rights" issue. We should not be putting our women in situations like this.
    Some of them want to do it...

  3. #43
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,121
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    I don't know how some even make this an "equal rights" issue. We should not be putting our women in situations like this.
    As I said earlier, there are 238 different positions that are considered "combat," not just grunt infantry. So when you say "situations like this," I don't think you're considering the whole range of possibilities.

  4. #44
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    I don't know how some even make this an "equal rights" issue. We should not be putting our women in situations like this.
    Equality means equal access to opportunity under the Law (for those who wish to seek it) AND equal responsabillity TO the State under the Law.

  5. #45
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,121
    Post Thanks / Like
    Some news clippings to clarify the issues... also indication of how difficult it will be for women to meet requirements for some units...

    Pentagon policy restricting women from serving in combat on the ground was modified in 1994, according to the Congressional Research Service. Women cannot be assigned below the brigade level a unit of about 3,500 troops to fight on the ground. Effectively, that has barred women from infantry, artillery, armor, combat engineers and special operations units of battalion size about 700 troops or lower.
    Positions now closed to women in the Air Force are combat control; combat rescue and special tactics; and special operations weather officer positions for commissioned officers, and the combat control, tactical air command and control, pararescue and special operations weather specialties for enlisted airmen. These career fields represent about 3,235 positions, officials said.
    Rescinding the direct ground-combat exclusion allows the Navy to expand opportunities for women in its riverine forces and in billets that directly support Marine infantry operations, such as hospital corpsmen and chaplains, Mabus noted. He also pointed out that the Marine Corps -- which is part of the Navy Department -- already has opened officer and staff noncommissioned officer billets in unrestricted mission occupational specialties in ground combat units that were previously closed to women, such as artillery, armor, low-altitude air defense and combat engineer battalions.

    The necessities of combat in Iraq and Afghanistan, however, propelled women into jobs as medics, military police and intelligence officers that were sometimes attached but not formally assigned to battalions. So while a woman couldn't be assigned as an infantryman in a battalion going out on patrol, she could fly the helicopter supporting the unit, or move in to provide medical aid if troops were injured.
    And these conflicts, where battlefield lines are blurred and insurgents can lurk around every corner, have made it almost impossible to keep women clear of combat.
    Still, as recent surveys and experiences have shown, it will not be an easy transition. When the Marine Corps sought women to go through its tough infantry course last year, two volunteered and both failed to complete the course. And there may not be a wide clamoring from women for the more intense, dangerous and difficult jobs, including some infantry and commando positions.

  6. #46
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    49,999
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    I don't know how some even make this an "equal rights" issue. We should not be putting our women in situations like this.
    They are not "our women".

  7. #47
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Equality means equal access to opportunity under the Law (for those who wish to seek it) AND equal responsabillity TO the State under the Law.
    Fine. If you want to put women in combat go ahead. But that means they need to begin holding women to the same guidelines as men in physical training tests etc. Because right now, they don't.

  8. #48
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    They are not "our women".
    Whatever that means..

  9. #49
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,543
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    Whatever that means..
    He's taking a common phrase that you used that means one thing, and making it seem like you meant it in a totally sexist and demeaning way. That's what they do.

  10. #50
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    greenwich village, NYC
    Posts
    8,121
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    Fine. If you want to put women in combat go ahead. But that means they need to begin holding women to the same guidelines as men in physical training tests etc. Because right now, they don't.
    Do you have any evidence that this is true? I posted above the following:

    Still, as recent surveys and experiences have shown, it will not be an easy transition. When the Marine Corps sought women to go through its tough infantry course last year, two volunteered and both failed to complete the course. And there may not be a wide clamoring from women for the more intense, dangerous and difficult jobs, including some infantry and commando positions.

    Doesn't look like women are being given a free pass...

  11. #51
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    He's taking a common phrase that you used that means one thing, and making it seem like you meant it in a totally sexist and demeaning way. That's what they do.
    Hate to break with tradition Tater, but I'm going to agree with FF on this one.

    I think his use of "our women" in this context was absolutely sexism/chauvinism in action.


  12. #52
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by JetPotato View Post
    He's taking a common phrase that you used that means one thing, and making it seem like you meant it in a totally sexist and demeaning way. That's what they do.
    I meant it in the way I mean that I don't think "OUR SONS" should be sent to fight illegal wars.

  13. #53
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by long island leprechaun View Post
    Do you have any evidence that this is true? I posted above the following:

    Still, as recent surveys and experiences have shown, it will not be an easy transition. When the Marine Corps sought women to go through its tough infantry course last year, two volunteered and both failed to complete the course. And there may not be a wide clamoring from women for the more intense, dangerous and difficult jobs, including some infantry and commando positions.

    Doesn't look like women are being given a free pass...
    The Marines may be different. What I do know is that not only women, but also older men are not held to the same standards as younger men as well.

  14. #54
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Hate to break with tradition Tater, but I'm going to agree with FF on this one.

    I think his use of "our women" in this context was absolutely sexism/chauvinism in action.

    You are insane. Guess it comes with the territory on internet messageboards. Making outrageous assumptions. I meant our fellow citizens, our mothers, daughters, and sisters.. Gosh, you guys are too much.

  15. #55
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    You are insane. Guess it comes with the territory on internet messageboards. Making outrageous assumptions. I meant our fellow citizens, our mothers, daughters, and sisters.. Gosh, you guys are too much.
    Sure you did Archie Bunker.

  16. #56
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    From Parts Unknown
    Posts
    10,325
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    Sure you did Archie Bunker.
    Typical Liberal!

  17. #57
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,611
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by 24 View Post
    Typical Liberal!
    Absolutely, ask anyone here, I am like, totally a typical liberal.

    For serious.

  18. #58
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Jasper17 View Post
    By this logic, any "decent" male HS track-runner out sprints Gold-Medal winning Allison Felix.

    Yea, I suppose that's believable.

    Except that the 2012 Westchester County 200m Boys' Champ ran 22.08 and Felix ran 21.88 in London.

    The "best" 200m sprinter in Westchester County (no track slouches mind you) would not have beat one of the "best women athletes in the world." Therefore, I suggest it would not be nearly as simple as you suppose that a "decent" male would beat her.

    Ultimately, women (by-and-large) are not going to be able to sustain the testing/selection/training processes of these SOFs so the whole debate about women "not being able to handle it" is moot.

    However, if they CAN prove they can meet/exceed the standards of their male counterparts, and can sustain the training regimen, why not? Best of the best yes? If they are better or as good as males who pass selection and can endure operational pace, why not?

    Again, I'll reiterate, I don't believe many if any women will be able to qualify even to test for these groups, but just because you don't want to share your toys because girls have cooties is foolish.


    Sorry to break the news to you but Westchester is not a mecca for any sport.
    I said DECENT track or swimming athlete.
    Look at the numbers from FL, TX, CA, SC, NJ - almost anywhere.
    As far as women on the police force or SWAT teams- I don't think standards should be watered down. And in all deference to 32green, while a police officer's job is no picnic, it pales in comparison to a combat infantry assignment but in terms of length of activity and physical demand. Still, I feel for LE officers who go into action with anyone not FULLY up to what may be needed.
    When lives are on the line, we must be ABSOLUTELY SELECTIVE. If someone feels put out - tough.

  19. #59
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    What this gives me hope for is that we'll soon move beyond th segregationist, sexist, seperate-but-not-equal of High School and College Sports, to a system of "One Team, One Sport, Equal Access" sporting in our education system.

    Have a Basketball Team? Great, men and women are equal, and can equally try out for the one school team. No more "Men's This" or "Women's That", thats pure text book sexism and sex descrimination. Want a Field Hockey team? Great, man and women can try out, best players make the team. It's about the abillity and character of the athlete, not their sexual reproductive organs, isn't it?

    We'd finally have some equallity in our school sports, would no longer have the segreationist/sexist Title 9 issue lingering on, and sports would truly be the ebst of the ebst in every field, not a limited team based purely on whats between the players legs.

    Equallity is long overdue in this sphere as well, and I think this (women in the Millitary) is a good step towards that equallity and end to segregation based on sexism.

    Here is where I must disagree. If it was one sport, everyone tries out, there would be no women in sports and no women's sport at all at any level.
    Title 9 sometimes gets carried too far, but it inssures women have someplace to compete. That's good. Gives them a chance to excel and demonstrate leadership and other skills. Long term that's good for them in whatever career.

  20. #60
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    4,850
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by FF2 View Post
    Until they have the opportunity, you really cant make that assessment.

    Despite your deep knowledge on women's soccer.
    I know more about" objectively graded" sports like track and field and swimming.
    Women are not at the same level physically. FACT. Indispuatable.
    Strength, endurance and speed are the cornerstone of a good COMBAT soldier.
    There are still plenty of jobs in the military for the less fit.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us