• Welcome to BGO! We know you will have questions as you become familiar with the software. Please take a moment to read our New BGO User Guide which will give you a great start. If you have questions, post them in the Feedback and Tech Support Forum, or feel free to message any available Staff Member.

Women should be able to serve in front-line combat units: military comission to advis

Happy hour starts in 5 minutes

Sarge

Guest

This is going to be a complete cluster****. I'm now on board with the quarters that contend that Obama is doing what he can to destroy the military and bring it down to the level of everyone else


http://www.nydailynews.com/news/nat...military_comission_to_ad.html?r=news/national

It's time to feminize the front lines -- at least according to a military advisory panel that says women ought to finally be allowed to serve fully in combat units.

The Military Leadership Diversity Commission is expected to send its report to Congress and President Obama in the spring.

It urges them to repeal the combat-barring policy in order to "create a level playing field for all qualified service members," the members said on Friday.
 

Boone

The Commissioner
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
41,713
Reaction score
2,376
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

Sorry. But it's plain genetics. Women (in general) are no match for men in terms of the physical skills it takes to be in combat arms. I'm not arguing there aren't exceptions in terms of individuals, and there may be combat support functions they can match males in, but overall, they cannot do what their male counterparts can do.

It's just a fact.

This won't happen - because US military leadership isn't going to stand by and let politicians make decisions that degrade our ability to defend ourselves or cost lives in combat. The military is about one thing, and one thing only - imposing our will on our enemies. It's not about equal opportunity, political correctness, or anything else.

For the record, if there are (for example) female Marines who, individually demonstrate they can fight, endure, and physically match their male combat arms counterparts, I have no philosophical objection to them being given the opportunity. But the number of females who that exception might apply to are so few as to be almost inconsequential. Most males can't cut it.
 

Sarge

Guest
doesnt seem to have affected the Israelis much.
The Israelis repealed it

Sorry. But it's plain genetics. Women (in general) are no match for men in terms of the physical skills it takes to be in combat arms. I'm not arguing there aren't exceptions in terms of individuals, and there may be combat support functions they can match males in, but overall, they cannot do what their male counterparts can do.

It's just a fact.

This won't happen - because US military leadership isn't going to stand by and let politicians make decisions that degrade our ability to defend ourselves or cost lives in combat. The military is about one thing, and one thing only - imposing our will on our enemies. It's not about equal opportunity, political correctness, or anything else.
They bent over for DADT, they'll bend over for this as well. Not that they want to, but the leftist PC administration will foist it on them
 

Boone

The Commissioner
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
41,713
Reaction score
2,376
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

The Israelis repealed it



They bent over for DADT, they'll bend over for this as well. Not that they want to, but the leftist PC administration will foist it on them
Two totally different propositions Sarge. One is about moral beliefs, unit morale, and practical considerations. The other is about combat effectiveness and the ability to wage war. I think you're wrong in terms of the response this will get.

Guess we'll see...
 

Sarge

Guest
Two totally different propositions Sarge. One is about moral beliefs, unit morale, and practical considerations. The other is about combat effectiveness and the ability to wage war. I think you're wrong in terms of the response this will get.

Guess we'll see...
Are not the two all components of combat effectiveness?

Like I said, I haven't into the "Obama is trying to destroy the country" bit. At least I don't think he's doing it on purpose. It's just that his liberal ideals are starting to do the job.

And budget cuts always happens during Dem adminstrations. Now on top of that they are doing what they can to undermine a military still engaged in two wars.
 

Boone

The Commissioner
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Apr 11, 2009
Messages
41,713
Reaction score
2,376
Points
2,044
Location
Greensboro, NC

Marine Corps Virginia

No - DADT is a political issue. Sure - there are many hyperventilating about how having a homosexual in the midst of heterosexuals somehow destroys morale or unit cohesiveness. But honestly, that borders on silly.

Women, on average, simply cannot physically perform the job of the basic infantryman. They cannot move as fast as their male counterparts. They cannot carry the loads required. And if it comes down to hand to hand combat, they are going to die in droves. There may be a handful of females for whom this isn't the case, but they are 1 in 1000.

Having women serving in pure combat arms roles (I'm not talking about support roles) puts US military strength and the ability to carry out the mission at risk. There's no comparing that scenario to fear that someone's giving someone else a blowjob.
 
Last edited:

Sarge

Guest
Well, we have the DADT thread, so I won't open the can of worms here except to say that in and of itself, it's a bad idea

As for women in combat I'm with you 100%. There is no way they could have done what I and others did in Afghanistan
 

Miles Monroe

The Owner's Favorite
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Jul 15, 2009
Messages
5,702
Reaction score
97
Points
128
Location
Cape Coral Fl


Having had to deal with a woman in a class as a firefighter, there are just some things they cant do physically. The class was called shorthanded firefighting, and it taught techniques is laddering and nozzle work. In a completely controlled situation, this women nearly got at least 4 people seriously injured on separate occasions. In a real fire ground operation, there could have been serious consequences for the people around her.
 

fansince62

Guest
Two totally different propositions Sarge. One is about moral beliefs, unit morale, and practical considerations. The other is about combat effectiveness and the ability to wage war. I think you're wrong in terms of the response this will get.

Guess we'll see...
good list Boone...I would add "and the rights of all members of the military."

addendum: your comment on silliness doesn't make it so. kinda like saying "bestiality, in my book, doesn't bother me. can't see why it bothers anyone else."
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Henry

Super Bowl MVP
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Apr 12, 2009
Messages
9,852
Reaction score
173
Points
219
Location
Fairfax, VA


I agree with Boone one this one.

I do think that women should not be expressly forbidden from combat roles, but they should be expected to meet the exact same physical requirements the men do. If it's good enough for the NFL, it should be good enough for the military. :)
 

Goaldeje

The Legend
Staff member
BGO Ownership Group
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
18,406
Reaction score
58
Points
328
Location
Waynesboro, VA

James Madison

As others have said, terrible idea.

And FS, did you really just equate bestiality with homosexuality?
Posted via BGO Mobile Device
 

fansince62

Guest
As others have said, terrible idea.

And FS, did you really just equate bestiality with homosexuality?
Posted via BGO Mobile Device

no...I was pointing out that Boone's position about "silliness" was a personal pov - what he finds silly. the beastiality example was tantamount to saying someone else might suggest the same thing in a different context.

you'll have to do better than that Goldie!!

and...just to be clear...I have no issues with female combat pilots. juts like male pilots - if they make the cut...welcome aboard. I can't speak for the ground portion of all of this.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Total: 1, Members: 0, Guests: 1)

Private conversations
Help Users
    Top