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

[Sarge]

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.

 

[Rymanofthenorth]

doesnt seem to have affected the Israelis much.

 

[Boone]

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]

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The Israelis repealed it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 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]

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]

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.

 

[Sarge]

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]

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]

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."

 

[Henry]

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]

As others have said, terrible idea.

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

 

[riggins44]

They bent over for DADT, they'll bend over for this as well.

With all this talk of "bent over" I can see where your mind is today.

 

[Lanky Livingston]

I don't know, Pvt. Vasquez was BAD. ASS.

http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1747029760/tt0090605

 

[fansince62]

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.