We’re pulling string together on a breaking news story on Military.com that a congressionally-mandated panel on ”diversity” in the military has recommended that the Pentagon abandon its rule barring women from being assigned to units involved in “direct ground combat.”
These policies constitute a structural barrier that prevents women from entering the tactical/operational career fields associated with promotion to the flag/general officer grades and from serving in career-enhancing assignments.
Hard to argue that…
The commission, headed by retired Air Force Gen. Lester Lyles recommends a phased approach to integrating women into combat units.
- Women in career fields/specialties currently open to them should be immediatrely able to be assigned to any unit that requires that career field/specialty, consistent with the current operational environment.
- DoD and the services should take deliberate steps in a phased approach to open additional career fields and units involved in “direct ground combat” to qualified women.
- DoD and the services should report to Congress the process and timeline for removing barriers that inhibit women from achieving senior leadership positions.
One of the commission’s key points is that the current restrictions inhibit commanders’ ability to pick the best trooper for the job. I can see how this might apply to intel analysts, sigint folks and MI troops.
We’ve heard rumblings of this from former Army COS Casey and a recent announcement from USASOC asking for female engagement team members for its units. Seems the horse has left the barn and it won’t be long before GI Jane moves out of Hollywood and into the Teams…
{ 184 comments… read them below or add one }
holy crikee
guess they have to start producing tactical maxi pads now…
No, regular ones will work fine
Actually…there is a tactical..or Combat pad out there. Designed for women in theater that don't have time to change out their pad when you are on ops. Oh, and on a note. CANADA already has women in it's combat forces outside the wire in Afghanistan.
And thats another reason America is better then Canada!
Ultimate politically correct bullsh*t. Never would I trust a woman to drag me out of a firefight, never would I trust one to remain entirely emotionally detached, and never have I seen one able to carry her own weight.
We have a word for people who remain "entirely emotionally detached". It's "Sociopath", and they are sick people who need our pity.
if you have ever been in combat you would know that complete emotional detachment does not interfere with interactions with the local populace, and is the only way to stay combat effective, and be able to complete your job, stay alive and keep your buddies to the left and right alive. To do this is to be a cold blooded killer when called upon. EMOTIONAL DETACHMENT is the only way to keep everything in so called perspective so you can accomplish these tasks when all hell breaks loose. you must be able to stay calm and cool headed when rpg's and bullets are impacting around you and your fellow dipensers of hate and death. there is no time or place in combat to get "caught up" in your own "Woe is me" moment one life is to many to be lost for a failure of "violence of action".
Uh…so what are you saying is you would rather stay in a firefight than have your female comrad help you out ? Think carefully…
i believe whats being said is that, they do not trust in the fact that a fully loaded combat soldier weighing over 200lbs, could be dragged or carried by a female soldier of half that weight. Which would cause a need for another soldier to help with the extraction process. In turn taking another weapon out of the fight. And putting another body in danger. Also possibly causing a larger burden on the rest of the squad or platoon by having not one but 2 or possibly 3 caualties to have to take care of, reducing the number of guns in the fight even further.
You havent seen much
I don’t see any problems as long as they’re held to the same PFT standards as the men.
There’s probably nothing a 6-foot 170-pound *** couldn’t do that a 150-pound 5-foot-seven man could.
If they can do the job then good. I know women that are tougher, faster, stronger than infantrymen I know without issue. It's to bad that there are so many sexist idiots on this site, thankfully the infantrymen I know and work with pretty regulary don't have the same sexism issues the 'vets' on this site seem to have.
Are YOU an Infantryman? Infantry, btw, is capitalized. I'm going to have to call BS on your post.
I suspect a Drugstore Commando in him.
I suspect trollness in you… Or well I found trollness in you. If you don't have anything constructive to say… Or did you not have a mother to teach you that?
In your view I maybe a troll, but I see some one who is so delusional he/she refuses to see facts in a logical form. If the facts don't fit your preconceived opinions they don't exist in your view. You want what you want and to hell with any one or thing that does not agree with your point of view. As before put your facts on the table and prove your points.
How childish of you to attack my Mother. From that I see you have a serious maturity problem to the point if can you be logical ???
You know it's interesting that you admit to never to have served in the Infantry and claim to believe in justice; then attack others "verbally" by calling us trolls and attacking MY MOTHER. How is that fair and just???? It is amazing how one who has not served in the Infantry is such an EXPERT on the subject.
Nope. Never said I was. Just work with them almost everyday. Never said I was. Do you have anything constructive to add or are you just a troll?
Oh and BTW, look up infantry and infantrymen in the dictionary. If you are using it as part of a proper name you might capitalize it, but otherwise it's a generic term for a type of military personnel. You don't capitalize it any more than you would capitalize tank or police or milkman. Good job trying to find something extra to troll about though… At least I can see you are trying.
You capitalize it if you are one…which you are not, which makes you wholly unqualified to comment. Crap, I "worked around" SF guys, and CCT guys, and PJ guys and SEAL guys and SBS guys, but I sure as heck have never coat-tailed it due to that. You, sir, are a poser and wannabee.
LOL… Your deductive reasoning skills leave something to be desired. Didn't get a good enough ASVAB score to do more than just work around those guys huh?
Thank you for your positive opinion's on this issue. I'm shocked however not shocked at some of the replies posted here. I have 2 women family members that are serving in Afghanistan and are as capable as any man and as willing as any man to fully carry out the job for their country…. side note: I wonder what the wives or girlfriends think of their "men" who have posted such derogitory statements against their counterparts think of them, if it were me, I'd look for another man…
Maggie, I'm a true American. I want freedom, liberty and justice for all. Not just the men, or the straights or the white, not just American but everyone. I don't think it's in our best interest to disqualify anyone from anything on any basis other than ability to do anything else is a violation of the very founding principles of this country. Many of those writing to these forums lack even the intelligence to understand what those statements mean on a personal level let alone that they must apply to everyone equally. The rest are blustering fools that wouldn't dare repeat the things they say in public let alone to their wifes, mothers and daughters. Thankfully none of them have any real say in government or military affairs, and they will not effect our great military's honored history of being the gateway to freedom and equality in this country.
I don't doubt some of their ability to operate in the infantry, but it is physically, emotionally, and physiologically impossible for women to be special forces operators.
hell, if you give a mouse a muffin.
Dude, alot of countries already use women as special forces. Some of the worlds top special forces snipers are females.
You’re right baah
I don't buy that at all.
You only need to look at Israel and the IDF for an example of how women can serve effectively. I do agree that women must be made to live up to the same standards as men but I believe there will be many women who can.
this is for nraddin, casey and kip
its not just about physically being fit. you must also be mentally tough, and able to with stand hours of pain that the mind wants quit from. we are talking about 100+lbs of weight on your back. let alone a crewserve weapon and all acompannying ammo that is your combat load plus what you need to carry for 2 or 3 day patrol or longer. then there is water and food. this amounts to hours and days of agonizing pain and strain on you back, joints and mind. this is merely survived when on a perfect patrol where nothing happens. what do you do when you hump all day then ambushed. most men in the infantry question themselves at some point, even the most athletic and in shape. not to mention the simple fact of the violence on a day to day basis, this game is for keeps there are no extra lives or do overs once its done its done.
i am not questioning the ability of women to kill, women are some the most vindictive and cold hearted people you will ever meet. but physical stress on top of mental stress is a real @#$%&.
Which is why I bring up the IDF. I admit that I think that the majority of women aren't fit for front line action but there are also many men who wouldn't be fit either (I'd guesstimate that the proportion of women who should serve is the proportion of men who shouldn't.) I know some women who are tough as nails can rough out a hell of a lot more than the typical East Coast gentleman. Basically what I'm saying is that women shouldn't be barred from front line service just because they're women.
However, full disclosure – I don't serve myself and I wouldn't claim to know what makes a suitable rifleman. I just believe that a "capable rifleman" is familiar with both genders.
Then listen to those who have been there and done that. We, who have, speak with knowledge of which you do not have. Learn from us, learn the truth. All we want is to minimize the casualties. There many books to read, which are written by those of/like us that will give you a better picture of what we do. Please read them and learn.
A few can but they shouldn't.
Why is an air force general, who never served in the infantry or saw combat, making this suggestion?
Because there is a political agenda. the recommendation was already formed before the committee was selected.
Because he is a political REMF
At first the women will be required to meet the same physical standards. But then pressure will mount to create a separate, lower standard for women because so few women can meet the male standard. Just look at the marines physical fitness standards for men and the, much lower, standards for women.
Women won't be held to the same standard, that is just a lie to get the policy implemented.
None of the services has a fitness test that a female athlete couldn't ace.
The running is the equivalent of 5KM at a six-minute mile pace, which is nothing for a serious female runner, and there's no reason a sufficiently strong and lean woman couldn't do 20 pullups or sixty pushups.
Women are also better multitaskers and history has shown that women have excelled at roles such as snipers and intelligence.
Now, special forces is a different story physically, but in some cases having a women's touch would be worth her weight in gold since special forces is 90% dealing with local populations and 10% fighting.
You need to read "The that got away" by Chris McNab and "Bravo Two Zero" by Andy McNab before you spout off about women being good candidates for Spec Ops.
That's not what I said. I only suggest that women could excel at certain roles that Spec-Ops do.
The number of women in the military who could pass Hell Week or any other special operations training if held to the men's standards is probably close to zero.
There's a big dang difference between being an athlete, and an Infantry or Special Forces Soldier. Apples and oranges, as far as physical demands.
And there are women out there who could dropkick some of the men who could physically qualify for infantry halfway across an FOB.
I'm not suggesting that combat arms should have to accept anyone but those who are physically qualified.
Then why do women have separate categories in sports?? Why aren't women competing in the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB or any other major sport in the top levels???
Because the top 99.9% of women can't compete with the top 99.9% of men in a purely athletic context. Professional sports is an entirely different world from war. In war, the loser dies and the best of the best are people like Carlos Hathcock. In sports, the loser feels bad and tries harder next time and the best of the best get paid millions of dollars like Roger Federer.
In the military, we’re talking about maybe the top 80% of men as far as physical abilities go, and assuming the women are held to the same standards, probably the top 95% of women.
But the fact of the matter is that if this was sports, I guarantee there isn't a female professional athlete on the planet that you could personally beat at her own sport (unless you're a professional athlete in the same sport). Which means that there is probably a female soldier out there who could kill you ninety nine times out of a hundred.
Keep in mind that combat isn't all about carrying a heavy loadout and being able to drag friendlies to safety…
damn right
Thank you BBB for being a thinking person. So many of the idiots on here are just below average intelligence, sexist, bigots, that I being to wonder if everyone is. It's refreshing to see that someone has thought about what is required and needed instead of just a knee jerk response.
Good point on the spec ops BTW, and despite what these plebeian drolls think there are spec ops teams all over the world working with females embedded with their teams. Now maybe those females can get a little more training before doing that.
ignorance is bliss isn't it nraddin
You tell us.
I don't buy into the arguments about "emotional frailty" of women. And women certainly are capable of the same physical toughness as men – just look at the fire fighting service.
BUT, you cannot just uproot hundreds of years of military culture and "boys club" atmosphere for the sake of…what? Will we see thousands of women joining infantry units, extending our nations capability to fight globally? I doubt it. What you will see – over and over again I'm sure – will be guys acting inappropriately, women ultimately getting offended by it and then complaining to someone. It happens in EVERY predominantly male field that women try to nudge their way into.
You cannot use Israel as an example because their military culture is not like Americas. Walk into any room filled with male soldiers and you'll find out in five seconds why a woman should not be introduced into that situation. There seems to be a good amount of integration in non direct combat roles, especially in the Navy. But life on a boat and life in the trenches are very different. Emotions run higher, stress is compounded, guys act stupid.
This is a crazy political stunt, and absolutely more trouble than it's worth.
As a firefighter who has worked with women on the job, I'll tell you they don't work out so well here either. Most are too weak in the upper body to handle hose and ladders. They spend far more time on disability for injuries than men. Add in the difficulties with sexual harassment, etc, and it is far from a success story. Read up on the Baltimore City female firefighter recruit who dies in a practice burn because she couldn't get her fat butt out of a window. http://www.firehouse.com/news/news/niosh-report-b…
Oh I'm sure that women have a much harder time physically than men in demanding fields like the fire service and military, I just meant that certain women could be capable of keeping up. So using the argument that "they just can't do it" for women who can doesn't really work. The ones that can keep up – if thats all we are basing our judgment on – should be allowed to stay.
But like I said, its a terrible idea because it interferes with how things are done in the military without producing any real gains. Women just need to get over it, as sexist as that may sound.
If you’ve ever been on ship, you know that males and females working together in large numbers in close proximity is a recipe for bad dealings. Speaking from experience. There is a large difference between the fire fighting service and the infantry. That is an apples to apples comparison. As an Infantry Platoon Sergeant, I don’t want to deal with it.
You know as soon as some ones "little princess" gets killed her parents will blame the military
They get killed all the time. Have some class.
lol
They didnt say they were thinking of letting princesses in combat arms
yes they have thought about it!
All I know is that Israeli IDF girls are hot to trot. They are not shy about giving you a quick rob.
If bras are made optional and hair left down, I'm all for women in combat arms.
Just not the Marines and SOCOM.
You need to earn your boots first and grow up.
Any thinking about combat should be focused in WINNING!… not upon PC "inclusion" and female promotion potential. After all, do we go to war to win a fight? Or, to get promoted? Think about the CORRECT answer.
I know! Think!
Gotta love them butch lesbians!!! LOL!
As a female fighter, I will out run, out gun and out perform my enemies, and drive on to complete the mission, though I be the lone survivor.
Since the closest thing to action most of you have seen is hand to hand combat with a Po boy sandwich, I will chalk up the negative remarks as sheer bravado, while trying to make up for your insecurity. Don't worry, just because your job title is 92 Sierra, I will still respect you in the morning.
Are you a butch lesbian?
Or a you a hottie?
^^America's Finest right there folks.
BUTCH. Post pics.
Some people on here needs to just stay quiet!
Lt, I respect you and your skills.
Well 2nd Lt., it appears that you really don't understand what a Grunt (Rifleman) is or does. You speak with bravado, which is nice. Can you walk the walk? Do not tell me you can; Do it. Carry the load, hump the hills,swamps and the mountains. Not in nice sunny weather, in a monsoon, in the deep snow, and the desert.
Lead your platoon by example, from the front. Live the hardship of the Infantry to the same standards as the men. If you think your as good as you have been bragging, then Ranger school should be a breeze to graduate as the top student with the only perfect score. Then, I suspect you are only talking trash.
You are out of your lane, boot. I was wrangling Johnny Jihad when you were still playing with Barbies.
Young lieutenant, you talk alot of smack. You can shoot expert on the range at paper and pop up targets. You can max your APFT. Outstanding! Even with being able to do all that, it still doesn’t make you combat ready. If you really want to find out you have what it takes, go down to TAS-C, check out a 150 pound dummy, dress it up in battle rattle, and then on the hottest day of the year, firemen carry it while going uphill in sand, on sat Sicily or Holland DZ. Then hit the Audie Murphy trail and hump back to Main Post. Once there, hit the nearest firing range and shoot that rifle and see if you can still hit expert. I doubt it. Those of us who have been there, done that, and have the t-shirt, ball cap, and free coffee mug can attest to how difficult that is. You can sling lead down range all day long and still not hit the right spot. Now take your bravado to the sandbox and see how far it will get you. As a retired 1SG, I have trained many a Soldier and led many a Soldier, so I know what I am talking about and have the bones to back it up. Did I always qual expert on the range? No. Did every bad guy I shot ever get back up? No. You have alot of growing up to do young lieutenant.
couldnt agree more to 1SG Chuck. And honestly, I wouldnt try to quote (and butcher) the Ranger Creed until you've completed the course. Its real easy to watch it on the discovery channel and think I can do that.
LT you are way out of line. I have been in the infantry for 13 years and a cop for 5. There are countless videos online you can watch of female police officers being brutilized by suspects.
Might want to check with the Medical Service Corps and see if they will tell you how many women drop dead during training each year! You have 20% fewer red blood cells than men. In its place you have more water. This is why they have separate sporting events for women. Because you tire quicker! The arteries that pump blood to your brain are in your neck. Take a wild guess why you feel light headed when you take off your rucksack!
As a cop I am here to tell you that thanks to this argument you and those like are putting forth defense attorney's are already making the argument that their clients are not guilty of rape. The arguement being and I quote" Your honor my client thought she liked it rough and she was role playing. Otherwise she would have fought him off!"
Lieutenant, I wouldn't want a jerk like you on my wing. In the Air Force, we either put up or shut up. I've been in combat…an aircraft makes a damn fine target…and I've seen female crew members pee themselves when they get shot at. I served with a female pilot who couldn't handle the physical stresses of combat training, so what happened? She was promoted in order to not make her look bad. A male pilot in the same situation would have been out. You know you're a protected class, so you can run your mouth in full awareness that a man will die to cover your worthless behind when under fire.
As you were. Dismissed.
What I'm wondering is when we'll follow Australia's lead and have the military services give women free breast implants to "boost moral."
If it ain't been broke for 236yrs, why fix it now? All I know is that I can say that I served in the USMC infantry when it was the Hard Corps
1775?
Is this really for all women? Or is it mainly geared to female officers looking for a fast track for promotion? You will NEVER have an entire battalion of female infantry. Most females do not want a combat position except for female OFFICERS. Combat arms has always been the fastest way to make rank, enlisted or commisioned. Its gonna be a female is good enough to lead a platoon, company, battlion,etc, but a male officer will never lead an all female ‘whatever’ because their won’t be enough of them. Because of this females will ALWAYS be assigned with men to hide any short comings that may occur. What is important is that the females officers ‘get their tickets punched’ so that they can promote quicker. I think it was once stated that at any one time at LEAST 10% of the women in the military are not able to perform their duties due to pregnancy. So any commander, that would in theory, have an all female force, would have to content with at a MINIMUM of 10% of his force being unable to deploy.
If we're going to females serve infantry, I say we also open it up to midgets and the handicapped. It'll be like Glee!
That would give them somethin to think about
This is what happens when the inmates run the asylum! AF general? Go back to flying your planes you putz! The Infantry has too many cry babies, sensetive type males. WE ARE NOT F-IN ISREAL! We do not need every person in uniform. I have never seen a female humping a ruck over 35 lbs. See it everyday on Longstreet at FT Bragg. They are the last ones road marching like it is torture. Women are not engineered the same as men. Period! I am 250 lbs. A 75-85 lbs ruck whoops my ass. We gonna give a 110 lbs female the same weight? Some one else will have to pick up her slack. Think Leonidas' 300 would have lasted as long as they did if they had " I broke a nail" Females in their ranks? Screw you guys I'm going to retire!
Wait until they try the winter mountain warfare load ! That's without the Squad sled with all of the extreme cold weather kit. The pack alone will crush 95% of them, if not all. Then that's the snow package at MCMWTC(USMC Mountain Warfare Training Center). Every Infantry marine has to go, I believe the Army has one like it. The first females to go will be a disaster.
Leonidas was gay though, so maybe more gays in the military?
Has any one read the report on the combat load of the Infantry? The average load including armor was over 90lbs.
The average service female, even the top 10% won't be able to handle it. If the men are suffering from back stress injuries, knee stress injuries, and premature beginnings of arthritis. This is directly linked to the load and environment in which the Infantry operates in. Both can not be changed. These guys are in the best physical shape of the MOS's. One SGT paid for an MRI out his own pocket to prove he wasn't a whinner. He had a herniated disc and the beginnings of arthritis, He is only 25 years old.
If the men are having these problems, what will happen to the women and how many will fail just in training, let alone on the field of battle? If they fail in combat, how many casualties will we suffer who need not?
I have nothing against women, I do know they are different than men. I question the commission and their findings. Why wasn't there any one with Infantry experience assigned. I do believe that one day women may be in the Infantry, but the technology needed is not even on the drawing board yet. I see a great disaster coming
and it saddens me….
Thanks for the common sense. Beats idiot chest beating that I see above.
Agreed. There are undeniable physical differences, and seriously, if the ruck weighs more than you, you're not gonna make it through on sheer grit and determination.
Thanks guys, I appreciate your support to logic and the truth. Unfortunately, there are people here who have selective vision/hearing. Reality cannot be changed and they refuse to see it. I have been there and done that as an 0311/USMC.
So, I challenge those who call me sexist and prove it. Start by using the male PFT standards and then see if they can pass Ranger school, Mountain Warfare training at Bridgeport (both packages) or other serious Infantry training (no jump school doesn't count). I suspect maybe 10% will pass the PFT and the rest will fall out before school ends. If any are still standing, Maybe a squad could be formed, if that. The real question is how much will that cost? I believe it to be fiscally stupid in our current financial standing, those defense dollars would be better spent else where.
Israeli women are not in front like Combat units. The ones that might be are in support rolls and not direct action units.
Here is a excerpt from an older but relevant article:
""For example, it is a common misperception that Israel allows women in combat units. In fact, women have been barred from combat in Israel since 1950, when a review of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War showed how harmful their presence could be. The study revealed that men tried to protect and assist women rather than continue their attack. As a result, they not only put their own lives in greater danger, but also jeopardized the survival of the entire unit. The study further revealed that unit morale was damaged when men saw women killed and maimed on the battlefield," Luddy said.
Read more: Debunking the Israeli 'women in combat' myth http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=23…
Let's try some other resources besides WorldNutDaily and their (typically) poorly researched ultra right-wing bias:
"During the War of Independence in 1948, women were on full combat status and assumed important combat command positions. After the war, they were no longer allowed into combat positions. They continued as trainers and provided a valuable source of training manpower. From the late 1990s onwards, they are moving back into combat positions, including flight school. The first female fighter pilot graduated in 2001. Before women were re-absorbed into combat units, there used to be a womens' corps which provides professional support and backup that was created as a parallel administrative system to the command system. It was disbanded in 2001. In its place there is a female consultant to the chief of staff. " ( http://www.mahal-idf-volunteers.org/information/b…
From NYTimes, 1996: http://www.nytimes.com/1996/01/03/world/ruling-ex…
:In a landmark decision on Nov. 8, the Israeli Supreme Court ruled that Alice Miller, a 23-year-old officer serving as an aeronautical engineer, could take qualification tests and join the air force flight-training course, opening the door for Israeli women to become pilots."
"The IDF abolished its "Women's Corps" command in 2001, believing that it had become an anachronism and a stumbling block towards integration of women in the IDF as regular soldiers with no special status. However, after pressures from feminist lobbies, the Chief of Staff was persuaded to keep an "adviser for women's affairs". Female soldiers now fall under the authority of individual units based on jobs and not on gender. The 2006 Lebanon War was the first time since 1948 that IDF Women were involved in field operations alongside men. Airborne helicopter engineer Sergeant-Major (res.) Keren Tendler became the first female combat soldier to be killed in action." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_Defense_Forces#IDF_Women)
And lastly: http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Israel+beyond+politics/…
If they want to serve….LET THEM. If they wash out, they WASH OUT. Period. End of story.
Wow, thanks to your source I've learned the 11 threats to our power grid and how to build a "full acre crisis garden"… whew…
"Besides, this recommendation is probably better than DADT. "
I would rather serve in a whole batallion of homos before I would depend on a woman to pull me out of a combat zone.
This has very little to do with 'equality', this is nothing but some high brass pushing a very political subject for fame and promotion.
And I have to laugh at those comments suggesting facts about what "female athletes" can do. Because of course our female infanry applicants would all be crossfit stars, and the military would never accept less…haha…
The question for these athletes is why do the men and women compete in separately? Better yet, why aren't there any women in the NFL, NBA, NHL, MLB or competing in the Tour de France? They are suppose to be equal to men, aren't they?
NUTS!!!
I'd be more supportive of this if Congress hadn't just rammed the bill ending DADT down the throats of the JCS, because now it looks as if political correctness was the driving force behind this. Barring basic feminism and feelings of "unfairness", "ethicality", or "morality", what is the actual benefit to doing this? Whether Israel does or does not allow women into combat units is irrelevant; we aren't Israel. We aren't surrounded by hostile nations who wish to destroy us. How useful will this actually be?
"a congressionally-mandated panel on ”diversity” in the military"
Reason I hate Congress #841. What a load of BS. they have no problem leaving the military with ancient equipment but they love their "diversity panels".
Its important to note that Israel's female fighters are kept sealed at the southern border doing little more then border security, with "real" units called for when anything unusual erupts.
they can be instructors, they can be medics, they CANNOT physically be a part of an effective forward combat unit.
men are the warrior caste in our species, it's as simple as that, women's qualities shine in many other places outside of the battlefield.
All of the posts regarding women in combat arms from other countries seemed to focus on Israel. While I didn't read all of the sub-comments to main comments, I didn't see Canada mentioned. Canada has a fully integrated military including in combat arms and direct combat. I am not saying that it is the same thing, but they would seem to be closer to the US's position, world situation, and tradition than Israel.
I was unaware that Canadian forces were integrated. But just doing a very brief search for some info on the subject, I found that only about 225 female soldiers are currently operating in direct combat roles with another 925 in reserve. Granted we have a much larger military so the number should be larger, but is that small amount of soldiers really worth the shitstorm this will cause with current military culture?
I don't have anything against women personally, but some things just aren't worth the trouble.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/cdnmilitary/wom…
Like all facilities, the saunas are used by both men and women, and the Swedish military does not segregate living quarters or bathrooms.
But the coalition-building has also led to some odd cultural exchanges. Chief among them has been getting foreign officers used to the Swedish habit of socializing with little or no clothing in the warship's sauna.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/2010/may/26/sa…
I'd like to see Lt. Peterson in the sauna some day–hot or butch, shaved or jungle warfare.
Lt. Peterson, I was an infantry officer (11A not 92S) for three Iraq tours. I fought in the brutal summer fun of Najaf in August, 2004. I've killed hadjis who were better than you claim to be. Every one of the blessed infantrymen from that platoon and from subsequent commands could whip your smart ass in a New York minute. It's easier to quote from the Ranger creed than to be a Ranger little girl. Where will you be when your platoon lived in a city for a month in 135 degree heat with a shortage of water, no change of clothes and no shower for over a month? Where will you be when your men are wearing more gear and ammo than you weigh (I carried 20 magazines and shot through almost every one of them twice in Najaf) and they are running up and down buildings, clearing rooms all day and into the night?
You'll be in the rear with an IV in both arms complaining that your gear is too heavy and that you have a HELLISH yeast infection. You won't go back out because crapping on the cement floor of a building next to a stinky man, surrounded by piles of pooh is "icky" (there are no working commodes). You'll refuse to go back to the battle because you have to sleep on a concrete floor in the open for 3-4 hours with only an OTV or a Kevlar as a pillow. You definitely wouldn't be able to drag an unconscious man (fully loaded mind you) to safety after an RPG slammed into the wall next to his head, (thankfully not decapitating him, although I've seen a couple of decapitated troops). After the battle, when you are safe and snug in your CHU, you'll do what other female officers do; you'll fraternize (i.e. f–k) the troops in your command.
BRAVO!
I've seen your type at USMA and the in Army. Perhaps you were grey trou. You want to go out and break barriers because our jacked up culture told you that you could and should. You watched "GI Jane" and "Courage Under Fire" and thought, "what's so hard about that?" Nothing little girl…absolutely nothing…except you were not built for it emotionally and physically. And with the attitude you have, your mostly male troops are going to hate you. I've seen it happen with other "hard core" officer chicks.
Women were not meant for combat, physically or psychologically. Along with the DADT repeal, this is further proof that everything is falling apart.
Sir, she wouldn't last long enough to graduate basic Infantry Officers course. Let alone any advanced training such as Ranger School. I'll bet she won't last the first week. She will DOR !!!
Thank you TC26,
You've hit it on the head its easy to think you can do something you see in the news or in a video, Its a different world once its in your face.
wow, thank goodness story time is over
Well said.
Hell, I was infantry and I thought crapping next to a stinky man was icky.
If a girl, unwashed for weeks, crapped next to my stinky ass, I'd stick my pee-pee in there.
I've been in all male Infantry units, and later, mixed MP units. I prefer all male units. The presence of women, especially in a combat environment, destroys unit morale and effectiveness. Too many freekin sex shenanigans.
This has been(and still is) a hot subject in pretty much every NATO-country.
Take mine for instance, Norway.
When I went trough basic training we had two girls in my platoon. And they both carried every bit of the 45kg(100lbs) + skiis and other assorted gear, we all hated lugging around during our winter survival course in which we continuously marched in the montains for 5 days straight. No complaints from either of em'.
One of the two, showed a remarkable talent for markmanship and was soon assigned as a marksman, and issued a Barett 50. cal.
She lugged that thing around all day long on field exersizes and I never heard her bitch about once. Her male counterparts however, a totally different story. So IMHO, women in _some_ combat roles is not something to get all worked about.
I'm necceseraly saying that this is the norm for women(far from it), but when in some rare case you actually find one that is up for the challenge, shouldn't she be given that chance to prove herself?
In the norwegian army, we have one particular battalion, the Telemarks battalion(TMBN for those of you that may have come across them in Afghanisthan), which is our foremost mekanized infantry for offensive operations. TMBN had until recently separate requirements for men and women. They changed that rather quckly when they hit Afghan dirt. The reasons are obvious, and have been listed in here by others:
A soldier needs to know that he can rely on his partner, man or woman, to be able to drag/carry his gear-overloaded ass out of harms way if he gets hit or knocked out.
As a result, the requirements are now the same for men as for women. And they do have some in the battalion, allthough I'm currently unsure if any of them have infantryman as they're MOS. Nevertheless all soldiers in the BN are required to perform to the same physical requirements.
Different story with Norwegian Spec-Ops units though. They've allowed women to apply for and enter selection for many years now, but, None have made it so far.
With an annual drop-out rate of around 90% among spec-ops candidates, It's not exactly what you'd call a shocker.
So to the guys in here, saying "Hell no!! women cant be on combat duty! They'll just pms and menstruate all over the place!!", let the girlies have they're chance, and if you're right they'll just wash out anyways.
Well, that was my sorry attempt of giving some balanced insight in how one of you're allies has gone about this little ordeal. Take care brothers!
Cheers
M
"I'm NOT neceseraly saying" was what I meant on line number 12.
Please excuse my typo's, bad formulations and grammar.
English isn't my first language and it's very late/early up here above the artic circle.
First of all, I'm Norwegian not Swedish. Get a map and learn some geography.
Second: If you don't have anything useful or relevant to add to the discussion I suggest you refrain from embarrasing yourself further. I mean, you can't even spell a four letter word in your first language correctly.
Take a sauna.
go lose a spelling bee.
Please note: It's a Grunt's right to B#$%&. Now that said, they will get the job done. As for the women, there are not enough who will make it to make the search viable. There was a report posted recently about the combat loads of the Infantry, I suggest you read it.
Read this book: http://www.cousinsofcolor.com/about_the_author.ht…
William Schroder is Vietnam veteran, infantry officer, helicopter pilot, businessman, sailor and author of several essays, short stories and screen plays. Cousins of Color is his debut novel.
Growing up in the politically charged '60s, for decades Bill was an outspoken critic of our nation's continuing negative preoccupation with racial themes and issues. Inspired by Dr. Willard B. Gatewood's Smoked Yankees and the Struggle for Empire, Bill spent four years researching and writing about the Philippine Campaign, a shameful period in our nation's history most Americans would like to ignore.
"I was on the lookout for a good story. You know the kind I mean – big, with all the great themes – love, hate, anger, greed, sacrifice and redemption. Ingredients that properly mixed and baked offered a taste of the pie called the human condition. I was on the lookout and thought I’d found it the day Dr. Willard Gatewood introduced me to Private David Fagen, a black American who, in time of war, traded his future for the chance to help another “colored” people gain freedom. A tremendous story, it contained all the elements, just what I’d been looking for, but it was the wrong war."
No different than a buck o' five female JM. Can't pull in D-bags or heaven forbid a towed jumper. Sickens me every time.
When your average female soldier can effectively drag/carry a 200+ pound(+ gear) wounded comrade while under fire, THEN I will consider the idea. And, they're gonna have to sign up for the draft too. That'll go over like sh*t in a punch bowl.
Why does it have to be the average female solder? Can the average Male solder do that? How about we set the standards and those that can meet them can join, those that can't don't. I am not suggesting that every female can do it but why not give them a chance.
It is about living and dying. They might be able to pass some "tests" and still not be able to do the job. It also has to do with those around you. If they don't have the confidence in YOU to do the job; YOU DO NOT BELONG !!!!!
Hasn’t political correctness done enough damage already? I recently retired after 28 years. 22 of them were as 11B, and the last 6 1/2 as an MP. Have women proven themselves under fire in Iraq and Afghanistan? To say no would be denying them their due. My problem is not so much with women in combat, but what would the disruption be in opening these traditionally male fields to them. For instance, men have the inherent desire to protect a woman when she is faced with danger. Would this stop if women were allowed in combat units? No, it would not. Too many will say “what about Israel? They allow women in their infantry?” Now lets look at that. Israel, with a population of around 4.5 million is surrounded by nearly 400 million Arabs who would love to drive them out of existance. So for them, it is not only logical, but vital that they have as many on the front lines as they can muster. We are not Israel, so that argument is moot. Eventually, there will come a time when women will be given the opportunity to serve in combat roles. And under no circumstances can the standards be changed or diminished. But when it comes, I know that the leaders of tomorrow will rise to this new challenge. I am a product of the older generation and am fixed in my beliefs and I just can’t support this report and its recommendations.
I am a female in the military and I think it is ridiculous that men doubt ALL females. Grant it, there are females that are POS in the military but not ALL of us are. Personally, I hold myself to the male standards when I take an APFT. Emotionally stable?? That's a bunch of bullshit as well. There are a lot of males in the military that I know of that come to me about their problems and cry bitch and complain because they don't want to be deployed. This occupation should not just be limited to males. If the female is top notch, I do not see why they shouldn't get the same opportunity as a male. By the way, if you sexist pigs out there think that women can't do this job, then I hope to God you never are lying in a combat zone with nobody around but me, because if you feel that way, then f**k off. A soldier is a soldier. There is no separation of genders. We ALL are laying our lives on the line.
Are you a butch lesbian?
Why, what are you going to do sit on my face? Unless, you can fireman carry a 250 lb man, shut up!
Sit on your face?? Are you fucking stupid? I can't carry 250 pounds but I ca moss likely do more physical shit than you can. And for the ignorant comment you made, I would definitely not refer to you as the chosen soldier.
Right, and you've been in combat boy? How far can you carry a 250lb man? Too many John Wayne movies, eh? Also, you need to show some respect to EVERYONE, as it's crystal clear you never served…
First of all, your comments are crude, rude, and offensive. Now be honest. Can you fireman carry a fully loaded 250 lb man? Under fire? I think not. You remind me of all those REMF’s that I used to see hanging out at the magazine rack in the PX. Reading the latest Soldier of Fortune magazines, eyes glazed over, and slurping on a big gulp. For 28 years, I performed and gave my very best, as many of us who’ve “been there, done that” can say. It is folks like you with these knuckle dragging, 2 I.Q. points above ignorance comments that really get under the skin of those who did and still can “walk the line.”
No, actually I am not. Are you a douche? Sure sounds like it. Some "Grunt" you are….
Don't get all emotional on me now, baby.
By the way, if you sexist pigs out there think that women can’t do this job, then I hope to God you never are lying in a combat zone with nobody around but me, because if you feel that way, then f**k off.
As a retired 1SG, your little comment shows how unprofessional you are. To even consider leaving a fallen comrade on the field because he doesn’t think like you or hold the same beliefs as you shows one thing; YOU and YOU alone don’t even warrant any consideration for any role in any operational combat unit. And if you are holding a leadership role, then holding with your line of thought, you would leave one of your subordinates bleeding and dying because he doesn’t think like you. That is the ultimate in cardinal sins for a leader.
Thanks for serving. I believe you are missing the point. That is if women can do the job of a riflemen as well as a man. You must understand the Infantry has not changed much from the beginning of time, only the tactic and weaponry have. Combat loads also have increase over time and have dramatically done so in the past 25 years. A report recently published stated the average weight is around 90lbs. The Infantry whether you realize it or not does 95% of its movement on foot not in humvee's or MRAP's. This is not 4-8 hours on the road and then back to hot showers and fresh chow, with your next patrol 2-3 days later. Patrols are usually 3-4 days covering a minimum 15-20 miles a day. Then the ambush opens up. Yes, there are men who will not be able to deal with it. The Grunt will because he has to. So far in training exercises at the academies has shown the women don't fair well. Yes, some have done well in a firefight or two,but that does not make a Grunt. Infantry Officers and Staff NCO's on this site have unitedly stated women are not ready for the Infantry; they should know they have been there and done that. I have been there and done that.
We speak from experience, that you don't have. Learn from this and from us. This is suppose to be a debate about logic, not EMOTION, which is most of your rant.
Shame on you Ashley,
You are a poor example of a soldier. It does not matter if that harry sexist ape farted in your general direction, he is still an american soldier, and I WILL NEVER LEAVE A FALLEN COMRADE. You really need to evaluate continuing in the military. Go back and look at your warrior ethos and creed.
I usually use my sex appeal to get the strong men to the heavy lifting for me. How many guys can say that here?
Brains, not Brauns, fellas. I can move mountains with what I have between my legs. That's Power.
You must be really HOT. mmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm….
This can’t be a serious comment? If this is truly how you operate, then how can women expect to be taken seriously when it comes to allowing them to serve in operational combat units? I am sure not all women are of this line of thinking. As I said in a previous comment, I am basically too old to change my spots. Now that is not to say that I might warm up to the idea of there being female Infantrymen one day. It will have to be a very strong and convincing case for me to change my view. There is no doubt that women have stepped up in Iraq and Afghanistan when the time came for them to do so. I won’t deny that. But if you want to be taken seriously, and if you are a 2LT which I am not questioning, then you should know better than to make such a comment.
She may just be alluding to contributing not so much combat arms but in intel or advisory roles, where she can move mountains with those vertical lips. Play into your strengths.
Unless this is a joke and a very bad one at that. If you are an officer and this comment is true, it is grounds for a article 134 hearing.
Why? Women have manipulated men since the begining of time? Why is that illegal?
True, but if what she has stated is true then she has admitted to conduct unbecoming an officer. Which is a violation of the UCMJ. It is what is called the catch all. It can be used for anything that can be considered as inappropriate behavior reflecting badly upon the service.
Leaders in the military are held to a very standard of moral and ethical conduct. Her statement demonstrates that she could be lacking in both of these areas. And if she is in or part of a command structure, then those in her charge deserve better. Just because one gender can manipulate the other with enticement does not make it right, especially so if you are a leader.
Have you ever been to Norway? our women are the same as any other women, around 5ft. tall and a LOT less fat-asses than in the states. I thought with all the over-weight lard-asses you have in the states, you would now a big valkyrie when you saw one….
If a woman somehow in the future passes special-ops selection, well then she's proven that she in fact CAN perform.
But as I said: No females has ever passed selection. a course where 90% of the men wash out as well.
All I'm saying, let them try, if they fail they fail, if they make it, well good for them.
Yes, we DO have a mega-ton of fat-ass women here. And, they have this sense of entitlement, which they have not earned. And It sucks.
Norway is probably very different. Maybe YOUR services won't drop the standards for women, but, OURS will. And, that BS will get guys dead. And, if 90% fail, WHY bother with the cost and effort of allowing them to try out in the first place?
Most of our women in the Navy are Whales and in the Marines, they are Fooglies.
Look Gene, I'm not disagreeing with you here.
Women shouldn' be allowed into combat units because of F-in politcal correctness. The only way they should be allowed in is IF, and ONLY if, they can prove that they're qualified. That means adhear to the same standards as men.
If your services drop the standards to allow women in, I firmly believe they will destroy the good reputation of US soldiers.
The US has the reputation of training some of the finest soldiers in the world, with skills and tactics proven a dozen times over. To trow that away because of simpy because of PC is the most retarded notion ever.
The sad part is that politicians will clim over themselves in order too screw it up. And I fear that if it does infact become a clusterf***, they will never admit they're mistake and keep rolling with it to the bitter end.
@@@ Sarah,
It's girls like you that make girls like me look bad in the military. You belong in the banking or legal firm–or maybe McDonald's, not the military.
"By the way, if you sexist pigs out there think that women can't do this job, then I hope to God you never are lying in a combat zone with nobody around but me, because if you feel that way, then **** off."
Really? Emotionally stable? You have kind of contradicted yourself with that statement… No matter how much someone pissed me off, I would never abandon them or fail to care for them if they needed my help. Your attitude is one more reason why hormonal women are not suited for the adversity of Infantry combat. You let a few remarks on a message board get to you…
What was that little thing I heard before? Something about "I shall never leave a fallen comrade". Yeah, you're a real shining example of what I want in combat arms…
You and me are on the same page with this one. I blistered her too. Hopefully she isn’t wearing stripes or brass.
I believe we three. It's very obvious she spoke from emotion not from logic. If she has stripes or god forbid brass, she needs to be flushed. There is no place for that kind of attitude in service.
We had Navy female ensigns going commando with their white uniforms around ship. Nothing was left to the imagination. At least they could've shaved, black thru white or brown thru white, is a really visible contrast. This is what women do, they play mind games.
I don't get it are you complaining?
Read Co-Ed combat. The author (forgot his name – it's on amazon.com/kindle/books/etc.)
He shows scientific facts and studies.
Anyways, in the end, if there are only 10 females capable of serving in the Infantry, it wouldn't be worth it. We don't need women as grunts. It would only generate more problems and difficulties.
Women are great, some can run like the wind and shoot like Annie Oakley, but that alone DOES NOT MAKE HER A FREAKIN' INFANTRYMAN.
Physcially, the best fit male will be better suited for combat than the best fit female. The same holds true for mental/emotional aspects of warfare. There is n way to dance around that issue without paying a serious price.
Don't sacrifice unit cohesion and ability for political correctness. I'm all for women everywhere else, from McDonald's to Senator to CIA to Hollywood.
Women in direct combat units doesn't necessarily mean infantry.
There's armor, artillery, ADA, etc.
If there's only ten females capable of being 11B, then there wouldn't be any problems. I guarantee there were more homosexuals than that serving in the infantry before DADT's repeal, and I can't see a handful of women qualifying problem being any bigger.
Women manipulate and Men influence.
There is no room manipulation in Infantry, so keep the women in intel or advisory roles.
Read my post below by CPT T. You could use to learn something about life and how men and women really are. If you’ve ever been deployed, you’ll know that you find out the truth about people during this time. Lots of disappointments!
The main reason for this recommendation is that women are serving in combat areas right now and the military wants to increase the numbers. Marines started the FET (female engagement teams) program to interact with the locals and gather intel. They've been very successful and now the Army wants to do the same. Problem is the law as it's written does not allow females in "combat" units, so it's a legal issue.
ok well if and injured commrade gets downed by his partner (a female) and hes 150-250 lbs. she gone be able to carry his fat a** outta there? not everybodys for combat.
ok well if and injured commrade gets downed by his partner (a female) and hes 180-250 lbs. she gone be able to carry his fat a** outta there? not everybodys for combat.
Coming from an AD female currently deployed in Afghanistan, supporting an Infantry BN: I’ve seen more manipulation coming from males than anything else. Females tend to manipulate with seduction. The men here have been manipulative by putting Soldiers that they dislike on the worse, most dangerous missions imaginable. Yes, they have attempted putting a woman out on an OP with nothing other than men. The idiots, to include the medical personnel, didn’t even think about personal hygeine. MEN, the idiots making all of the decisions, tend to forget that women CANNOT go for lengthy periods of time without showers. Yes, there is this thing called menstruation that men usually forget that happens monthly. For that and the risk of infection which could lead to sterility, there needs to be access to showers daily. The problem that happens ALL TOO OFTEN is that there are always inexperienced men making decisions for women. When will men stop doing that and ask a woman for once what her opinion is? Men should stop playing the guessing game because they ALWAYS get it WRONG!!!
Your women are giants.
Whatever you say genius..
http://www.iiss.org/EasySiteWeb/getresource.axd?A…
That's the comparative chart of NATO forces. You get to have women in your military and have saunas all day long, because we (US of A) is doing the bulk of the work here. Don't preach, you Swede.
Norway and Sweden are two very different countries.. Would you like it if i called you a Mexican? In all my millitary years, I have never come across a sauna in an army field base.
Maybe the navy has them on they're ships, but they're SAILORS and not soldiers.
And don't start with the whole, "we do all the work here" BS. Your're pissing on the graves of the good men we've lost down there. Show some damn respect!
Look at your response and ask yourself again why I berated you. I stated a simple fact, to which you threw insults. You didn't disagree with me you insulted me. If you want to give a discussion about the relative merits of having female service members serve with line units I will be happy to do that. But if you come at me with insults expect to get them in return. I am sure my mother would tell me I shouldn't let you get to me like that (Sorry Mom) but you are far from a place to be judgmental about my response to you.
See I am not the only who believes you are a FRAUD and a LIAR !!!
Did I say I never served? Your good a jumping to conclusions. That's at least twice now you have done that. First you assume that I would not debate or be willing to change my mind, without offering any counterpoint of your own, only insults, and then you assume that I have never served in the infantry when I said that I was not a infantrymen (I'm a little old for that now). I am not currently serving at all but that is not the same thing as saying I never have. You fail to even consider that there might be other MOS in the military that see direct enemy action or that there might be other places other than the military that would allow for a understanding of the hardships involved with military life. This is all without even bothering to point out that having severed in the military or not is not nor should it ever be the sole arbiter on who can an opinion on how the military of this republic should be comprised or how it should conduct itself.
Your unwillingness you look at your own behavior or think about the topic at hand with logic, and use counterpoint reasoning is why you fail to persuade me of the righteousness of your opinion. And no amount of blustering about the fairness of being insulted after you cast disparagement upon another is going to change those facts.
You wanna compare deads now, you nasty f&%!
you lost a whopping 12 troops, are you crazy?
You say this as if your opinion has weight or that you even seem to understand what the word liar means. I have not said a single thing that could be construed as a statement that would allow it to be a lie. Where is this lie to speak off? And what evidence do you have it's a lie?
Did I say that we've lost more guys than you? That's right you idiot, I didn't.
Unlike you, I don't disrespect those who gave their lives down there.
Your just another ignorant A-hole and I'm done wasting my damn time on you.
Ok you have served. Remember you did jump to a conclusion and insulted my Mother, who is not party to this. Nor have I attacked any of you relatives, so who's wrong? I know I am not a diplomat and was never trained to be; I was trained to be a Marine Rifleman.
Now the question remains is " Have you served with the Infantry battalion?" I believe experience gives one insight, understanding or knowledge others won't have. The Infantry Officers and Senior Staff NCO"s have unitedly stated here, women are not ready to serve in the Infantry and yet, you admittedly not a Grunt, know better? Now, these men have observed women in training exercises failing, consistently. Yet, you still insist that you know more than they do.
Experience Is what keeps a Grunt alive. It is experience, that helps the Infantryman accomplish his mission. It is experience, that helps keep the casualties to a minimum. It is experience, that helps those who lead and fight to have confidence in or not in those who serve next to them. Those who have taught and served with me have that experience. And yet you say WE are wrong.
BTW you still have not answered my challenge that the "SEAL Training" you observed women participating in was toned WAY DOWN for the civilian market. Those women would not survive the REAL HELL week in BUD/S.
You are delusional. Poser: Is a person who implies he/she is an expert or experience in a subject; when in reality he/she has little or none at all. You are a POSER.
Keep thinking the rest of NATO is pulling its fair share of the load in this mess, Thor.
True it's not just carrying the load. It is about putting fire on the enemy quickly. It's about bringing ammo to the gun team when they call for it during the fight. It's advancing on the enemy to assault his position. It's being there doing what is needed, when it's needed FAST; not when you're ready or have caught your breath after climbing a couple of thousand feet in Afghanistan. Because if you fail, some one will become a casualty.
The Infantry Officers and Senior Staff NCO's have unitedly stated Women are not ready to serve in combat arms, let alone the Infantry. They speak from experience. Maybe one day women will, but they are NOT ready now.
I do know that no matter how good I may be, that there is some one out there who is better than I. I have no delusions of being a war god. I am a man and nothing more.
Ok I am going to let this go now… I wrote a long message explaining my points and giving counter points but it's all stuff that has been explained to you 1000 times before and each time you insist on making it about me, which I think I have made pretty clear I don't want to talk about, and don't think is relevant or you insult, slander and disparage me. Then 4 or 5 posts (Thanks for pointing out this is the 2nd time you have done this) into a thread you switch and start mixing is some debate with your insults in the hopes that you can suggest that I will not debate you. So lets debate. First points below…
So here are my points. There are not based on who I am but on publicly known facts and reports. Counter them with something not about me or you, based on facts we can verify please:
1) Women can physically do it. have you seen female strongest? Or a female Tri-athlete?
2) Women can handle it emotionally, they are embedded regularly now. Many have seen direct action and did very well.
3) Reports from the field say that men don't have issues with the embedded females and they quickly become part of the team.
If no one could physically qualify, I see no problem with that at all. And if they never allow women into anything but armor and aviation, it's not skin off my nose since I'm a guy.
Nice dodging. You talk a lot, but don't say much. So, you never were an 0300 series or 11 series mos Infantryman. You don't rate to comment on this.
I don't exactly see waves upon waves of "female Tri-athletes" enlisting for Infantry slots. The fact that they have to be at that level speaks volumes about how much of a waste it would be. For the sake of argument, lets say that it is instated; realistically speaking, how many women who enlist are going to be of a level of fitness of that of a Tri-Athlete? very few I'd imagine. And after the first several months of having a near-zero pass rate for females attempting to be Infantry, feminists will whine, and then cause Congress to force the military to lower the standard, so that this "if they are physically qualified" argument is pointless. This is not a matter of "fairness" or "equality", it is purely political. Here is one of my points: How will this enhance our ability to destroy the enemy wherever he is? The Answer: It won't. The number of women who will get through training will be so insignificant, that it simply won't matter.
That's kind of what I thought. You don't want to debate the points.
Great point. There will likely be a low turn out for females that qualify physically which makes sense and is a negative. Hard for me to argue against that point other than to say I don't think low turn out is a good enough reason for inequality. I also I don't think it needs to go to the rate of tri-athlete I was just using that as a obvious and hard to argue against example of a women that would qualify. I personally know lots of women that get scores high enough of their PT pass a men the same age. There are lots more women athletes out there than even 20 years ago.
I hope you are wrong and I believe you will turn out to be about the lowering of physical fitness standards for females. They didn't lower the qualifications for pilots (The most obvious of the physically and mentally demanding MOS they have let females into) and I do hope they keep that thinking alive for infantry. Personally I think it's unfair to assume they will allow a lowering of the standard but I also understand why you would feel worried about such an event.
To your last point of being able to destroy the enemy. I agree it's not an enhancement (Although I personally would argue not a negative either) to the ability to destroy the enemy in direct action conflict. (Although there is something to be said for having someone small that can get through windows, rat holes and you can push over a wall). Having said that however the infantry of today does much much more than just direct contact with the enemy. While it would be nice to have MPs or civil affairs units conduct all civilian contact it is not the world we live in. Having females available for that direct contact and proven to be a key element not just in the middle east, but in Europe and Africa as well. Replacing the embedding process with females that have full infantry training, and have lived worked and trained with the units they are with is the next logical step in the para-dime we are faced with.
It might not be ideal, I can see where people would argue that (Although I personally disagree and I think the data supports me pretty well), it's the best way to perform the job given the system we are left with.
I will concede the fact that yes, women, in some scenarios, would be useful in the field. That said, why now? This should be done when we aren't faced with a two front war, economic issues, and impending military budget cuts. Common sense also dictates that it needs more than the recommendation of a REMF AF General for this to work. Just throwing units together peicemeal and then shipping them off to Afghanistan is not the best way to develop tactics and procedures for the implementation of said unit. Can females do the job of the Infantry? perhaps. I've never seen it, and probably the worst way to find out is by sending a platoon of them to charge an enemy position under fire. My main point is: If there is no obvious advantage to this, why should it be done now?
I think the obvious advantage for doing it now is that we are already doing it but giving the females less basic combat training, and very little time to train with the unit they will be attached to. If we get the female solders into the units earlier (Like as E1s) and with better training (Infantry school) they will more readily fit into the unit (They will be more used to having the female solider with them do to time), and females will be more of an asset and less of a potential hindrance. The point is that it's already done now but without a comprehensive system designed for maximum effect and minimize. Seems to me if we are going to put females with infantry units, that it would be best to make them the best fit you can.
F*** you, you damn usless jarhead. The ONLY thing "Marines" like youare good for is raiding beach heads and killing innocent civilians. I have personally lost 6 buddies between the two theatres, THATS LESS THAN 12!!!! Each one SUCKED. Lets play your numbers game, Devil Dog, There were an estimated 78,000,000 losses in WWII, and less than 20,000 in Iraq AND A-stan. Each of those 12 Souls had families. Its assholes like you that make marines look stupid. your like the blondes of the military.