Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Women Heading Into Combat!  
User currently offlinetugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 5506 posts, RR: 8
Posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 12 hours ago) and read 2128 times:

Women are no longer being barred from combat positions in the USA military:

Quote:
The U.S. military is ending its policy of excluding women from combat and will open combat jobs and direct combat units to female troops, CNN has learned. Multiple officials confirm to CNN that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will make the announcement tomorrow and notify Congress of the planned change in policy.

“We will eliminate the policy of ‘no women in units that are tasked with direct combat,’” a senior defense official says.

But the officials caution that “not every position will open all at once on Thursday.” Once the policy is changed, the Department of Defense will enter what is being called an “assessment phase,” in which each branch of service will examine all of its jobs and units not currently integrated and then produce a timetable in which it can integrate them.
http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/0...en-combat-jobs-to-women/?hpt=hp_c1

I personally am fine with it and though I know some are concerned but I think it will not impact the combat ability of the US military.

Tugg

[Edited 2013-01-23 13:26:26]


I don’t know that I am unafraid to be myself, but it is hard to be somebody else. -W. Shatner
52 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5400 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2094 times:

I'm glad.

Disclaimer: I have not served in the military.

But, I have served with women in the fire service and worked side by side with female police officers while in the fire service. And, I have not found them wanting one bit in skill or ability. It's not military service in a combat zone, but there are many parallels.

It's about time.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6601 posts, RR: 9
Reply 2, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2080 times:

What does that really mean ? When you're fighting against guerrillas any sortie, patrol, etc., is potential combat.


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineL-188 From United States of America, joined Jul 1999, 29795 posts, RR: 58
Reply 3, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2039 times:

Was it the Marines a couple of months ago tried to run a women's infantry officers course and only had two volunteers both of whom failed out of the course?

I agree that the restriction has grown ever dumber the last twenty five years but they still need to be able to physically fo the same job. I knew of more than one female who couldn't lift a 155mm arty shell. And plenty who where working the system.

So.

Allow women on combat...OK but make them meet the same pt test standard as males (there are male and female standards now) and get rid of the female exemption to the draft and make them sign up for selective service while you are at it!



OBAMA-WORST PRESIDENT EVER....Even SKOORB would be better.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19559 posts, RR: 58
Reply 4, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2030 times:

My concern is that we are generally not fighting civilized people, especially in the Mid-East. I am very concerned about the way that Taliban and friends would treat female captives as opposed to male ones.

User currently offlineraffik From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2006, 1716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 5, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2019 times:

Women are already in the army in places like Israel aren't they?
If women want to do this, then good for them. It's all about equality. They will know the risks of what they're doing when they sign up for this and if they don't want to do it, then they aren't being forced into it.



Happy -go- lucky kinda guy!
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2006 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 4):

My concern is that we are generally not fighting civilized people, especially in the Mid-East. I am very concerned about the way that Taliban and friends would treat female captives as opposed to male ones.

While you raise a legitimate fact about the people we're fighting, I'm not inclined to think that matters a whole lot. Given the asymmetrical nature of this war and the lack of front lines, women are going to get caught up in it anyhow; we might as well not pretend to have institutional misgivings about it. If it turns out that not many women actually end up becoming combat troops, well okay, but we shouldn't categorically deny them the chance.


User currently offlineAR385 From Mexico, joined Nov 2003, 6186 posts, RR: 31
Reply 7, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1987 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Didn´t the Red Army had women in active combat during World War 2?


MGGS
User currently offlineDeltaMD90 From United States of America, joined Apr 2008, 7884 posts, RR: 52
Reply 8, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1987 times:

Used to be against it, but I am cautiously for it ONLY if they don't do some affirmative action bull**** and make at least X% of infantry officers female or something. No. They need to have a bar, if that bar is set so high that 0 females are qualified tough luck, it's combat, not a social movement


Ironically I have never flown a Delta MD-90 :)
User currently offlinevenus6971 From United States of America, joined Dec 2004, 1442 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1985 times:

As long as all the standards are the same and not watered down to reach quotas. While your at it have them sign up for selective service. Plus across the board in all the branches of the armed forces the same physical fitness standard and not gender specific. Equality baby!!!


I would help you but it is not in the contract
User currently offline2707200X From United States of America, joined Mar 2009, 8490 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 1966 times:

Quoting venus6971 (Reply 9):
As long as all the standards are the same and not watered down to reach quotas. While your at it have them sign up for selective service. Plus across the board in all the branches of the armed forces the same physical fitness standard and not gender specific. Equality baby!!!

Exactly what I had in mind.

I have supported the idea for a long time and also one standard for the battlefield.



"And all I ask is a tall ship and a star to steer her by." John Masefield Sea-Fever
User currently offlineroswell41 From United States of America, joined Aug 2001, 778 posts, RR: 1
Reply 11, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1917 times:

I'm fine with it as long as they have to pass the same physical fitness tests and make all women have to register for the draft like men already have to. I imagine the country wouldn't put women into combat if suddenly fathers and mothers had to worry about their daughter being drafted into the infantry or cavalry.

I would also like to see the military keep records regarding women 'getting pregnant' on the eve of battle. I've heard that this is an issue, where the military sinks lots of money into training women for a particular discipline, then the call to war happens and the female soldier uses the 'pregnancy' card to stay home. We have limited resources and need to make sure our resources are properly spent.


User currently offlineDreadnought From United States of America, joined Feb 2008, 8837 posts, RR: 24
Reply 12, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1904 times:

Quoting tugger (Thread starter):
I personally am fine with it and though I know some are concerned but I think it will not impact the combat ability of the US military.

I agree.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 4):
My concern is that we are generally not fighting civilized people, especially in the Mid-East. I am very concerned about the way that Taliban and friends would treat female captives as opposed to male ones.

That's my biggest worry. Of course any US soldier that falls into the hands of the Taliban is almost certainly a goner, but still. It's one thing if the enemy is a nation that more or less respects women, but not in the mid-east.

Quoting L-188 (Reply 3):
I agree that the restriction has grown ever dumber the last twenty five years but they still need to be able to physically fo the same job. I knew of more than one female who couldn't lift a 155mm arty shell. And plenty who where working the system.

Fair point. But just as you pick (or are chosen) for different duties based on your abilities, you won't choose a woman to be a loader.



Veni Vidi Castratavi Illegitimos
User currently offlineQFA380 From Australia, joined Jul 2005, 2062 posts, RR: 1
Reply 13, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1875 times:

Quoting Dreadnought (Reply 13):
Fair point. But just as you pick (or are chosen) for different duties based on your abilities, you won't choose a woman to be a loader.

There has to be a minimum standard of work that everyone can achieve. There's a difference between 'this guy can run the fastest so he can be scout, but everyone else can run nearly as fast if need be' to 'this guy can't run at all due to a dicky knee, make sure you don't put him as scout'. You make one exception then you need to make more exceptions, what if she falls over from the recoil of a certain gun, guess she can't use that gun; it goes on until you wind up with two distinct classes of soldier anyway.

I would be willing to bet a large sum of money that within a decade there will be female standards and male standards. They will open it up where the women need to achieve the same physical fitness, but not enough women will want/be able to meet that level. Then there will be cries of discrimination because there's only 0.5 women in each platoon and the military will be forced to make the concession because the whole reason they opened it up in the first place was to avoid being labelled discriminatory.

Doesn't bother me too much, I have no intention of joining the military; but I really feel for the friends of mine and others who will arrive home in a body bag because one of their team members couldn't load an artillery gun but was put there to placate feminists screeching from their ivory towers.


User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 14, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 3 hours ago) and read 1852 times:

Quoting QFA380 (Reply 14):
Doesn't bother me too much, I have no intention of joining the military; but I really feel for the friends of mine and others who will arrive home in a body bag because one of their team members couldn't load an artillery gun but was put there to placate feminists screeching from their ivory towers.

I'm fairly certain that this is not how the new policy was put in place.


User currently offlineMaverick623 From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 5598 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1831 times:

Quoting L-188 (Reply 3):


Allow women on combat...OK but make them meet the same pt test standard as males

This.

It always bothered me a bit that women are held to a lower physical standard than their male counterparts, especially now that women are routinely placed in areas and situations where they could (and have) become the "front line".

And if you think DADT was a pain in the butt to get rid of, you ain't seen nuthin yet.



"PHX is Phoenix, PDX is the other city" -777Way
User currently offlinekpitrrat From United States of America, joined Oct 2011, 186 posts, RR: 0
Reply 16, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days 2 hours ago) and read 1823 times:

Quoting AR385 (Reply 7):
Didn´t the Red Army had women in active combat during World War 2?

Yes, however they generally served in more specialized positions: Sniper, Machinegunner, Tank crew, etc.

Not many were really "frontline" infantry. Still, these were combat positions.


User currently offlinedc863 From Denmark, joined Jun 1999, 1558 posts, RR: 2
Reply 17, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days ago) and read 1801 times:

As long as the women can pass the same physical requirements as the men then I have no problem. If they can't pass muster then a female candidate shouldn't be allowed no matter what some PC higher up may wish.

User currently offlinegreasespot From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3079 posts, RR: 20
Reply 18, posted (1 year 7 months 6 days ago) and read 1800 times:

We have women in combat and even fought in Afghanistan. One was even killed.

It is not like every women in the military will not want to take on a combat roll.

I think this is good.



Sometimes all you can do is look them in the eye and ask " how much did your mom drink when she was pregnant with you?"
User currently onlinefr8mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5400 posts, RR: 14
Reply 19, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 1795 times:

I'm guessing that women will be required to register for the Selective Service now.

Another result from this is that women will now have additional paths for advancement in the combat arms.

Again, a long time coming.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineNewark727 From United States of America, joined Dec 2009, 1340 posts, RR: 0
Reply 20, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 1723 times:

Quoting fr8mech (Reply 20):
I'm guessing that women will be required to register for the Selective Service now.

Not right away I don't think, but on another discussion forum someone said that it would be pretty easy to challenge current law on the matter in court once this policy went into effect.


User currently offlineKiwiRob From New Zealand, joined Jun 2005, 7269 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 1697 times:

If women are happy to get shot at just like the men then no worries let them, a female target is no better than a male target, just smaller.

User currently offlineHywel From Uganda, joined Apr 2008, 802 posts, RR: 3
Reply 22, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1668 times:

Feminists have wanted equality for decades, and yet they'll be angry over this decision  

User currently offlinepvjin From Finland, joined Mar 2012, 1248 posts, RR: 3
Reply 23, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 1661 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 4):
My concern is that we are generally not fighting civilized people, especially in the Mid-East. I am very concerned about the way that Taliban and friends would treat female captives as opposed to male ones.

Well any captive is likely going to get killed anyway, and after all that's war, anyone who willingly joins any military force on this planet should also accept possibility of death in combat or even worse than just simple death.

And honestly I'm pretty sure rapes would happen even in a war between two "civilized" western countries, just look at what happened between Germany and Russia during WW2, and that happened to civilian population. Enemy female soldier would be even more likely to get such treatment when caught alive.

But yeah I think this is a good thing, people who want to risk their lives for oil and politics should definitely be free to do so no matter what sex they are.



"A rational army would run away"
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19559 posts, RR: 58
Reply 24, posted (1 year 7 months 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 1643 times:

Quoting pvjin (Reply 23):
And honestly I'm pretty sure rapes would happen even in a war between two "civilized" western countries, just look at what happened between Germany and Russia during WW2, and that happened to civilian population. Enemy female soldier would be even more likely to get such treatment when caught alive.

I would argue that just because Japanese and German troops wore uniforms and marched under a flag, it did not make them "civilized." The Germans were busy gassing 12 million "undesirables" and the Japanese were instructing their young men to suicide into American ships. Those are signs of a breakdown in civilization.


25 Aesma : Well aren't there thousands of rapes inside the US military right now ? I guess they're not civilized either.
26 Revelation : Yet around here kids are told it's a great way to save money for college (which it really isn't, because the cost of college goes up faster than your
27 Newark727 : Well if you're from Qatar like your flag says you'll maybe hear different, but so far at least I've only heard positive remarks about this from typic
28 Post contains images Hywel : Not originally from Qatar, and my comment was sarcastic
29 DocLightning : Good point. And, on further reflection I have come to realize that women themselves should be the ones to decide whether they wish to face the risks
30 fr8mech : I'm not even sure why this is an argument anymore. Women are already in combat and dying in combat. This policy change just allows them to reap the "b
31 fridgmus : Hmm, don't know about this one. Our Military should not be used for social experiments etc. The few women who will apply to Infantry positions will mo
32 stratosphere : I don't have a problem with it..But in anything that tends to be PC there is bound to be somewhere down the line they will have different standards fo
33 Aesma : Well Israel has a military service for men and women equally so I would think they could have segregated units that would solve that problem.
34 Geezer : My my, wonders never cease ! Doc and I finally agreeing on something ! And make no mistake; the people Doc is alluding to are just licking their lips
35 pvjin : Well then later when Soviets started their march towards Berlin they did just the same as Germans had done, raped and pillaged. War is pure murder an
36 Darksnowynight : Absolutely. Part of our problem in the US is that we really don't listen to folks who've been there and done that when making these decisions (though
37 Revelation : Or just ditzy teenagers who can't find any other source of income and buy the recruitment pitch. It's epidemic, regardless of the reason. There's not
38 FlyDeltaJets : Women find themselves in combat today. So the thread title of women heading into combat is misleading. This only changes the verbiage of their roles t
39 Dreadnought : While I am all in favor of women doing everything they are physically capable of doing. This editorial does cause me to think a little bit. For some
40 Geezer : Not having ever met General Dempsey, I'm not able to say anything about him, one way or another; but regardless of what he OR Leon Panetta think, they
41 SmittyOne : I agree but add one caveat. Most military fitness tests measure RELATIVE fitness. In other words, something like a two mile run (wearing sneakers and
42 Darksnowynight : I didn't even think about that one before, but it does make complete sense. The only "justification" I can see to age is that past a given point, som
43 SmittyOne : Absolutely...that's why if you want to make sure that all your soldiers have a certain "level of fitness" regardless of what their primary duties wou
44 connies4ever : A few facts (and I am certain we can all find exceptions to the following):: -women are generally shorter than men (by a head, usually), therefore hav
45 DeltaMD90 : I realize this, and as unfair as biology is, I don't care when lives are in stake. There should be a basic human standard for infantry, if that means
46 SmittyOne : I agree 100%...but tell me what time on the 2-mile run equates to survival on the battlefield? How many pushups? My ONLY point here is that if you wa
47 Post contains links DeltaMD90 : How does physical strength equate to survival on the battlefield? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Fitness_Test http://www.army.mil/article/52548/
48 Post contains images Smittyone : I have no idea. I used the word "survival" but that was a poor choice. Read it again as "what minimum time on the 2-mile run (or number of pushups/si
49 Ken777 : Reality is that war is not civilized at any level. But if we are going to put women in combat then let's set up a PMS Brigade and send them after the
50 DeltaMD90 : Don't forget that with age comes a lot more experience... I don't expect the old crusty SGM to be as in shape as a PFC (although that is often the ca
51 Smittyone : I think so too! Keep in mind that all I'm talking about here is how to implement a useful fitness assessment...there is a hell of a lot more to the i
52 DeltaMD90 : Yes but what happens when a CO wants his (or her I guess now lol) unit to be above standards? Not all combat units are created equal. There are bette
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Bill Aims To Bar Women From Direct Ground Combat posted Thu May 19 2005 19:38:38 by Flyingbronco05
Gay Men/women Doing Non-stereotypical Jobs. posted Tue Dec 25 2012 01:46:34 by Ps762
Getting A Fids Feed Into Your Home? posted Sun Dec 2 2012 14:31:36 by ordjoe
Azerbaijan Moving Into Central Europe posted Thu Nov 22 2012 15:08:22 by ME AVN FAN
What Major/minor Should I Choose If Into Airlines posted Thu Nov 15 2012 23:51:55 by crazyguineapig
"Binders Full Of Women" Memes posted Wed Oct 17 2012 14:33:51 by Revelation
Man Jumps Into Tiger Exhibit At Zoo posted Fri Sep 21 2012 14:48:50 by dragon-wings
Anyone Into Car Audio? posted Sun Aug 26 2012 11:27:56 by mmedford
Women-Only City To Be Built In Saudi Arabia posted Fri Aug 10 2012 09:56:33 by MadameConcorde
New Hawaii Gov. To Combat "Birthers" posted Tue Dec 28 2010 15:48:46 by Aaron747