Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 185

Thread: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    Great, just what the Military needs. More civilians with no military experience telling us what we need. Same reason we now get issued thousands of dollars of equipment that stays in its original packaging, stuffed in a ruck in the back of a closet.
    I would agree with you except that in this case the women bringing the law suit ARE military.

  2. #22
    Baby Eating Monster
    Korimyr the Rat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Laramie, WY
    Last Seen
    11-23-17 @ 02:02 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    18,709
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Soldiers are soldiers.
    Except they're not. No matter how much we might pretend otherwise, they're still human beings first and that influences how they fight.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Women in the military have the same responsibilities as their male counterparts. If they can fight for their country, and die for their country, they deserve equality.
    Yes. The problem is that they have no business being that close to foreign wars in the first place. The entire purpose of having a standing military is to keep war away from women. Women dying in combat is what happens when you lose a war, and why any nation that deserves to survive does everything in its power to ensure that doesn't happen.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    I cry to see our veterans return with their limbs and their minds destroyed because of what they have suffered... but I cannot and will not dismiss the sacrifice of women who have served with honor, simply because they lacked a penis in the field of battle.
    I'm not dismissing their sacrifice. I'm lamenting their sacrifice as costing society more than the same sacrifice made by a man.

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Gonzo Rodeo View Post
    There is only one advantage to a front-line combat assignment: medals, without which senior officers cannot make General.
    Civilians seem obsessed with medals for some reason. Nobody in the military would volunteer for a dangerous assignment for a freaking medal.

  4. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    SE Asia
    Last Seen
    07-12-14 @ 10:52 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    2,333

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Viktyr Gehrig View Post
    The entire purpose of having a standing military is to keep war away from women.
    No, it is to keep it is to keep war away from civilians.

  5. #25
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Sarcogito View Post
    I would agree with you except that in this case the women bringing the law suit ARE military.
    I didn't read the article before I posted. It's about the eighty-six thousandth time this issue has come up. My bad.

    If these female Service Members want to be Infantry, more power to them, but I don't see them complaining about the "inequality" in the PT standards. If they can pass the male standards of the PT test at a minimum of 70%, and maintain that, then by all means, let them in. If not, they can go back to being mechanics, medics, pilots, surgeons, heavy equipment operators, cooks, administrative personnel, electricians, drivers, Sappers, lawyers, Military Police, intelligence personnel, and all those other important roles which they feel aren't good enough.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  6. #26
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,927

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    For civilized peoples it does. International law, ROE, the Geneva Convention, the Hague Convention, and a plethora of treaties which limit what we can and cannot do.
    Fools and a their foolish notions. Civilized war. I am reminded of the term Jumbo Shrimp.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

  7. #27
    better late than pregnant
    Gonzo Rodeo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Here
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:07 PM
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    4,133

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    Hate to break it to you, but Service Members don't go to combat for little pieces of ribbon and brass.
    Quote Originally Posted by Sarcogito View Post
    Civilians seem obsessed with medals for some reason. Nobody in the military would volunteer for a dangerous assignment for a freaking medal.
    You are both putting words into my mouth. I never said that people only go into combat for medals. I said there is only one advantage to a front line combat assignment: medals. Without combat, your chances of becoming a General officer are much, much lower... unless you are female and get a "diversity" pick, and even then you are probably at least closely related to combat (helicopter pilot, flight doc/nurse, etc).

    I was enlisted in the Air Force, and there they used medal points toward promotion. I don't know how it works in the other services, but even as enlisted you are not competitive for rank-up without the medals. Then again, you rank up according to your AFSC (MOS) and compete with others of your AFSC, so in some cases you have to get the medals just to get back on the playing field (but, again, only among those that share your same job description). If that's the same in other services, then as far as enlisted are concerned not being able to earn medals does not hurt your chances of promotion, seeing as how if you can't be in a combat specialty then you aren't in competition with people who are going to naturally have more medals than you.

    With officers of all branches, however, it is very difficult to see a star without some heavy combat time under your belt. Unless you have a specialty like being a doctor or a lawyer, you're pretty much screwed when it comes to hitting anything over 0-5. Then again, we are starting to see more and more "diversity" picks, for lack of a better word. And I'm not using "diversity" in the sense of Twofor on 30 Rock either; for the longest time Intel officers had a glass ceiling for making O-9 and O-10 for having a lack of combat experience (read: medals). The upper echelons of rank are starting to get more and more picks from non-combat specialties, because the JCS pretty much declared that's what has to be done now. And very much in the 30 Rock, affirmative action sense - it doesn't hurt if you're a woman, or a minority (or both).

    So, seeing as how there are already methods to combat the singular drawback of being barred the most dangerous of career paths within the Armed Forces... why would anyone fight for the "right" to get shot at more than they have to?

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    And we don't call the enemy by denigrating terms to "dehumanize" them. We know damn well that they're people, regardless of how we describe them. Words don't mean a damn thing when you're getting shot at.
    The psychology is on my side on this one. When you refer to a German as a kraut or Jerry, or an Asian as a Jap or a squint or a slant or a gook, you are no longer referring to them as a person. You have made them an item, a thing, a target to fill your reticule. Humans have done this throughout our entire recorded history, even as far back as the Babylonians repurposing the Sumerian mother-god Tiamat into a heinous beast that was the font of all evil. You see, if you aren't like us, then YOU must be "the bad guys," and we can kill you with a clear conscious.

    In the naval/aeronautical tradition, enemy troops on other ships are not people, they're "the enemy." But when that ship gets sunk, all of the survivors stranded in the water are "souls," as in, "the ship went down with 100 souls aboard, twenty souls got out in time"... until you pick them up out of the water, at which point they are then "prisoners".

    This phenomenon is widely rampant today in the world of politics, most especially in the terms of overgeneralizaton, i.e. "all conservatives must necessarily be bigots," or "all liberals must necessarily be stupid and gullible." This accomplishes the same feat of taking an individual person out of any future equation and replacing them with a "thing" that just happens to be stupid/bigoted/something we can fundamentally disagree with on everything, and both parties have used this to package popular ideas with unpopular ones.

    Sociologists and historians often view dehumanization as central to some or all types of wars. Governments sometimes represent "enemy" civilians or soldiers as less than human so that voters will be more likely to support a war they may otherwise consider mass murder.[citation needed] Dictatorships use the same process to prevent opposition by citizens. Such efforts often depend on preexisting racist, sectarian or otherwise biased beliefs, which governments play upon through various types of media, presenting "enemies" as barbaric, undeserving of rights, and a threat to the nation. Alternatively, states sometimes present an enemy government or way of life as barbaric and its citizens as childlike and incapable of managing their own affairs. Such arguments have been used as a pretext for colonialism.[citation needed] The Holocaust during World War II and the Rwandan Genocide have both been cited as atrocities predicated upon government-organized campaigns of dehumanization, while crimes like lynching (especially in the United States) are often thought of as the result of popular bigotry and government apathy. Anthropologists Ashley Montagu and Floyd Matson famously wrote that dehumanization might well be considered "the fifth horseman of the apocalypse" because of the inestimable damage it has dealt to society. When people become things, the logic follows, they become dispensable - and any atrocity can be justified. Dehumanization can be seen outside of overtly violent conflicts, as in political debates where opponents are presented as collectively stupid or inherently evil. Such "good-versus-evil" claims help end substantive debate (see also thought-terminating cliché).
    Last edited by Gonzo Rodeo; 11-28-12 at 06:09 AM.
    "Political speech and writing are largely the defense of the indefensible. . . . Thus political language has to consist largely of euphemism, question-begging and sheer cloudy vagueness."
    ~Orwell, Politics and the English Language

  8. #28
    versus the world
    Surtr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The greatest planet in the world.
    Last Seen
    06-10-14 @ 03:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,017

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateMk1 View Post
    Fools and a their foolish notions. Civilized war. I am reminded of the term Jumbo Shrimp.
    You mean prawns? lol.
    I love the NSA. It's like having a secret fan-base you will never see, but they're there, watching everything you write and it makes me feel all warm and fuzzy inside knowing that I may be some person's only form of unconstitutional entertainment one night.

  9. #29
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,927

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by DiAnna View Post
    Women in combat should be treated the same as men in combat in the same situations. I don't want to hear about men who will "protect women" more than they will "protect their own comrades in arms". Soldiers are soldiers. Women in the military have the same responsibilities as their male counterparts. If they can fight for their country, and die for their country, they deserve equality. The USA is at war. Women who serve are at war. I cry to see our veterans return with their limbs and their minds destroyed because of what they have suffered... but I cannot and will not dismiss the sacrifice of women who have served with honor, simply because they lacked a penis in the field of battle.
    So long as they pass all of the requirements that men would have as far pysical condition ect. then I agree with you. If women get a watered down tailered bull**** version, then quite frankly all they are gona end up doing is getting themselves killed. Theres a reason there are standards in PT and the like. Weeding out people that cant hack it being one.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

  10. #30
    Resident Martian ;)
    PirateMk1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    Today @ 06:37 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Private
    Posts
    9,927

    Re: Aclu sues over policy barring women from combat

    Quote Originally Posted by Surtr View Post
    You mean prawns? lol.
    I am stuck on stupid mode today. Doaghhh. Speaking of prawns, that sounds tasty.
    Semper Fidelis, Semper Liber.
    I spit at lots of people through my computer screen. Not only does it "teach them a lesson" but it keeps the screen clean and shiny.
    Stolen fair and square from the Capt. Courtesey himself.

Page 3 of 19 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

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