• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pentagon to overturn ban on women in military combat roles

madman said:
pardon the ignorance, but arent women already permitted to fight in combat? After all, my best friends daughter is a gunner and has been wounded.
Click to expand...

They're not allowed to serve in combat arms units: infantry, artillery, combat engineers, armor, cavalry.
 
The way we have trained for years and years just so women can pass it. No. There is a reason armies train like they do.
Boo Radley said:
Can I question the validity of the training?
Click to expand...
 
ecofarm said:
Yes, military men are neanderthals that drool and scratch themselves when they see a woman. Get a clue.


And... why is 'woman' in quotes above? Are military chicks not real women according to you?
Click to expand...

im not the one that implied ALL military men. I said many.
 
madman said:
This all makes me think that some are trying to prevent women from getting military promotions.
Click to expand...

Actually, some of us are interested in saving lives on the battlefield.

Because after all, im sure many men hate the idea of being told what to do by a "woman".
Click to expand...

And, if that's the case, then so be it. This is our military we're talking about. It's not designed to make everybody happy. The objective is to destroy the enemy in close quarter combat and if the troops won't follow a leader, then that leader doesn't need to be in the position, regardless of the reason they won't follow said leader and regardless of that leader's gender.
 
Last edited:
madman said:
im not the one that implied ALL military men. I said many.
Click to expand...

Oh, please, you are implying that military men are, to such an extent as to establish regs, misogynists. That's a crappy thing to do. Like you know anything about the military.

And then YOU go and put the word 'woman' in quotes. Why? Because military women are not real women? I think it's clear who has a problem with women (or "women") here. Stop projecting.
 
mak2 said:
The way we have trained for years and years just so women can pass it. No. There is a reason armies train like they do.
Click to expand...

Having done something a certain way doesn't necessarily mean it is the best way or that it is what is needed. Is it possible the military suffers from group think?
 
ecofarm said:
Oh, please, you are implying that military men are, to such an extent as to establish regs, misogynists. That's a crappy thing to do. Like you know anything about the military.

And then YOU go and put the word 'woman' in quotes. Why? Because military women are not real women? I think it's clear who has a problem with women (or "women") here. Stop projecting.
Click to expand...

ohh, am im?

We need to go back to 2nd grade vocabulary.
Plz define "MANY" for me.

I used women in quotes as a way to show how many men say it in a misogynist way.
 
Boo Radley said:
Having done something a certain way doesn't necessarily mean it is the best way or that it is what is needed. Is it possible the military suffers from group think?
Click to expand...

Stop me when I'm wrong, we have the finest military force in human history. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
 
madman said:
We need to go back to 2nd grade vocabulary.
Click to expand...

I don't think they're gonna send me from my PhD to 2nd grade. What level of education do you have? I'm sure it's not close to mine. So, why don't you go back to school. I hate when uneducated people talk crap about education.


Look dude, you claim that the military is preventing women from being promoted. That has nothing to do with the subject. You were just throwing some anti-military crap out there and hoping it would stick. This is monkey throwing crap level of debate, and you're off topic:

madman said:
This all makes me think that some are trying to prevent women from getting military promotions.
Click to expand...

Then, you hit military women with the scare quotes:

Because after all, im sure many men hate the idea of being told what to do by a "woman".
Click to expand...

Nice little attempt at an anti-military hit job, but you only succeeded in clearly displaying your own prejudice. So, military women are not real women, huh?
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
Stop me when I'm wrong, we have the finest military force in human history. If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Click to expand...

Even hear of continuous improvement? Resting on one's laurels is usually a bad idea. As it has been stated it has been done the same way for a long time, wouldn't questioning that be appropriate. I'm not saying change to change, or even to change at all, but to question it.
 
Yes, in fact group think in a military unit, or a basketball team might be a good thing. I think military training does evolove, but as long as humans kill humans in combat, there will be constants. The strongest, smartest and best trained tend to survive. Hand to hand combat is mainly upper body strength, so is carrying ammo or your buddy. Nope, I think the training should be the same for both, and if changed, channge it due to changes in combat, not to accomadate women.
Boo Radley said:
Having done something a certain way doesn't necessarily mean it is the best way or that it is what is needed. Is it possible the military suffers from group think?
Click to expand...
 
ecofarm said:
I don't think they're gonna send me from my PhD to 2nd grade. What level of education do you have? I'm sure it's not close to mine. So, why don't you go back to school. I hate when uneducated people talk crap about education.


Look dude, you claim that the military is preventing women from being promoted. That has nothing to do with the subject. You were just throwing some anti-military crap out there and hoping it would stick. This is monkey throwing crap level of debate, and you're off topic:



Then, you hit military women with the scare quotes:



Nice little attempt at an anti-military hit job, but you only succeeded in clearly displaying your own prejudice. So, military women are not real women, huh?
Click to expand...


Reading comprehension is crucial:

I said: This all makes me think that some are trying to prevent women from getting military promotions.
No where in the sentence did it say "the military is preventing".


I said: Because after all, im sure many men hate the idea of being told what to do by a "woman".
No where in that sentence did i say all men. Again, look up the definition of "many".


I said: I used women in quotes as a way to show how many men say it in a misogynist way.
But you ignored that anyway.


someone needs to file a hurt feelings report.
 
mak2 said:
Yes, in fact group think in a military unit, or a basketball team might be a good thing. I think military training does evolove, but as long as humans kill humans in combat, there will be constants. The strongest, smartest and best trained tend to survive. Hand to hand combat is mainly upper body strength, so is carrying ammo or your buddy. Nope, I think the training should be the same for both, and if changed, channge it due to changes in combat, not to accomadate women.
Click to expand...

I was told when I enter the military that it was designed for the smaller, quicker male. Strength was not measured in terms on mass and total poundage that one could lift. I was stronger than most, but larger, less flexible.

As for group think being a good thing, I have to disagree. A basketball team can get locked into a belief and slow to change when needed. All things should be question from time to time.
 
Boo Radley said:
Even hear of continuous improvement? Resting on one's laurels is usually a bad idea. As it has been stated it has been done the same way for a long time, wouldn't questioning that be appropriate. I'm not saying change to change, or even to change at all, but to question it.
Click to expand...

Allowing the creation of coed combat arms units isn't, "improvement". History has proven that it doesn't work and decreases combat effectiveness.
 
apdst said:
Allowing the creation of coed combat arms units isn't, "improvement". History has proven that it doesn't work and decreases combat effectiveness.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that's true, but what I asked was to question assumptions.
 
madman said:
someone needs to file a hurt feelings report.
Click to expand...

When you get done with that 2nd grade assignment (and, really, I don't look down on you for trying to get an education) and are no longer scared of "women", let me know.
 
I dont have a problem with your opinion, I just generally dont agree. I dont think the militray has a good reason to change combat training, we are pretty damn good at it. I dont think that is to keep women out. I do think women should be allowed in combat but for their sakes they should have the same training. I do not think most militray men really think about the superior officer being a female. Back when I was in I just seen the rank, I dont think I thought much about the gender.
Boo Radley said:
I was told when I enter the military that it was designed for the smaller, quicker male. Strength was not measured in terms on mass and total poundage that one could lift. I was stronger than most, but larger, less flexible.

As for group think being a good thing, I have to disagree. A basketball team can get locked into a belief and slow to change when needed. All things should be question from time to time.
Click to expand...
 
Boo Radley said:
I'm not sure that's true, but what I asked was to question assumptions.
Click to expand...

It's not an assumption, that mixed gender units suffer from decreased combat effectiveness.
 
mak2 said:
I dont have a problem with your opinion, I just generally dont agree. I dont think the militray has a good reason to change combat training, we are pretty damn good at it. I dont think that is to keep women out. I do think women should be allowed in combat but for their sakes they should have the same training. I do not think most militray men really think about the superior officer being a female. Back when I was in I just seen the rank, I dont think I thought much about the gender.
Click to expand...

Back when I was in, I saw a signal corps O-3 and I damn well noticed her gender. ;)
 
150px-Roza_Shanina.jpg

Roza Shanina, a Soviet sniper during World War II, credited with 54 confirmed target hits. About 400,000 Soviet women served in front-line duty units,[1] chiefly as medics and nurses.
 
apdst said:
Allowing the creation of coed combat arms units isn't, "improvement". History has proven that it doesn't work and decreases combat effectiveness.
Click to expand...

Do you have anything from a credible non-agenda orientated source on that?

(do you know what assumptions I'm asking be questioned?)
 
Boo Radley said:
View attachment 67141295

Roza Shanina, a Soviet sniper during World War II, credited with 54 confirmed target hits. About 400,000 Soviet women served in front-line duty units,[1] chiefly as medics and nurses.
Click to expand...

She didn't serve in a coed unit, either.

Just to be clear, I'm not opposed to women serving in combat arms units. I'm opposed to the creation of coed combat arms units.

Even the Soviets new better and formed all female units.
 
mak2 said:
I dont have a problem with your opinion, I just generally dont agree. I dont think the militray has a good reason to change combat training, we are pretty damn good at it. I dont think that is to keep women out. I do think women should be allowed in combat but for their sakes they should have the same training. I do not think most militray men really think about the superior officer being a female. Back when I was in I just seen the rank, I dont think I thought much about the gender.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with you much. But hell, I question the training when I was in for reasons other . I find it hard none question it now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom