Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 LastLast
Results 121 to 130 of 141

Thread: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

  1. #121
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tashah View Post
    Lol. I think a lot of males here are upset because they would lose the exclusivity to one of their domains. It also seems to me that what the outdated study is grounded upon is the notion that men will place gender-bias ahead of battlefield necessity. You guys better toughen up.
    I do not know about the Israeli Military but in the US military there two different standards when it comes to males and females.

    Lugging around a gun is so difficult? Jeeze Louise. I have an M-4 and a pup-gun and neither is as heavy as my purse.
    Have you any of the other females in your unit ever carried around an Israeli equivalent to a M240? Unless you put alot of things in your purse this is a lot heavier than a purse.

    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  2. #122
    wʜɪтe яussɪaи Tashah's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    ישראל אמריקה
    Last Seen
    05-12-14 @ 04:00 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    18,379

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    Have you any of the other females in your unit ever carried around an Israeli equivalent to a M240? Unless you put alot of things in your purse this is a lot heavier than a purse.

    Obviously, you've never lugged around a well-stocked woman's purse in one hand while carrying a screaming toddler in the other.

    אשכנזי היהודי Белый Россию

  3. #123
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:30 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,290
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    I do not know about the Israeli Military but in the US military there two different standards when it comes to males and females.
    And that would have to change if women are going to serve in infantry. I think we already pretty much agreed on that.

  4. #124
    Advisor Polynikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-04-13 @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    522

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    1) What evidence do you have that putting women in front line infantry units would lower military effectiveness? Since you chose not to defend the link you posted, the 48 study is not valid.
    I wasn't aware that I had to defend the study. It speaks for itself. All I said was that it wasn't the cornerstone of my argument. I think the study is legitimate. I believe you want to disregard it in an effort to turn this debate into something subjective and opioniated.

    2)
    What duties do you think make infantry duties more of an issue than armor or artillery? The combat load is irrelevant, as objective physical standards would ensure that soldiers have enough strength to carry out their.

    I just don't see how the physical aspect can be ignored when it is such a central part of life in the infantry. There is a reason grunts do physical training every single day, when the rest of the Marine Corps does 3 times a week, and half that time is spent 'at the gym' or playing basketball etc.

    If you agree that women would have to pass the same tests as men, then why don't they already in their physical fitness tests? In the Marine Corps men do pullups or chin-ups, women do flexed arm hang. In the Army men do pushups and women do push-ups from modified kneeling position. I believe this says something in itself. Shouldn't this be an outrage to you?



    Women in the Military: Combat Roles Considered

    Another argument against women in combat is that they simply do not have the physical strength and endurance needed. Without a doubt, being in the military is a physically demanding job that not everyone is fit to handle. Despite this, all experts agree that there are some women, although perhaps small in number, who have the physical strength and endurance to be soldiers (Army Times, July 29, 1996). Concerning combat aviation some question whether women can handle the gravitational forces of an aircraft, but there is absolutely no evidence that says they cannot. It is interesting to note that everyone, including women, believe the physical standards for military occupational specialties (MOS) should be identical for both men and women



    Race and Sex in the Military


    The Washington Times (10/2/98) carried a story, by Rowan Scarborough, about a Marine Corps internal memorandum dictating that by 2003 its officer corps shall be 12 percent black, 12 percent Hispanic and 5 percent other ethnic origins. In the wake of the memo's controversy, Marine Commandant, General Charles C. Krulak did the Clintonist double talk saying that "12-12-5" stemmed from guidelines he approved earlier but, "The fact of the matter is I confessed to signing something I was not really attuned to." General Krulak feigns offense at the idea marines would have standards lowering racial quotas. But that's the same military rope-a-dope about not lowering standards to accommodate women. Let's look at it.

    The "USMA report on the Integration and Performance of Women at West Point", cited by Mackubin Thomas Owens, in Proceedings (July 1998) reveals sex-norming schemes whereby women receive A grades for the same performance that earns a man a D. Navy women pass physical readiness tests by performing 11% fewer sit-ups, 53% fewer push-ups, and running 1.5 miles 27% slower than men. The Marine Corps discovered that only 45% of female Marines could toss a hand grenade beyond its burst radius; one Army study reported only 12% could. Navy studies show that only 12% of women can accomplish the two-person stretcher carry, a requirement critical to ship security. Women may be able to drive a five-ton truck, but need a man's help if they must change a tire. Women can fire field artillery pieces but often can't handle the ammunition.
    Senator Olympia Snowe (R.ME) says, "Every time a woman is excluded from a position [in the military], she is devalued." That's the kind of stupid thinking that ignores important physical and psychological sex differences and has compromised our military readiness. A partial listing of those differences include: the average female soldier is five inches shorter than her male counter-part, has half the upper body strength, has significantly lower aerobic capacity (at her physical peak, ages 20 to 30, the average woman has the aerobic capacity of a 50-year-old male), and 37% less muscle mass. Women have a much lighter skeleton that means, among other things, she can't pull G forces as well as men and is at greater risk of skeletal injuries.

    Women soldiers are four times more likely to report ill. The percentage of women being medically non-available at any time is twice that of male soldiers. Then there's pregnancy. Each year, between 10 and 17 percent of servicewomen become pregnant. In certain posts the rate is higher. In 1988, James Webb, Secretary of the Navy, said 51% of single Air Force and 48% of single Navy women stationed in Iceland were pregnant. During troop deployment in Bosnia, between December 1995 and July 1996, a woman had to be evacuated due to pregnancy every three days. These and other factors mean that women suffer a higher rate of attrition than men and because of the turnover they are not as profitable training investments.

    Perhaps the most dangerous aspect of military social engineering is official coverup of failure. Officers who criticize double standards or expose official lies and deception, risk their careers. If General Krulak's quota plan goes forward, you can bet there will be just as much lying and deception about race.

    Blacks are 11% of Army officers, and 6% of the officers in the other branches. Hispanics are roughly 4% of the officers in each branch. Black and Hispanic officers should be at the forefront of the protest against Krulak's quota program, or have their achievements seen as handouts. More importantly Krulak should be fired.

    Walter E. Williams





    So if we ignore the physical aspect, my other arguments are still valid, check back to earlier posts.

    3) Be more specific about what roles you are worried about women having. The sniper role is considered a front line infantry position, yet Russian women during WW2 excelled in such a role. Clearly, not all infantry jobs have the same requirements.

    I have explained the role numerous times. Infantryman. Not tankers or artillery, which I believe they could do. It is the role in the infantry that is the only one I don't believe women should be involved in.

    I do believe women could fill a role as a sniper much more effectively than they could as an infantrymen. The justification is that they would endanger a very limited amount of people. If you look back to one of the main reasons for women 'jeopardizing missions' it wasn't any of their mental or physical shortcomings, but how men reacted to them either being wounded or trying to protect them. If an army were to deploy female snipers, only the spotter and perhaps another sniper team in close vicinity would feel responsible for her or even know their locations. As well as the teams commander and those above him.

    4) How exactly do you suggest studying the effects unless you test them
    In my opinion the effects have been tested with the 1948 study. I haven't yet seen one argument that states why that study is invalid. I don't see how the fundamentals of warfare has changed enough to warrant such a broad change.
    "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -Jefferson

  5. #125
    Advisor Polynikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-04-13 @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    522

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    As I stated in my first post that my views are never set in stone and although I haven't changed my opinion concerning the issue, I have definitely thought about it in a new light. Throughout the course of this debate, points that were brought up by members of the forum and by my own research have led me to some interesting articles and studies that do deserve attention.

    http://usacac.army.mil/CAC/milreview...c02/wojack.pdf


    Women in Combat


    This quote sums up how I feel in regards to the physical aspect, which was least of my concerns.

    "The pure and simple point is that all jobs should be open to women and men - if and only if - the women and men are qualified, capable, competent, and able to perform them! Nothing more, nothing less."



    The most important aspect that warrants more attention is a study into whether women do jeopardize the mission as the IDF study of 1948 implies

    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.


    I don't believe the data is sufficient enough at this time to reverse the policy, but I certainly believe it is not a closed issue, and is one that should not be looked into further. My concern, as voiced before, is that lives would be lost in order for this study to come to a decisive conclusion.
    "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -Jefferson

  6. #126
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tashah View Post
    Obviously, you've never lugged around a well-stocked woman's purse in one hand while carrying a screaming toddler in the other.
    Have most of the females in the IDF done such a thing while in service?

    I have lugged around kids too and diaper bags.However that is nothing compared to running up a hill with a flack vest on while carrying a 249 saw,ammo,packed ruck sack,filled canteens, water and ammo.
    Last edited by jamesrage; 05-26-09 at 05:47 PM.
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  7. #127
    Sage
    jamesrage's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    A place where common sense exists
    Last Seen
    12-10-17 @ 09:23 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    31,067

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    And that would have to change if women are going to serve in infantry. I think we already pretty much agreed on that.
    If the government does decided to allow females into the infantry do you think they are going to be held to the same current standards(not standards lowered) as their male counterparts or do you think the female soldiers will have the same substandards they do now in the US military?
    "A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder is less to fear"

    Cicero Marcus Tullius

  8. #128
    Advisor Polynikes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Seen
    02-04-13 @ 01:19 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    522

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tashah View Post
    Obviously, you've never lugged around a well-stocked woman's purse in one hand while carrying a screaming toddler in the other.
    Obviously you have never done a 12 mile hike with a M240 across your soldiers and 75 lbs on your back, up hills, in 75-90 degree heat.

    I would take a purse and a toddler any day.
    "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." -Jefferson

  9. #129
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:30 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,290
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by jamesrage View Post
    If the government does decided to allow females into the infantry do you think they are going to be held to the same current standards(not standards lowered) as their male counterparts or do you think the female soldiers will have the same substandards they do now in the US military?
    For combat/infantry duty, I would certainly object to different standards based on sex.

  10. #130
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:13 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    17,991

    Re: U.K. Considers Lifting Combat Ban for Female Troops.

    Quote Originally Posted by rathi View Post
    How big are the logistics requirements? Everything you mentioned except tampons and medical stuff could be ignored, and I doubt that would have any noticeable impact on supplies. Considering that woman don't need to shave, it is possible they might even come out ahead in logistics.
    You are right. Many things could be ignored. However, we guage in regards to Boot Camp. When it comes to the female needs (as prescribed by our culture) the watchdogs are always ensuring that the women have what they need. This is not to suggest that their training is less intensive, but to show that special accomodations are a requirment. "Mothers of America" has a large impact.

    There are plenty of women that could carry a man across a battle field, do without a shower for a month, and even outrun some men. But there are plenty more that simply cannot. And opening a Grunt unit to women means that plenty would not be able to handle the rigors and eventually would bring down the moral of the unit.

    But in comes the idea that standards should be set to set apart those few as if they are auditioning for a special op unit. This brings in another problem. There are physical standards already set. For example: Twenty "dead hang" pull ups will get a male Marine a max of 100 points on his [ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Marine_Corps_Physical_Fitness_Test"]PFT[/ame]. The equivelent for a female Marine is Seventy seconds of flex arm hang. In other words, the male must come completely down and straighten his arm twenty times for a max score, but a female only has to keep hanging on the bar, bent at the elbow, for seventy seconds to achieve the same score. Keep in mind that these scores have everything to do with judging a Marine's ability to be a Marine and his/her promotions.

    Now, obviously putting women in an Infantry Unit is possible. But it is not practical nor is it easily done. We are talking about a looooot of changes, which include convincing "Mothers of America," who do not want their daughters facing down AK-47s in an intentional fire fight, that equality actually means equality in some books.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

Page 13 of 15 FirstFirst ... 31112131415 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
  •