Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 141

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

  1. #31
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:32 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,328
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes View Post
    A member doesn't carry the same validity as a comprehensivne national study, provided in the link I posted.
    So some one who would know, in ways you or I cannot, whether Israel uses women in combat, is going to be dismissed because her statement goes against what you want to believe? You have any credibility how?

  2. #32
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    Thats not evidence, that is more anecdote.

    Show me statistics of female fighter pilots repeatedly and consistantly out-performing males in practice sessions at full speed and high G.
    We have female fighter pilots and have for years now. No complaints so far from the government or anyone else.

    I don't care about the issue enough to research whatever you are talking about. It is a fact that women have better hand eye coordination. I don't care about the "high G's" or anything else.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    There's the bar, now jump over it.
    I will ignore the bar as I don't really care.
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

  3. #33
    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 Redress View Post
    Why has no one commented on this yet? The OP is flawed, that really throws in question any conclusion drawn from the OP.
    Israel Defense Forces - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The IDF abolished its "Women's Corps" command in 2001, with a view that it had become an anachronism and a stumbling block towards integration of women in the army 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 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.[8]

    From the way I see it, the Chief of Staff caved to demands from women's rights groups and then irresponsibly put the burden on the unit commanders to get the groups off his back. I suspect there was some back-channeling talking and memos to make sure that there is not large numbers of women involved in combat. In 1948 they served solely due to manpower shortages.
    "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

  4. #34
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    We have female fighter pilots and have for years now. No complaints so far from the government or anyone else.
    That is not evidence for this assertion . . .

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    they are actually stronger in some situations such as combat pilots.
    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    I don't care about the issue enough to research whatever you are talking about.
    That is fine, but understand in future, when you make that assertion, you are making it without being able to provide evidence for it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Blackdog View Post
    It is a fact that women have better hand eye coordination. I don't care about the "high G's" or anything else.
    That is not evidence that women are "stronger combat pilots" , it is you making a claim about hand eye coordination.

  5. #35
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Last Seen
    04-23-17 @ 05:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    15,429
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    I think with the way we are now fighting combat, its inherent that women in the military be given some sort of basic infantry schooling. The Marine Corps already does this with ALL of its non infantry MOS, male and female. All Marines, regardless of their respective job, are basic riflemen. Meaning we are all trained in basic squad mauevers, special weapons firing, MOUT, etc.....I think its important(and the Army has toyed with the idea as well) that everybody be trained in some basic infantry tactics, since the attacks come from anywhere and everywhere. Its folly to have females serve on the ground as supply personell, and as in the case of Jessica Lynch, hand off their weapon to someone else when attacked. A female Marine would have likely fixed her bayonet if it came down to it.

    However, even though all female Marines go through this extra training, they are still segregated from the males, just as they are in boot camp. And as was mentioned before, females do have different standards for physical strength testing(and I believe they get a few extra minutes to complete the run). Once they reach MOS schools and fleet units, they are integrated with males, and are expected to be able to perform their job, and develop the same leadership skills in the same manner a male is. So if they are going to be in a support role, they should be trained in some basic infantry tactics, since there is a chance they could be faced with an ambush.

    But should they be pure infantry in their roles? I don't think so. Its not a knock on their capabilities, but rather that as a society, men are expendable. I've used this example before, using really simple numbers to illustrate the point. A country has 10 men and 10 females. They come under attack. half of the 20 people will serve in defense. Of the 10 that fight, only two come back. In scenario one, 5 males and 5 females were sent to fight. 1 male and 1 female return, giving the society a total of 6 males, and 6 females. The highest possible birthrate over the next year(to replenish the society) is 6 children. In scenario 2, all 10 males are sent to fight, whilst the 10 women stay behind. 2 males return. The highest possible birthrate over the next year, is 10 children. So we can effectively shrink the male population down to a small number, and still experience a greater population growth, than we could if we sent an equal number of women into obvious combat situations. If you put it into the context of women having 2-3 kids over the course of a lifetime, you can see the numbers would even more greatly favor the scenario where men are sent into the heart of the matter.

    Its really the only rationale I can think of, as to why we have ever kept women out of combat. A natural inclination, as a species, to keep the baby farms alive and protected, so that our species can expand and grow. Its evident in some aspects of nature(think lion prides, one or two males, several females).
    "Loyalty only matters when there's a hundred reasons not to be-" Gen. Mattis

  6. #36
    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 Redress View Post
    So some one who would know, in ways you or I cannot, whether Israel uses women in combat, is going to be dismissed because her statement goes against what you want to believe? You have any credibility how?
    Could you rephrase that?

    It is not a matter of me 'wanting to believe' they shouldn't be able to serve in combat, it is historical data and studies that point out they shouldn't be.

    And as far as my credibility is concerned, I am not sure in what manner you are trying to say I don't have any, whether it be intellectually on the topic or what not, but I feel my having been in infantry related combat does give my opinion some credibility. Also I like to think I am credible due to the fact I am very objective in my views and have no problem changing them if a more compelling argument is presented.
    "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

  7. #37
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes View Post
    And as far as my credibility is concerned, I am not sure in what manner you are trying to say I don't have any, whether it be intellectually on the topic or what not, but I feel my having been in infantry related combat does give my opinion some credibility. Also I like to think I am credible due to the fact I am very objective in my views and have no problem changing them if a more compelling argument is presented.
    On top of that, you have the guts to discuss the whole topic and not myopically focus on one thing to then tout a useless solution.

    Kudos to Credibility

  8. #38
    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 WI Crippler View Post
    I think with the way we are now fighting combat, its inherent that women in the military be given some sort of basic infantry schooling. The Marine Corps already does this with ALL of its non infantry MOS, male and female. All Marines, regardless of their respective job, are basic riflemen. Meaning we are all trained in basic squad mauevers, special weapons firing, MOUT, etc.....I think its important(and the Army has toyed with the idea as well) that everybody be trained in some basic infantry tactics, since the attacks come from anywhere and everywhere. Its folly to have females serve on the ground as supply personell, and as in the case of Jessica Lynch, hand off their weapon to someone else when attacked. A female Marine would have likely fixed her bayonet if it came down to it.

    However, even though all female Marines go through this extra training, they are still segregated from the males, just as they are in boot camp. And as was mentioned before, females do have different standards for physical strength testing(and I believe they get a few extra minutes to complete the run). Once they reach MOS schools and fleet units, they are integrated with males, and are expected to be able to perform their job, and develop the same leadership skills in the same manner a male is. So if they are going to be in a support role, they should be trained in some basic infantry tactics, since there is a chance they could be faced with an ambush.

    But should they be pure infantry in their roles? I don't think so. Its not a knock on their capabilities, but rather that as a society, men are expendable. I've used this example before, using really simple numbers to illustrate the point. A country has 10 men and 10 females. They come under attack. half of the 20 people will serve in defense. Of the 10 that fight, only two come back. In scenario one, 5 males and 5 females were sent to fight. 1 male and 1 female return, giving the society a total of 6 males, and 6 females. The highest possible birthrate over the next year(to replenish the society) is 6 children. In scenario 2, all 10 males are sent to fight, whilst the 10 women stay behind. 2 males return. The highest possible birthrate over the next year, is 10 children. So we can effectively shrink the male population down to a small number, and still experience a greater population growth, than we could if we sent an equal number of women into obvious combat situations. If you put it into the context of women having 2-3 kids over the course of a lifetime, you can see the numbers would even more greatly favor the scenario where men are sent into the heart of the matter.

    Its really the only rationale I can think of, as to why we have ever kept women out of combat. A natural inclination, as a species, to keep the baby farms alive and protected, so that our species can expand and grow. Its evident in some aspects of nature(think lion prides, one or two males, several females).
    Your rationale concerning the natural inclination of our species is very similar to what I posted earlier and I completely agree. Do you think that given the current population that a society's survival is an issue when deciding whether to send women in to combat? Or that this is just a left over instinctual trait from the past?
    "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. #39
    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 Voidwar View Post
    On top of that, you have the guts to discuss the whole topic and not myopically focus on one thing to then tout a useless solution.

    Kudos to Credibility
    Thank you.

    Oh, and I got the shot addressed at Redress..haha
    "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

  10. #40
    King Of The Dog Pound
    Black Dog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    South Florida
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    34,516

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    That is not evidence for this assertion . . .
    Yes it is, I figured it was common sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    That is fine, but understand in future, when you make that assertion, you are making it without being able to provide evidence for it.
    It is my opinion, so I can make it anything I like. I have seen women in combat situations and a supporting role. They did fine.

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    That is not evidence that women are "stronger combat pilots" , it is you making a claim about hand eye coordination.
    If women have better hand eye it would stand to reason they would make better pilots.

    Again this is common sense.

    "Indian air force commanders say a woman's place is in the cockpit of a fighter jet but the delicate nature of cultural and social traditions in the country is keeping them from yankin' and bankin' with the men. "We have not been asked and the government's policy is that only men can qualify to fly fighter aircraft. But if you are asking if the women are capable, the answer is yes," Air Marshal B.N. Gokhale told the Calcutta Telegraph. More than capable, women consistently test better than men in training exercises. "I would recommend that women are put into fighter cockpits on the basis of performance," said Group Captain Chetan Bali, who heads up the faculty of flying at India's Air Force Academy. And lest there are those who believe that Western culture is far ahead when it comes to offering up our young women for combat duty, it's worth noting that the first U.S. female fighter pilot to unload an F/A-18's worth of missiles and laser-guided bombs in combat didn't do so until 2002 in the first wave of attacks against Iraq. Also, the first female pilot joined the Thunderbirds air demonstration team last fall and will perform with the team in the current air show season. - Women Make Better Fighter Pilots
    Quote Originally Posted by Moot View Post
    Benjii likes the protests...he'd be largely irrelevant without them. So he needs to speak where he knows there will be protests against him and that makes him responsible for the protests.
    Quote Originally Posted by Absentglare View Post
    You can successfully wipe your ass with toilet paper, that doesn't mean that you should.

Page 4 of 15 FirstFirst ... 2345614 ... 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
  •