Page 8 of 15 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 141

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

  1. #71
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,293
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    And, is there any reason I shouldn't ? You don't think that the validity of an IDF study is in jeopardy because of a few anecdotes do you ?
    It is in jeopardy because the world has changed in 60 years.

  2. #72
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Last Seen
    12-10-11 @ 02:19 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    5,122

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    It is in jeopardy because the world has changed in 60 years.
    Prove it. Prove the changes impacted female efficacy in combat.

  3. #73
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,293
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Voidwar View Post
    Prove it. Prove the changes impacted female efficacy in combat.
    I do not know that to be true. I do know that it is time for a new study(see earlier post where I say just this) because the 60 year time frame and the changes in the world in that 60 years make the old study suspect.

  4. #74
    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
    Going to refer back to the study you keep mentioning:



    Note the bolded part. 1948 Arab-Israeli War. Sex roles, interaction among the sexus, social ethics and more have changed significantly since then. It's time to do a new study, this one is useless in a modern context.

    I don't see the point in repeatedly mentioning that the study is out of date when the underlying issues are ones that will not change with time or with the era of 'modern warfare'. Are you neglecting in your definition of 'modern warfare' that the fact still remains one is going to see horrific casualties, perform physicially arduous tasks, and above all else be able to put everything aside to be able to accomplish the mission.

    This isn't Ghost Recon 2 or some video game where you have heads up displays showing enemy locations and press B to heal a casualty. Real combat is looking down your sights, or through your ACOG and putting a bullet in someone, or picking up your buddy's leg in hopes they can stitch it on later.

    This is relative due to the fact that studies have shown that men have a much harder time dealing with these circumstances and have been show to compromise the mission when women are involved.


    Has combat significantly changed since 1948 to be able to negate these factors?

    Watch the movie 'Black Hawk Down' for a little taste of 'modern warfare' and objectively ask yourself if women had been involved in combat on the streets of Mogadishu could they of performed as well as the men? Speculate as to whether men would react differently to hearing a crying women in the street with her intestines spilled out as opposed to a man? And would the mission still of gotten accomplished effectively (well, as effectively as they could given the horrible circumstances.)

    I believe the elite soldiers could allow their extraordinary training to overcome the circumstances, but for the average grunt, probably not.
    "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. #75
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,293
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes View Post
    I don't see the point in repeatedly mentioning that the study is out of date when the underlying issues are ones that will not change with time or with the era of 'modern warfare'. Are you neglecting in your definition of 'modern warfare' that the fact still remains one is going to see horrific casualties, perform physicially arduous tasks, and above all else be able to put everything aside to be able to accomplish the mission.
    Now you are going beyond what is stated in your linked article. These are not the issues mentioned from the 1948 study. I do not see anything in your list that women are incapable of handling.

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes
    This is relative due to the fact that studies have shown that men have a much harder time dealing with these circumstances and have been show to compromise the mission when women are involved.
    Now this is the study I am questioning. It's outdated and needs to be re-examined. Note this is not saying it is wrong, only questionable. If we do not continually question past assumptions, we will fall behind, no matter what the topic in question is.

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes
    Has combat significantly changed since 1948 to be able to negate these factors?
    No, but the people and equipment of combat have.

  6. #76
    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.

    Now you are going beyond what is stated in your linked article. These are not the issues mentioned from the 1948 study. I do not see anything in your list that women are incapable of handling.
    It isn't a matter of the women being unable to handle it, except for the physical aspect, which I don't believe they could. But simple physical fitness tests could determine whether they are capable of this.

    It is the men who 'can't handle it' that the study indicates. They are the ones jeopardizing the mission. So this begs the question of "Well, men can learn to deal with it."

    But should lives have to be lost in order for women to feel equal to serve in combat to find out this answer?



    Now this is the study I am questioning. It's outdated and needs to be re-examined. Note this is not saying it is wrong, only questionable. If we do not continually question past assumptions, we will fall behind, no matter what the topic in question is.
    I agree, we should always question past assumptions and 'authorities on matters.' This however isn't a study of going out and examining mating habits of rabbits, people would lose their lives in order to find conclusive results.



    No, but the people and equipment of combat have.
    Yes, they have, but how does this validate your point or negate any of mine? Exoskeletons aren't widely used yet to support the heavy loads, and we haven't yet implemented mind controlling measures in soldiers for them to be able to block out traumatic experiences during battle and affter. Yet being a key word.
    "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. #77
    Count Smackula
    rathi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    California
    Last Seen
    10-31-15 @ 10:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    7,890

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

    The link Polynikes posted carries little weight. The WND cites one guy from a conservative think tank who claims that men spent their time protecting women instead of fighting the enemy.

    1) The heritage foundation man provided no evidence for his claim.

    2) 1948 was a different time. In the U.S., we still were still segregated in the military. Sexism was rampant, and women faced immense discrimination in most jobs.

    3) Even if you want to accept such unfounded claims, they only would apply to unmounted infantry. Combat positions such as a tank commander or ground attack pilot would not have such problems.

  8. #78
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:44 PM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,293
    Blog Entries
    2

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Polynikes View Post

    But should lives have to be lost in order for women to feel equal to serve in combat to find out this answer?
    We are just going round and round on most of this, so just this one thing. Any study of women in combat in the modern world would not need to be based on experiment, but on what has happened in those situations now. Women do see combat, regularly. We therefore have a large pool of information to draw from.

  9. #79
    Guru
    F107HyperSabr's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Connecticut
    Last Seen
    10-21-10 @ 09:31 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    2,617

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

    I am a combat veteran ( Vietnam) and I do not believe that woman should b in combat. The reasons are varied but physicla strenght is one very imprtant one. It's not decrimination to exclude or better stated not include a set of human types fom an activity if they are not physically sited for that activity.

    I would never ever ever be considered for that NBA even if for some reason I had the ablity to sh00t baskets. I am not 6' 6" EOS !!!

    Now there are those who have basket sh00ting abilities and are over 7' + they would be ruled out of certain career fields in the miliatry becasue they are too tall to fit into the equipment to operate it.
    I do not recall the Viet Cong asking me if I was a natural born or Naturalized American before they shot at me, they just shot at all of us f107HyperSabr

  10. #80
    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
    We are just going round and round on most of this, so just this one thing. Any study of women in combat in the modern world would not need to be based on experiment, but on what has happened in those situations now. Women do see combat, regularly. We therefore have a large pool of information to draw from.
    Our definitions of combat are different. I am all for women serving in combat roles i.e. Pilots, Tank Crew, etc. The issue I am discussing, and the one the initial article addresses is them serving on front-line, infantry style combat. Women do not regularly see this type of combat. In fact I would say they very rarely do.

    There is no information available to analyze how they have either postively or negatively affected the battlefield. This type of 'experiment' would need to have women in an infantry platoon, walking the streets of Iraq or any other combat environment just like the infantry do now. Any other 'experiment' would not suffice.
    "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

Page 8 of 15 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... 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
  •