• 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!

Should women be allowed to serve in combat roles in the military?

Should women be allowed in combat roles in military?

  • Yes

    Votes: 45 68.2%

  • No

    Votes: 14 21.2%

  • IDK/other

    Votes: 7 10.6%
  • Total voters
    66
Redress said:
You should get out more then.
Click to expand...

well my brother in law wife was in the hospital this week so I was there every day and yesterday was my 46th wedding anniversary and I was at the Navy Exchange at Bangor so I do get out and around and your stats are garbage especially that the average woman weighs 164 lbs..

Oh and I used 6'2" because that is what I am........Only 195 in weight though.....Been working out a lot.....use to be 210
 
NP, I also find your "averages" to be way off. Why don't you actually look some information up before making BS assertions that act to bolster your argument.

Navy Pride said:
.They get pregnant to often and have to leave the ship without a replacement . The average age of a sailor on a navy combatant is 19 years.....The juices are running and men and women get together and have sex.
Click to expand...
Are you saying it is the women's fault for having sex? They would not even have to make separate showering facilities if everyone would grow up. We've all seen it before, why can't people keep themselves controlled?

RabidAlpaca said:
- I'm a little worried about the way men act when women are around. Considering the amount of testosterone filled chest beating that goes around in the infantry, I find that more often than not, they start acting dumb as s*** when females are around, it can be very distracting. This however is obviously a problem with men, not women, and I think in the end it may work out anyway.

- As far as the army's current policy, women can't be in the field longer than 3 days without a shower due to feminine hygiene issues. I have no idea about any of that, can anyone shed any light on that for me? We went weeks without showers walking up and down mountains, and even we had major hygiene issues because of it. Most of the deployment we used water bottles poured over our heads as a shower. If it would be damaging because of a woman's physiology to go through that, I would say maybe just have them be in combat situations where hygiene can be maintained at reasonable intervals.
Click to expand...

This has probably always been a BS excuse along, but especially now that we have disinfectant wipes and other items that can substitute for a soap and water cleansing. This brings to mind a question I often ask myself regarding a lot of issues -- what did they do in the "old days".

This is also a very good example of how things change dues to changing times and circumstances. During prairie days women were not expected to work the fields, but then when their husband and sons died they were forced to and did a fine job. Another example is Rosie the Riveter. During WWII too many men were off to war and there was no one left to build the weaponry or take other manufacturing jobs. At the time it was thought that women could not "handle" these types of position, but we sure showed them!

What about construction jobs, astronauts, race car drivers and pilots?

Before someone again says "but what if it came down to hand to hand combat?", I don't care who has my back, as long as they can deliver the goods to where it hurts. Plus -- with modern warfare how often does it come down to that?
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
Horse**** I don't care what your survey says I see them every day and a lot of Navy women barely make 5' 110 lbs and most men are at least 6'..........
Click to expand...


LMAO
Your ignorance is hilarious!!!!
I love when people present FACTS to you, you just cry and say not true

your dishonesty knows no bounds!

Weird I find it hard to encounter TWO women in a day 5 foot or less and you are claiming the majority arent even 5 foot, your dishonesty knows no bounds. Luckily people arent stupid enough to believe your unsupported illogical nonsense LMAO
 
Objective-J said:
LMAO
Your ignorance is hilarious!!!!
I love when people present FACTS to you, you just cry and say not true

your dishonesty knows no bounds!

Weird I find it hard to encounter TWO women in a day 5 foot or less and you are claiming the majority arent even 5 foot, your dishonesty knows no bounds. Luckily people arent stupid enough to believe your unsupported illogical nonsense LMAO
Click to expand...

You really can't be from Pittsburgh...........:lamo You ever been in combat?
 


You tell me how these women are able to do it? Not to mention.....they're smaller than American Women or Women in the West.
 
Navy Pride said:
Redress I don't even know a woman who weighs 164.......
Click to expand...


my daughter is 5'5" 15 yrs old and weighs 160

she plays softball, swims and does cross country but im sure she is rare compared to the out of shape fragile dainty women that choose to go into the military :laughat:

are you ever honesty? EVER?
 
beerftw said:
look up the marine female pt standards,they are barely any lower than mens but higher than army male standards.
Click to expand...

No I'm going to go out on a limb here and say 40 pushups is harder then a 15sec flexed arm hang.
 
StillBallin75 said:
Marksmanship isn't the only concern it comes to physical requirements for a combat soldier. Combat troops carry a hell of a lot of equipment. They also have to move wounded comrades. The point is, being a warfighter in this day and age still requires a degree of physical prowess. If men and women will be serving in the same roles and positions, they should be held to the exact same standards. The physical standards should not be lowered for women when people's lives depend on it.
Click to expand...

So what your saying is that women should be the commanders and unit leaders and men the grunts doing the mule's work as a matter of genetic reality. Women consume less calories being smaller in general, needing less to carry and on average make smaller targets.

Probably most don't agree with you that women are superior, but you may have a point. Women lead. Men carry along the supplies they way mules and horses used to.
 
Last edited:
MMC said:


You tell me how these women are able to do it? Not to mention.....they're smaller than American Women or Women in the West.
Click to expand...


one they seem to have much less gear to carry,but a bigger point it looks like they actually train instead of recieving a double standard.
 
taxigirl said:
NP, I also find your "averages" to be way off. Why don't you actually look some information up before making BS assertions that act to bolster your argument.


Are you saying it is the women's fault for having sex? They would not even have to make separate showering facilities if everyone would grow up. We've all seen it before, why can't people keep themselves controlled?



This has probably always been a BS excuse along, but especially now that we have disinfectant wipes and other items that can substitute for a soap and water cleansing. This brings to mind a question I often ask myself regarding a lot of issues -- what did they do in the "old days".

This is also a very good example of how things change dues to changing times and circumstances. During prairie days women were not expected to work the fields, but then when their husband and sons died they were forced to and did a fine job. Another example is Rosie the Riveter. During WWII too many men were off to war and there was no one left to build the weaponry or take other manufacturing jobs. At the time it was thought that women could not "handle" these types of position, but we sure showed them!

What about construction jobs, astronauts, race car drivers and pilots?

Before someone again says "but what if it came down to hand to hand combat?", I don't care who has my back, as long as they can deliver the goods to where it hurts. Plus -- with modern warfare how often does it come down to that?
Click to expand...


In a war you always need the grunts and there will always be hand to hand combat...... Like I said I see Navy guys every day and the women are not amazons like Redress makes them out to be.............Its all about political correctness and making the military and and organization for social experimentation. The military is there to fight your wars and protect you.that is the only reason.........Cut out the crap..........
 
Last edited:


It doesn't surprise me this guy doesn't like women in combat roles....
 
Navy Pride said:
[/B]

In a war you always need the grunts and there will always be hand to habd combat...... Like I said I see Navy guys every day and the women are not amazons like Redress makes them out to be.............Its all about political correctness and making the military and and organization for social experimentation. The military is there to fight your wars and protect you.that is the only reason.........Cut out the crap..........
Click to expand...

BUT elsewhere you have explained that children can not be raised without a father so men who have children or who is becoming a biofather must be discharged. If women can't fight and no men with children can fight, how do you figure to have a military combat force with anyone with any experience?
 


The Girls of the IDF.....I believe the video answers the question concerning gear.
 
Porchev said:


It doesn't surprise me this guy doesn't like women in combat roles....
Click to expand...



In his opinion, women only exist to have babies and raise children, nothing else. Everything else is to be controlled and done by men. Women exist to serve those men.
 
beerftw said:
one they seem to have much less gear to carry,but a bigger point it looks like they actually train instead of recieving a double standard.
Click to expand...

Also its by necessity that women do that there.........They are 16 million people surrounded by 100 million arabs who want to push them into the sea..every man and woman must serve.......Its not like that here.....
 
joko104 said:
BUT elsewhere you have explained that children can not be raised without a father so men who have children or who is becoming a biofather must be discharged. If women can't fight and no men with children can fight, how do you figure to have a military combat force with anyone with any experience?
Click to expand...

Listen I never said that.....Single parents raise children all the time and do it well..........Its just not the best way to raise a child..............Don't tell lies my left wing friend........I will call you on them every time......
 


Women make up 1/3rd of the Israel Defense Force. All women must serve 2 years.
thumbsup.gif
 
Navy Pride said:
They definitely should not be allowed to serve on Navy Combatants. They can't handle the physical requirements like carrying a P250 or P500 submersible pump on a DC party........
Click to expand...

Which is why nearly everyone who said yes qualified it by saying that they should have to meet the same physical requirements as a man.

Navy Pride said:
They get pregnant to often and have to leave the ship without a replacement .
Click to expand...

This is the only (possibly) valid point you make. The answer would be to simply require women serving in combat roles to be on birth control.

Navy Pride said:
The average age of a sailor on a navy combatant is 19 years.....The juices are running and men and women get together and have sex.
Click to expand...

If 19-year olds aren't mature enough to curb their sexual impulses, then they aren't mature enough to serve in the military. You can't have it both ways.

Navy Pride said:
Life aboard a Navy Combatant is dangerous and there are enough problems already with out adding women to the mix
Click to expand...

No doubt it is, but how is it more so to women than men?
 
Off topic a little........Its amazing how our left wing friends are so afraid of Santorum........
 
Navy Pride said:
[/B]

In a war you always need the grunts and there will always be hand to hand combat...... Like I said I see Navy guys every day and the women are not amazons like Redress makes them out to be.............Its all about political correctness and making the military and and organization for social experimentation. The military is there to fight your wars and protect you.that is the only reason.........Cut out the crap..........
Click to expand...

The crap huh. I am 5'6" and most of the women I spend time around are just about my height. Women are not very dainty anymore. The attributes you are talking about are for gymnasts who need to be small. It is not about political correctness, why would women want to put themselves in potentially dangerous situations just in the name of political correctness, that is not very smart -- are you going to say we are not smart as well? They have a desire to serve their country just as much as any man.

As for social experimentation -- are you saying the military has not done that before and therefore should not start engaging in it now? If you did you would be wrong.
 
Navy Pride said:
Off topic a little........Its amazing how our left wing friends are so afraid of Santorum........
Click to expand...

And some on the right are afraid too...afraid of him not beating Obama.

But back to the subject, the USAF has had women flying combat missions for almost 20 years and that has worked out just fine. Check out this story (and video) about some female F-15E pilots:
'Dudette 07': All-Female Air Force Combat Team Makes History over Afghanistan With Combat Mission - ABC News
 
In the last 10 years of my Navy career, I was around women Sailors every day. On ship and shore. I can only remember very small percentage that would have been less that 5'
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom