• 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
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........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. Life aboard a Navy Combatant is dangerous and there are enough problems already with out adding women to the mix....You want to put them on hospital ships or those luxury liners air craft carriers fine, but not on cruisers destroyers and submarines........


I wonder how many of you libs who voted yes have ever even been near a combat situation.
Click to expand...

Women already serve on navy combatant ships. Captain Maureen A. Farren was the first women to command a combat ship, the USS Mount Vernon(LSD-39) in 1998. http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~uscnrotc/Decades/d-1980/c1980bio/b80FAR.htm

Welcome to 14 years ago.
 
Navy Pride said:
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......
Click to expand...

No, you said two gay women can't raise children without a father-figure. You didn't say "they can do it well, it's just not be best way." In fact, you started a thread declaring women can not successfully raise children due to lack of a father-figure in opposite to lesbians raising a child.

I understand many people post diametrically opposite platitudes on different threads in pursuit of their own values/ideology. That is what I tend to call people out on.
 
Chiefgator said:
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'
Click to expand...

Hi shipmate. Rate, ship? When did you serve?

Also do not forget to request your award for your service here.
 
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.
Click to expand...

I looked at the poll and did not see them saying that.........Oh and they all don't meet the same standards.



Let me relay a little story to you about women and birth control OK......There was a ship that deployed to the far east during the 91 war......its name was the USS PUGET SOUND Ihad a crew of 100 men and women with 150 women...when the ship came back after a 6 month deployment it had 47 pregnancies...They nicknamed the ship the USS LOVEBOAT.. Oh and the women were all supposed to be on BC.......You see a lot of women join the military to get a because becasue they can't get one in civilian life.......

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
Click to expand...

Here is a flash for you.....they are already in the military...

No doubt it is, but how is it more so to women than men?
Click to expand...

You ever Combatant Navy Combantant? Be careul what you say, there will be a test.....

Oh and I served on 4 DDs a CLG and AOE in 21 years for full disclosure.
 
Last edited:
Navy Pride said:
Let me relay a little story to you about women and birth control OK......There was a ship that deployed to the far east during the 91 war......its name was the USS PUGET SOUND Ihad a crew of 100 men and women with 150 women...when the ship came back after a 6 month deployment it had 47 pregnancies...They nicknamed the ship the USS LOVEBOAT.. Oh and the women were all supposed to be on BC.......You see a lot of women join the military to get a because becasue they can't get one in civilian life.......
Click to expand...

I do believe you are referring to the USS Acadia, and there were 36 pregnancies.
 
Navy Pride said:
I looked at the poll and did not see them saying that.........Oh and they all don't meet the same standards.
Click to expand...

The poll doesn't give an option to explain your viewpoint Navy, you just get to pick from the choices available, that's how a poll works. If you had actually read people's responses, you'd already know that nearly everyone who said yes qualified it in the manner I mentioned. And if women don't have to meet the same standards as men, then I would agree that's a problem.

Navy Pride said:
Let me relay a little story to you about women and birth control OK......There was a ship that deployed to the far east during the 91 war......its name was the USS PUGET SOUND Ihad a crew of 100 men and women with 150 women...when the ship came back after a 6 month deployment it had 47 pregnancies...They nicknamed the ship the USS LOVEBOAT.. Oh and the women were all supposed to be on BC.......You see a lot of women join the military to get a because becasue they can't get one in civilian life.......
Click to expand...

Sounds like discipline was pretty lax to me, unless sailors on navy ships are allowed to have sex with each other while they're on deployment. And if they are, then perhaps that rule needs to change.

Navy Pride said:
Here is a flash for you.....they are already in the military...
Click to expand...

Then if they're mature enough to be in the military, they should be mature enough to handle women being around, yes?

Navy Pride said:
You ever Combatant Navy Combantant?
Click to expand...

No, nor have I ever said I was.

Navy Pride said:
Be careul what you say, there will be a test.....
Click to expand...

It's pretty insulting for you to insinuate that I'd lie about being in the military.

Navy Pride said:
Oh and I served on 4 DDs a CLG and AOE in 21 years for full disclosure.
Click to expand...

Then you should have no problems explaining in a cogent and reasoned manner why serving in the navy is more dangerous for a woman than a man, assuming she can meet the same minimum physical requirements that he can.
 
Redress said:
Women already serve on navy combatant ships. Captain Maureen A. Farren was the first women to command a combat ship, the USS Mount Vernon(LSD-39) in 1998. http://homepages.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~uscnrotc/Decades/d-1980/c1980bio/b80FAR.htm

Welcome to 14 years ago.
Click to expand...

Yeah and they are getting pregnant by the dozens..............I when in to the pass office last week to update my tabs for my truck.........there were 3 women airman there processing the requests...all from the Nimitz and all pregnant.....They were sent there because you can't keep them aboard ship.....They were sent without replacements so some poor guy has to do his and her job........sad........
 
Navy Pride said:
Yeah and they are getting pregnant by the dozens..............I when in to the pass office last week to update my tabs for my truck.........there were 3 women airman there processing the requests...all from the Nimitz and all pregnant.....They were sent there because you can't keep them aboard ship.....They were sent without replacements so some poor guy has to do his and her job........sad........
Click to expand...

So when caught out in a lie, instead of acknowledging the lie and that you made **** up, denying the service of thousands of women on combat ships, you change the subject. Well done.
 
taxigirl said:
Are you ignoring post 98, my response to being told to "cut the crap"?
Click to expand...

Not ignoring it, try and be patient and understand I am fighting 4 or 5 of you lefties on 3 or 4 different threads...........I will get to you.
 
taxigirl said:
I do believe you are referring to the USS Acadia, and there were 36 pregnancies.
Click to expand...

Nope USS PUGET SOUND use to be homeported here in Bremerton...Did not know about that one....thanks for the info.....The Arcadia and the Puget Sound are not Combatants though....they are support ships........
 
Sure. We are equal aint we?
 
taxigirl said:
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.
Click to expand...

I am just telling you what I see of the women every day and I might add there are always a bunch of pregnant ones........you can tell because they wear their blouses on the outside.........

Before I retired from the Navy the Chiefs at Pearl Harbor met with the Master Chief of the Navy at Oceans 11 (CPO CLUB) sit downitdown question and answer period and the subject came up of women in the Navy and aboard ship. He said that would never be a problem because the women would only be used in support areas and Never in combat...........I specifically asked the quebecauseecasue of the seavey/shorvey it might involve..........

I repeat again...The military is there to fight your wars and to protect you, not for social experimentation
 
Redress said:
Hi shipmate. Rate, ship? When did you serve?

Also do not forget to request your award for your service here.
Click to expand...

Hey shipmate How about giving me credit for my 9 years in the fleet reserve after I retired while your doing it.
 
Navy Pride said:
I am just telling you what I see of the women every day and I might add there are always a bunch of pregnant ones........you can tell because they wear their blouses on the outside.........

Before I retired from the Navy the Chiefs at Pearl Harbor met with the Master Chief of the Navy at Oceans 11 (CPO CLUB) sit downitdown question and answer period and the subject came up of women in the Navy and aboard ship. He said that would never be a problem because the women would only be used in support areas and Never in combat...........I specifically asked the quebecauseecasue of the seavey/shorvey it might involve..........

I repeat again...The military is there to fight your wars and to protect you, not for social experimentation
Click to expand...

What to beleive, studies on the subject, or your lies? I wonder.....

Apparently your sitdown came a long time ago, because women have been serving on combat ships and at combat stations for quite some time.

When women are able to do every other ****ing job out there, it is no longer social experimenting.
 
Again I would like to ask of you 19 people who said yes, How many of you actually served in combat and before you say the Navy does not serve in combat I will remind you of Navy Seal Team 6 who just got OBL and the Navy Corpsman who aid the Marines and the 55 Navy men who names are on that wall in DC from the Vietnam war, 3 who were personal friends of mine, May they Rest in Peace.
 
accept it navy redress is right,women shouldnt be disqualified for being women,they should only be disqualified for being unable to do their job,but its the same way with men,would you want a man whos 110 pounds who cant handle combat stress.

as far as i see it the military in most branches needs to increase training and quit holding double standards for combat,and should only let those fit for combat enter combat,reguardless of gender.
 
Navy Pride said:
Again I would like to ask of you 19 people who said yes, How many of you actually served in combat and before you say the Navy does not serve in combat I will remind you of Navy Seal Team 6 who just got OBL and the Navy Corpsman who aid the Marines and the 55 Navy men who names are on that wall in DC from the Vietnam war, 3 who were personal friends of mine, May they Rest in Peace.
Click to expand...


why does this matter?
 
Navy Pride said:
Again I would like to ask of you 19 people who said yes, How many of you actually served in combat and before you say the Navy does not serve in combat I will remind you of Navy Seal Team 6 who just got OBL and the Navy Corpsman who aid the Marines and the 55 Navy men who names are on that wall in DC from the Vietnam war, 3 who were personal friends of mine, May they Rest in Peace.
Click to expand...

Why do you believe only strait white males have should have an obligation to serve in the military, and defend the constitution? Are you also suggesting that strait white males are the only ones who deserve freedom and constitutional protection?
 
Women have for years served in combat situations, especially since there are often no clear cut front lines. Here is one story:

Defense.gov News Article: Woman Soldier Receives Silver Star for Valor in Iraq

"...Hester led her team through the "kill zone" and into a flanking position, where she assaulted a trench line with grenades and M203 grenade-launcher rounds. She and Nein, her squad leader, then cleared two trenches, at which time she killed three insurgents with her rifle."
 
kenvin said:
Why do you believe only strait white males have should have an obligation to serve in the military, and defend the constitution? Are you also suggesting that strait white males are the only ones who deserve freedom and constitutional protection?
Click to expand...

i think your own point is bs.

a large amount of the military is black,and to a lesser extent alot of gays in the military pre ending dadt.ending dadt didnt do anything for gays but allow them to wear pink shirts and tights around post without getting yelled at.

black people and hispanic people are a large portion of our military,most the black people i knew in the army came from the poorest parts of the country,but never complained one second about serving.to them the army took them out of a situation they tried on their own to leave,and gave them an opportunity to raise their kids outside of high crime low income neighborhoods.many of them thanked everyday in the military,they got training they got a job and they got the military to move them,to them it was a fresh start,to them dying for their country so their kids could live a better life was better than dying in the ghetto so someone could steal their car.


hispanics never figured out whu so many joined but i do know the majority of them are from peurto rico,and since im not familiar with that territory,i cant explain their reason.


i guess im saying the military wasnt worth it for me other than serving my time,but for many people it was every bit worth it,people saw a chance to raise their families better and to better themselves for the small price of defending their country.


take a trip to any military installation and count the white people there,i guarantee its not 100% its probably closer to 50% and 40% black and 10% light skinned hispanic,and thats counting black hispanics under black not hispanic.
 
beerftw said:
i think your own point is bs.

a large amount of the military is black,and to a lesser extent alot of gays in the military pre ending dadt.ending dadt didnt do anything for gays but allow them to wear pink shirts and tights around post without getting yelled at.

black people and hispanic people are a large portion of our military,most the black people i knew in the army came from the poorest parts of the country,but never complained one second about serving.to them the army took them out of a situation they tried on their own to leave,and gave them an opportunity to raise their kids outside of high crime low income neighborhoods.many of them thanked everyday in the military,they got training they got a job and they got the military to move them,to them it was a fresh start,to them dying for their country so their kids could live a better life was better than dying in the ghetto so someone could steal their car.


hispanics never figured out whu so many joined but i do know the majority of them are from peurto rico,and since im not familiar with that territory,i cant explain their reason.


i guess im saying the military wasnt worth it for me other than serving my time,but for many people it was every bit worth it,people saw a chance to raise their families better and to better themselves for the small price of defending their country.


take a trip to any military installation and count the white people there,i guarantee its not 100% its probably closer to 50% and 40% black and 10% light skinned hispanic,and thats counting black hispanics under black not hispanic.
Click to expand...

You don't have to tell me. Talk to Navy. He is the one saying the military should not be for social engineering. So things like desegregation shouldn't have happened. So according to him the military should be like it was in the 30's. Mostly strait white men. I think we should have modern inclusive military that doesn't have outdated and useless standards like you should be able to run a 4.2 40 to drive a tank or be a nuclear tech on a sub.
 
kenvin said:
You don't have to tell me. Talk to Navy. He is the one saying the military should not be for social engineering. So things like desegregation shouldn't have happened. So according to him the military should be like it was in the 30's. Mostly strait white men. I think we should have modern inclusive military that doesn't have outdated and useless standards like you should be able to run a 4.2 40 to drive a tank or be a nuclear tech on a sub.
Click to expand...

if he served in the past 70 years he would know the military has not been all white,its been mixed heavily through both world wars korea and vietnam,infact im pretty sure the draft era drafted more black people than white.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom