• 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
Women should be able to fight, with the exception of certain roles. Not because of sexism, but because said roles require the brute strength of a man.
 


Besides.....who doesn't luv a Woman in Uniform! ;)
 
Thunder said:
The real question of this thread is:

Should women be allowed to defend their country?
Click to expand...

Irrelevant question to this debate. Combat is not the only way to defend your country.
 
Jerry said:
Theres only 1 way to mount and operate the M2 50cal from a turret.
Click to expand...

That may be, or not. As I can't answer that specifically. But, when given a task, a mission to accomplish, are you of the mind that there is only one way to accomplish it?
 
I would say there are about 10% of the women in the Navy could handle a 6"50 gun projectile where with men its about 10% who can't.
 
Navy Pride said:
I would say there are about 10% of the women in the Navy could handle a 6"50 gun projectile where with men its about 10% who can't.
Click to expand...

considering your very clear bias against women, I really don't think its your place to make such judgements.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
That's irrelevant too.
Click to expand...

Not when applied to his response. The question he asked does not apply. This does not make my statement of fact irrelevant.
 
Thunder said:
considering your very clear bias against women, I really don't think its your place to make such judgements.
Click to expand...

God forbid an ex military person knows what they are talking about compared to someone who knows nothing about it. :roll:
 
Navy Pride said:
I would say there are about 10% of the women in the Navy could handle a 6"50 gun projectile where with men its about 10% who can't.
Click to expand...

But that's not the only job available, particularly for a Navy ship.
 
Thunder said:
his very negative bias against women is crystal clear, friend.
Click to expand...

True, but this makes his information no less true. I mean most females could not handle loading a tank gun. Now Rouge also mentions it's not the only job, this is also true. His bias has nothing to do with the fact his statement is true.
 
Thunder said:
edited for accuracy.
Click to expand...

It's a fact, it has been posted before by me. The physical requirements presently for women are far lower than males. Studies done in England and Israel show his comment is accurate.
 
Boo Radley said:
That may be, or not. As I can't answer that specifically. But, when given a task, a mission to accomplish, are you of the mind that there is only one way to accomplish it?
Click to expand...

I jave no idea what your asking. Please use spiific example.
 
Not only should they be able to freely join the military and go into combat, they should also be eligible for the draft if it ever comes again. We are all equal and the same rules should apply in all aspects of life.
 
Justice For All said:
Not only should they be able to freely join the military and go into combat, they should also be eligible for the draft if it ever comes again. We are all equal and the same rules should apply in all aspects of life.
Click to expand...

When it comes to sports and the military we are most definitely not equal. If this were the case no WBA would need to exist. We are physically and mentally different because nature made us that way.
 
Not even all men are physically and mentally equal to other male counter parts, I'm talking more or less about capable physically fit and mentally fit women who are drafted. The military will still have it's standards to be a soldier.
 
Justice For All said:
Not even all men are physically and mentally equal to other male counter parts, I'm talking more or less about capable physically fit and mentally fit women who are drafted. The military will still have it's standards to be a soldier.
Click to expand...

No one said they were all able? The problem is so few could do it, it is not worth the affect it would have on unit cohesion etc...

BRITISH STUDY FINDS FEMALE SOLDIERS “TOO WEAK” FOR LAND COMBAT
1/14/2002 12:58:35 PM

...Negative findings in the Combat Effectiveness Gender Study are even more significant in view of the fact that test exercises reportedly had been so diluted and watered down that they amounted to little more than "aggressive camping." (Electronic Telegraph, Mar. 26, 2001) According to Brig. Seymour Monro, the Army’s Director of Infantry, tasks that women soldiers were not physically capable of performing had been made easier or dropped from the trials... - Center for Military Readiness | International Policies

It was reviewed and tried again in 2010...

BRITISH CONCLUDE STUDY OF WOMEN IN COMBAT: NO CHANGES
Tuesday, November 30, 2010

...The Ministry of Defence has completed a review into the policy that excludes female members of the Armed Forces from carrying out ground close combat roles, and decided that it should remain unchanged... - CENTEX UNFILTERED NEWS: BRITISH CONCLUDE STUDY OF WOMEN IN COMBAT: NO CHANGES

“Few serious armies use women in combat roles. Israel, which drafts most of its young women and uses them in all kinds of military work, has learned from experience to take them out of combat zones. Tests show that few women have the upper-body strength required for combat tasks. Keeping combat forces all male would not be discriminatory, as were earlier racial segregation schemes in the military, because men and women are different both physically and psychologically,” - Feb. 5, 1990, National Review.

Israeli women won’t see combat
October 20, 2003

"JERUSALEM -- Young women who are drafted into the Israeli military will be barred from most combat duties because of a medical study that has determined they are, after all, the weaker sex..." - Israeli women won't see combat - Washington Times
 
Last edited:
Jerry said:
I jave no idea what your asking. Please use spiific example.
Click to expand...

Say ALL men became ill, couldn't do anything any more. Would fires simply not be fought and be allowed to burn? Would there be no more police? Would we no longer defend ourselves? I believe there was a test once, and I haven't looked for it on the internet, in which a group of men and a group of women were given a task that required endurance, strength, and intelligence. Women won the test. The point is not that women are better, because that was truly too small a sample to reach such a conclusion. but what was interesting is they tackled the problems differently, but just as effectively. Isn't possible that we become too married to standards that really don't matter? I'm only asking.
 
Boo Radley said:
Say ALL men became ill, couldn't do anything any more. Would fires simply not be fought and be allowed to burn? Would there be no more police? Would we no longer defend ourselves? I believe there was a test once, and I haven't looked for it on the internet, in which a group of men and a group of women were given a task that required endurance, strength, and intelligence. Women won the test. The point is not that women are better, because that was truly too small a sample to reach such a conclusion. but what was interesting is they tackled the problems differently, but just as effectively. Isn't possible that we become too married to standards that really don't matter? I'm only asking.
Click to expand...

Your examples are far fetched and show little. Without evidence to look at for such a test again it means little. All the studies done in the last 20 years as I posted above say it's a bad idea, period. Look at it this way...

If men and women cannot compete in simple athletic events against each other due to the huge physical advantage by men, why would we want to put weaker soldiers into combat???

As I said before if they could pass the same physical tests as the men in significant numbers I would have no problem. The truth is they can't, period. Not for ground combat anyway.
 
Blackdog said:
Your examples are far fetched and show little. Without evidence to look at for such a test again it means little. All the studies done in the last 20 years as I posted above say it's a bad idea, period. Look at it this way...

If men and women cannot compete in simple athletic events against each other due to the huge physical advantage by men, why would we want to put weaker soldiers into combat???

As I said before if they could pass the same physical tests as the men in significant numbers I would have no problem. The truth is they can't, period. Not for ground combat anyway.
Click to expand...

Again, I think you suffer from group think and assume that a mission can only be accomplished one way. I at least find the thought interesting, and worth a little consideration.
 
Boo Radley said:
Again, I think you suffer from group think and assume that a mission can only be accomplished one way. I at least find the thought interesting, and worth a little consideration.
Click to expand...

Not "group think" but common sense. I mean you can ignore the evidence and that is your prerogative, it does not however change the reality of the situation. Until science advances to the point were ground units no longer need physical endurance and strength as the evidence shows, their is little to debate.

Instead of addressing the evidence or answering my question, you simply dismiss it as "group think." That alone should be enough to prove how weak your position and argument really are.
 
Any man who wants to push women in front of bullets (except their wives and ex-wives), raise your hand and be counted.

No one.....that's what I thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom