View Poll Results: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Voters
106. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes

    73 68.87%
  • No

    33 31.13%
Page 14 of 63 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 628

Thread: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:57]

  1. #131
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    A chain is only as strong as its weakest link. Asserting that now all three mile treks will simply have to take more time and that smaller, lighter, weaker soldiers will be better "on balance" is simply dishonest. Dropping the basic physical requirements of all, to be more "fair" to some, is insane. As you pointed out, bigger is not always better, but the goal of best is never attained by simply redefining it as adequate, to let more have a chance to "participate".
    No the TEAM is only as strong as it's weakest link which is a breakdown in teamwork. No one in any patrol, fireteam, squad, platoon was the overall best. We covered each other's weaknesses, mine was first aid and Mk1 eyeball range guestimation. Dropping the standards so a 100 pound skinny girl can qualify is silly, but i have met many country girls who the endurance and hard work isn't as daunting to them as many suburban/city boys.

    FYI the goal is never the best, it is MISSION. Heart, drive, determination- not always best measured by who can do the most push-ups, but by who keeps pressing on under fire. A difficult thing to quantify.

    I never was the best by any stretch of the imagination, only barstool rangers are 'the best'.

    But as the Infantry motto said at the entrance to Ft. Puke a lifetime ago for many young men... I was second to none.... see the subtle difference there?

  2. #132
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    United States
    Last Seen
    01-21-16 @ 12:21 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    51,124

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    In my experience, the average person who weighs 140 pounds is fairly easy to toss around, regardless of their gender. Just sayin'.
    It's important to compare a female soldier to the enemy, not her male counterpart.

    The average Afghan male grew up with poor nutrition and weighs about 110lbs. I have personally witnessed one of our more petite females knock one of these guys to the ground with one rifle-punch.

    A 140lb female soldier wearing full battle-rattle weighs 180-200lbs. That's a 70-90lb advantage over the typical Afghan male.

    That being said, it is because of women in the service that we have the 9mm pistol instead of a 45 as standard issue. Women in general, with their smaller hands, have a difficult time properly gripping and firing the larger double-stack 45.
    Last edited by Jerry; 01-25-13 at 03:17 PM.

  3. #133
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    Some, sure. Some of both gneders would knock me into the next century with one shot.

    But not most.
    Course as one of my old play-toon sargeants once said,'it only takes running into that one skilled/lucky bastard to ruin an otherwise OUTstanding military career'

    my observation includes this as well... they rarely stop at one hit, stab, or shot.

    Lots of names on a wall in DC that got put there by some pretty small fellas, who lacked massive air/arty/gunship support- they did most of it the low tech old fashioned way.

    Oh just remembered one other thing an old salt was fond of saying...'if you are down to bare hands you have soooo pooched the mission planning!'

    FIDO! what you thought you'd live forever??!!

  4. #134
    Sometimes wrong

    ttwtt78640's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    Uhland, Texas
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:49 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    34,544

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by notquiteright View Post
    No the TEAM is only as strong as it's weakest link which is a breakdown in teamwork. No one in any patrol, fireteam, squad, platoon was the overall best. We covered each other's weaknesses, mine was first aid and Mk1 eyeball range guestimation. Dropping the standards so a 100 pound skinny girl can qualify is silly, but i have met many country girls who the endurance and hard work isn't as daunting to them as many suburban/city boys.

    FYI the goal is never the best, it is MISSION. Heart, drive, determination- not always best measured by who can do the most push-ups, but by who keeps pressing on under fire. A difficult thing to quantify.

    I never was the best by any stretch of the imagination, only barstool rangers are 'the best'.

    But as the Infantry motto said at the entrance to Ft. Puke a lifetime ago for many young men... I was second to none.... see the subtle difference there?
    I will agree 100% that military physical standards are not the only important factor, but equality of those standards surely are. If a man runs as fast as a woman, what makes him less "qualified"? I can see slight relaxation of the physical standards with age, as experience/training/specialization is then often increased to compensate, but no such justification exists based simply on gender. Either the standard is required or it is not. If one 20 year old soldier is OK with a running time 15 minutes then they all are, male or female. I simply doubt the resolve of the military to not lower standards to achieve some politically correct "fairness" than to adopt truely unisex or gender neutral standards. The first thing the Army did when allowing "some" women in was to "adjust" the requirements to fit the female soldiers, not to hold the female soldiers to the existing requirements. We will see, but I expect more "separate but unequal" standards to persist, in the name of "fairness".
    “The reasonable man adapts himself to the world: the unreasonable one persists to adapt the world to himself.
    Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man.” ― George Bernard Shaw, Man and Superman

  5. #135
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by Goshin View Post
    Ahhhhh.... look: I have no problem with women in combat, as long as they are trained and conditioned to the unit's required standards without regard to gender.


    However, it is most evident that there are physical differences in the genders regarding certain physical performance capabilities.

    Most of the time, in comparing a 140 lb man and a 140 lb woman, who are both comparably trained and conditioned, the man will typically have more strength and endurance, more muscle and bone mass, and will likely be a bit faster overall. If you look at athletic records it becomes quickly evident that in most sports where strength or endurance are the major factors, male athletes typically outperform female athletes on average.

    Not to say there aren't exceptional female athletes who are capable of competing with top-rank male athletes... yes there are a few, but only a few.

    Now I figure most women who'd want to be a Ranger, and are capable of qualifying under existing standards, would be exceptional physical specimens with exceptional drive and committment to excel already, so if they qual I have no problem with them doing it.

    But pretending that there aren't significant differences in physical performance capacity between the genders, speaking in terms of averages and generalities, is just not factual.
    I don't recall commenting on dropping requirements for the 75th regt. I was speaking of grunts, not snake eaters.

    The military isn't high school sports. grunts are not put into weight classes and fight same sized enemy. Nor do we compete against each other by size/weight.

    We exceed the standard and we are good to go.

    Now there is a bit of fallacy once you try and bring world class athletes into this. I have seen 200 pound bubbas wash out of AIT because they had never hit the wall before. they had no experience with having to pick themselves up after a crash and burn. Much smaller fellas knew the routine and could adapt and overcome. heart and determination isn't measured on a scale nor by who can dead lift the most.

    Grunts are not kept at peak nutritional and getting plenty of rest. grunts push on when hungry, bone tired, exhausted from heat, or numb with cold. They ENDURE far more than they actually grunt. No massages or whirlpool after 3 hours of competition.

    Who ever 'turns blue' continues a long and proud tradition pogues never can grasp. I would never endorse a lowering of the standards for anyone. But I can easily seeing a 140 pound woman with that look in her eye doing every bit as much as I ever did and probably with a bit more style, class and grace...

  6. #136
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,937

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tucker Case View Post
    In my experience, the average person who weighs 140 pounds is fairly easy to toss around, regardless of their gender. Just sayin'.
    To also be fair...the "average" guy I know whose in the military and actually in active duty rather than perhaps behind a desk tend to be in much better shape than the "average" guy of similar height/weight in the gen pop.

  7. #137
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 09:14 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Quote Originally Posted by ttwtt78640 View Post
    I will agree 100% that military physical standards are not the only important factor, but equality of those standards surely are. If a man runs as fast as a woman, what makes him less "qualified"? I can see slight relaxation of the physical standards with age, as experience/training/specialization is then often increased to compensate, but no such justification exists based simply on gender. Either the standard is required or it is not. If one 20 year old soldier is OK with a running time 15 minutes then they all are, male or female. I simply doubt the resolve of the military to not lower standards to achieve some politically correct "fairness" than to adopt truely unisex or gender neutral standards. The first thing the Army did when allowing "some" women in was to "adjust" the requirements to fit the female soldiers, not to hold the female soldiers to the existing requirements. We will see, but I expect more "separate but unequal" standards to persist, in the name of "fairness".
    it all sounds good to me, but let me point out one thing...soldier isn't grunt. most soldiers don't run anywhere. I was visiting with a FIRES Bde. company 1SG and his REMF company have a laundry list of soldiers on the fat boy program. So the double standard is SOP already. So if the system was rigged for the girls then it was long ago rigged for the REMFs.

  8. #138
    Professor
    Monserrat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    US
    Last Seen
    04-29-14 @ 11:53 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    1,497

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    For the record, there are some beastly women out there, not all women are 5' 100 lbs:

    Do you really think  women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:57]-femalebodybuilder-jpg



    I don't know too much about the military but looking at this from the perspective of a manager in order to make a business run smoothly you want to maximize on the areas that an individual excels in while working to improve on areas that they don't in any downtime that you might have. So coming from that perspective I would say put people in the position that they do best in (that they're best qualified for), I don't care about whether they're male or female. You need the right people in the right position to maximize efficiency. Of course things don't always run that smoothly but I think having that perspective and being flexible enough to 'wing it' when you have to is what makes you successful.

    I'm not sure how much that would apply to the military but 'winging it' is the last resort, if you need someone to take on a role that they aren't the best at then you use them as a last resort. I wouldn't put any woman or man in a combat role just to satisfy societies demand for what they perceive to be 'equality'. You put them in that position if that's the area that they're going to excel in or if you run out of other options.

    Just my perspective.
    I believe half of the things I say and say half of the things I believe.

  9. #139
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Tallahassee
    Last Seen
    01-26-13 @ 01:31 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    8

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

    Kind of silly poll. I don't think anyone should WANT to go into a combat zone, ie I wish there was no war and people could just debate or leaders would box it out, but alas. Should be allowed in the combat zone? Hell yes if they are capable enough, but how many of them want to is entirely different

  10. #140
    Sage
    Navy Pride's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Pacific NW
    Last Seen
    05-07-15 @ 02:01 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    39,883

    Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:

    Quote Originally Posted by Sherman123 View Post
    I'm in total disbelief at that. I dabbled in ROTC and I have a dozen friends serving overseas as enlisted or newly commissioned officers with varying degrees of service time, and in my extremely short exposure to the military I have met literally hundreds of people who desired combat arms branches or MOS's and wanted the opportunity to deploy to a combat zone like Afghanistan or Iraq. I don't know how you could possibly have gone 21 years in the military without meeting someone who didn't want to go to a combat branch and experience combat.
    You still don't answer the question.....If men have to serve in combat and register for the draft why shouldn't all women required to do the same?
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

Page 14 of 63 FirstFirst ... 4121314151624 ... 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
  •