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 53 of 63 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... LastLast
Results 521 to 530 of 628

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

  1. #521
    Maquis Admiral
    maquiscat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,984

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    I would like to see affirmative action in the military occur. 50% of all active duty members should be female, including those on the front lines.
    Given that it's a volunteer military, you will never get that. More men than women join, that's simply facts. The ideal should be that no consideration should be given to the gender when making assignments.

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    Your problem is fathers, son and brothers already do this......The question ia do you want to add mothers sisters and daughters to the equation? I don't.
    Of course they already do this, but who really wants them to? I don't. I recognized the need and I want a force that wants to be there to defend this country, but that doesn't mean I want any of them in harm's way. But there are women out there that can do the job as well, if not better, than men. There are some men out there who really are not qualified to do the job. Set your standard and then that is the qualification. If one of the qualifications is to be able to toss out a thousand push-ups well then who ever can, passes, man or woman. And whoever can't washes out, man or woman. Now I will concede that when you look at the rule, at the average, most women will not want or be able to qualify for the task. But that doesn't mean that we should deny those that can do, to be able to.

  2. #522
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,006

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RabidAlpaca View Post

    It probably has a lot to do with the Army being substantially larger and actually doing more. It's easy to control a smaller group of marines off on the side with their one specific task. And yes, there have been plenty of marine embarassments.

    But hey, by all means, tell me why the Army is completely incompetent in combat zones. Something tells me you don't actually have a god damn idea how we fight, and more than likely you're just letting your arrogance and overly zealous marine pride run rampant in order to boost your ego on internet forums.
    "...completely incompetent" is your defensive and obnoxious term. I said nothing of the kind.

    And be careful. I know more than you think. And before you turn this into branch vs. branch foolishness, open your eyes. First let's dismiss the campy "nobody's perfect" garbage and look at the problem. You may as well be on a JV Team in High School pretending that there is no Varsity, because "nobody's perfect." Clearly, all branches have their issues. But issues that routinely kill its own for lack of preparedness should not be dismissed. Relying on a basic tired slogan to explain away real problems only allows it to persist. The Army's problem is institutional.

    "Size" is the routine copout. And this is why soldiers die needlessly. Army generals are very aware of the problem and this is why they have been seeking to emulate the Marine Corps in training, but have failed thus far because the Army is an organization that loves their very defined concreted roles. Training is everything. However, the problem here is that until the rest of the Army acknowledges the problem, the problem will persist. You write of arrogance. What blocks the Army's ability to protect its soldiers is false pride, false arrogance, ego and a continual talent for going on the defense against the Marine Corp's reputation. You displayed it right in your post. Most of the problems that come out of the Army is due to a lack of discipline, which an absence of training facilitates.

    Soldiers are not taught that they are riflemen first. They are taught the bare minimum in infantry at Basic and most never go back to that training again beyond their technical field training. Years later, when they find themselves on a convoy in a combat zone, they will do so with their kevlars off and weapons not at the ready. They will do so with dirty, rusty weapons and without the knowledge of how to attack through and turn the ambush around. They will do so while stepping on gas pedals leaving others behind, thereby dividing the force, to fend for themselves. They will do so without an attitude that they are killers. They will do so without any sense of where they are. And they will do so because they are taught that they are not infantry year after year. It's almost as if soldiers are anti-trained. Army infantry is more elitest than Marine infantry in that it looks down upon the rest extremely maliciously. This has become so institutional that the idea of providing routine annual infantry training to regular soldiers damages the stigma of being infantry. Therefore, the Army's "we're too big" becomes the default excuse for hundreds of dead soldiers who were unprepared for combat. And the idea that "it does more" is no excuse for soldiers not knowing how to soldier.

    The notion that "Every Marine a Rifleman first" is very real. This is why an Osprey mechanic or an Admin clerk can field strip guns, operate armored vehicles, and conduct themselves on patrol. This simply does not exist in the Army. And without this sense of conduct and discipline, the Army routinely gives the world its Abu Ghraibs, Jessica Lynchs, Robert Bales', and even investigations into gangs at Fort Gordon and others. In regards to Army Infantry, the general lack of discipline routinely breaks SOP and this is why it routinely gives the world blunders like overwhelming friendly fires, Black Hawk Downs, and Mai Lais. This lack of discipline trickles down the ranks. Walk up to a stranger and ask what he does and he will say he is a Marine (if he's a Marine). Ask another and he will say that he is a mechanic in the Army. The soldier is a mechanic, first. See the difference in attitude? Further examples would be burly mustaches hanging over lips, frumpy uniforms, tipped back caps, weapons hanging from slings that are too long and improper, etc. Most soldiers carry themselves lazily and despite Army regs being lax, they do exist and the leadership routinely looks the other way. "Such things aren't important," yet this translates into conduct on the battlefield, on the convoy, on the post, etc.

    But let's see what some of the Army thinks.....

    Here's some words from an Army General and an Army Lt. Col....

    Later, as commander of the Second Marine Division, and later still as commandant of the Marine Corps, Gray was in a position to implement Boyd's ideas about "maneuver warfare."

    Their first combat test came in Grenada in 1983. They passed.

    "We've got two companies of Marines running all over the island, and thousands of Army troops doing nothing," an Army general was quoted as saying at the time. "What the hell is going on?"

    Pentagon analyst Franklin "Chuck" Spinney, Boyd's closest associate for many years, said, "The Marines [later] used Boyd's tactics in the first Gulf war, and they worked like gangbusters."

    As the Marines showed success after success with their maneuver-warfare doctrine, elements of Boyd's thinking began percolating into the Army.

    "If the Marine Corps picks it up, the Army's first reaction is to try to discredit it," said retired Army Lt. Col. Ralph Peters, a leading military strategist. "If it proves to work, they'll copy it and claim it was their idea all along."

    Little-known pilot shaped U.S. strategy in Iraq
    Today, we need expeditionary forces in all of the services, and the army is belatedly waking up to that. But no matter how theoretically effective it may be, an army that cannot get to the war or conflict is useless to the American people.

    There's been a readiness crisis in the military, and especially in the army, since the mid-1990s. The former army chief of staff, for whatever reason, went to the Hill and lied about readiness. I think what we've seen in the 1990s is a politicization of the service chiefs and the Joint Chiefs overall. The administration's done a good job of picking primarily weak men, which is why Shinseki's such a great surprise. But everybody in the army knew. The people down in the motor pools, at the training ranges, in the battalions and brigades and divisions knew there were shortages of ammunition, of spare parts, or training funds. And yet again and again, the chief and the deputies went to the Hill and said, "Well, everything's pretty good, we could use a little more of this, but we're doing fine, sir." It wasn't true.

    In the Gulf War, U.S. Marine Corps wheeled vehicles were killing Iraqi T-72 tanks. Now the people that sell us the heavy armor and heavy guns would have told you that was impossible. But the Marines did it.
    http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontl...ws/peters.html
    "The deadliest weapon in the world is a Marine and his rifle!" ~ General Pershing, US Army

    "The safest place in Korea was right behind a platoon of Marines. LORD, how they could fight!" ~ Major General Frank Lowe, US Army

    "Do not attack the First Marine Division. Leave the yellowlegs alone. Strike the American Army" ~ Orders given to Communist troops in the Korean War; shortly afterward, the Marines were ordered to not wear their khaki leggings to keep the enemy from immediately fleeing.

    "Panic sweeps my men when they are facing the American Marines." ~ Captured North Korean Major

    The Marines are careful, brave fighters...they were like hunters, boring in relentlessly without fear. I never heard a wounded Marine moan."
    ~ The U.S. Army General Staff

    "We have two companies of Marines running all over this island and thousands of Army troops doing nothing!" ~ General John Vessey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs

    "I have just returned from visiting the Marines at the front, and there is not a finer fighting organization in the world!" ~ General Douglas MacArthur, US Army

    "The more Marines I have around the better I like it!" ~ General Mark Clark, US Army

    "I can never again see a United States Marine without experiencing a feeling of reverence." ~ General Johnson, US Army


    Notice how these Army Commanders from different eras make such high remarks regarding the Marine Corps and they aren't referring to their own branch? Why do you think that is? You think the arrogance of Marines need to hear it from Army Generals? We don't have our own Generals to blow smoke? Perhaps it's because the Army needs to listen to these truths for once. But why do you think the bulk of the Army would rather stick with their status quo than evolve? Oh...because "they are too big."

    Let's look at the present. How many soft targets and poorly trained soldiers have been captured and caught with their pants down? Iraqi insurgent leaders told their fighters to attack only Army personnel after they learned their lesson in Anbar. Tali-Ban forces have been ordered by their commanders to refrain from making major contact with the Marines marking them "crazy and unkillable." Sound historically familiar from war to war? General Patreaus had instructed General Mattis to train up Marine contact and advisory teams so that they could replace Army teams in Helmand who would rather hunker down than be aggressive in the mission. By the way, these Advisory Teams are not made of Infantry in the Marine Corps.

    So, instead of getting defensive, why don't you actually reflect on the very real truth that the Army is severely lacking in its discipline and its training and the result is a professional Army full of soldiers and units that can't conduct themselves properly in combat. You have every proof in front of you from year to year and from war to war, yet nothing changes. Could there be an institutional problem, not being solved due to ego? Default excuses prevail.
    Last edited by MSgt; 01-28-13 at 11:03 AM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  3. #523
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Today @ 11:45 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,006

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    What about the discrimination in society for expecting men to be the disposable sex?
    Everyone in unifom is disposable.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  4. #524
    Professor

    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    12-03-15 @ 09:25 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    1,589

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    I heard today on one of the news shows that women will have to sign up for the draft under the new regs...(that is all women), Now that is a step in the right direction.
    Well considering I don't know any men who have signed up for the draft, I'm not too worried. And why do you think it is a step in the right direction when you're against women in the military?

  5. #525
    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?

    Quote Originally Posted by kerussll View Post
    Well considering I don't know any men who have signed up for the draft, I'm not too worried. And why do you think it is a step in the right direction when you're against women in the military?
    I thought they all did with selective services?

    Top of their website says this:" Even though the Secretary of Defense has decided to allow women in combat jobs, the law has not been changed to include this. Consequently, only men are currently required to register by law with Selective Service during ages 18 thru 25. Women still do not register. (January 24, 2013)"

    Selective Service System: Welcome
    I believe half of the things I say and say half of the things I believe.

  6. #526
    Guru
    Smeagol's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Last Seen
    02-19-17 @ 11:35 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    4,147

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    In my 21 years in the military I have never heard of one person be they man or woman who wanted to serve in combat.
    Excellent point. I think with some people and some issues, this only being one, advancing an agenda is really the objective and the supposed issue only serves as a medium.
    Having opinions all over the map is a good sign of a person capable of autonomous thinking. Felix -2011

  7. #527
    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?[W:

    Quote Originally Posted by Smeagol View Post
    Excellent point. I think with some people and some issues, this only being one, advancing an agenda is really the objective and the supposed issue only serves as a medium.

    What's the agenda in regard to this issue?
    I believe half of the things I say and say half of the things I believe.

  8. #528
    Sage

    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Florida
    Last Seen
    Today @ 01:58 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    23,361

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Capster78 View Post
    I would like to see affirmative action in the military occur. 50% of all active duty members should be female, including those on the front lines.
    Lets just stick with racial minorities and college admissions for that. I do admire your belief in affirmative action though.

  9. #529
    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?

    This is to the women who responded yes to the poll..........Do you want to or have your sisters, daughters sign up to selective service or the draft?
    "God Bless Our Troops in Harms Way."

  10. #530
    Gradualist

    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Last Seen
    09-25-17 @ 12:48 PM
    Lean
    Socialist
    Posts
    34,949
    Blog Entries
    6

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Navy Pride View Post
    This is to the women who responded yes to the poll..........Do you want to or have your sisters, daughters sign up to selective service or the draft?
    Navy i dont think anyone wants to see their sisters, daughers or anyone to see combat.
    Stop generalizing about women.


Page 53 of 63 FirstFirst ... 3435152535455 ... 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
  •