• 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!

Report: Mullen Backs Women Serving on Submarines

Scorpion89

Banned
Joined
May 29, 2009
Messages
2,629
Reaction score
527
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Report: Mullen Backs Women Serving on Submarines - Political News - FOXNews.com

Female sailors can broaden their role in the Navy by serving on submarines, an activity currently prohibited by the Armed Service, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff has advised the Senate Armed Services Committee.

According to Defensetech.org, a site run by Military.com, a group boasting a membership of 10 million veterans and active duty forces, Adm. Michael Mullen told senators in a recent survey that he's long been an advocate for improving diversity in the Armed Forces.

"I believe we should continue to broaden opportunities for women. One policy I would like to see changed is the one barring their service aboard submarines," he added.

The policy change would mark a huge shift for the Navy, whose submarines have been devoid of female sailors even though women began flying fighter jets and performing other seagoing combat roles 15 years ago.

Defensetech.org reported that Mullen, a former chief of naval operations and a surface warfare officer, wrote his endorsement of women serving in subs in his response to questions submitted by senators preparing for Mullen's confirmation hearing for a second term as chairman of the JCS. That hearing was held Sept. 15.

Opponents of females serving on submarines say space is too restrictive to accommodate privacy needs for women, in particular bathrooms. Another study -- conducted in 1994 -- noted that fraternization in close quarters, among other issues, could also complicate operations at sea

First off let me state this for the record I have no issue with Women Assign to any Combat Ships or in Combat in General. With that said this is a very bad idea, anyone who has spent any time in a SSNB knows that space is very limited. My question for Adm. Mullen is where is the money going to come from to retro-fit all SSNB also what space and operational area do you plan on eleminating for a Female Bathroom and Sleeping area. Which both are found on all other US Naval Vessels. We aren't talking about a CVN which can easly have areas mod for Female Sailors we are talking about a very large tube. Also how are you going to get araound the whole Fraternizing issue, don't forget Adm. that most SSNB go out on very long underwater tours ranging from 4 weeks to up to 6 months underwater with very little shore time.
 
What if they had female only subs?
 
What if they had female only subs?

Do you know how long it takes to train a sailor to work on Subs??? Almost as long as it take to train Naval Avaitors which is about 2 Years.
 
The retrofitting would just involve moving some bulkheads. It's not a big deal, definitely doable. Whether it is a good idea, I have never been on subs, but every military job that has at one time not allowed women, that ended up with women in the job has worked out.
 
Do you know how long it takes to train a sailor to work on Subs??? Almost as long as it take to train Naval Avaitors which is about 2 Years.

ok so what if 2 years after deciding to have female submariners there was a female only sub?
 
The retrofitting would just involve moving some bulkheads. It's not a big deal, definitely doable. Whether it is a good idea, I have never been on subs, but every military job that has at one time not allowed women, that ended up with women in the job has worked out.

No Redress it would take allot of moving of items, let start with a Female Head and Sleeping area, as you know from your time on CVN most enlisted folks share there bunks with other Watch. In CVN and other Navy Ships it was easy to do the Mods for Female Sailors enough room and areas' were eleminated to do this. I recall on the Ike they eleminated one of the old F-14 engine shop for Female enlisted sleeping area.

On a SSNB you just can't go in and move Bulkheads the way a SSNB is designed and build the bulkhead act as reenforcers on the outer hull. Also what operational area do you plan on either eleminating or combining.
 
No Redress it would take allot of moving of items, let start with a Female Head and Sleeping area, as you know from your time on CVN most enlisted folks share there bunks with other Watch.

Not the case when I was in.

In CVN and other Navy Ships it was easy to do the Mods for Female Sailors enough room and areas' were eleminated to do this. I recall on the Ike they eleminated one of the old F-14 engine shop for Female enlisted sleeping area.

Actually, they just marked several berthings as female.

On a SSNB you just can't go in and move Bulkheads the way a SSNB is designed and build the bulkhead act as reenforcers on the outer hull. Also what operational area do you plan on either eleminating or combining.

I have not served on a sub, as I was quick to point out. I suspect that if the desire is there, it can be done without loss of readiness. The military has a remarkable track record when it comes to doing just that.
 
Not the case when I was in.



Actually, they just marked several berthings as female.



I have not served on a sub, as I was quick to point out. I suspect that if the desire is there, it can be done without loss of readiness. The military has a remarkable track record when it comes to doing just that.

Sorry I thought you were in when they started to do the upgrades. So did you have to come to the bulkhead of a female Area and announce Male Personal on Deck before entering. When I was on the Carl Vincent we had to do this.

Please also noted that I understand that you never have been on a Boomer, I have been on two one for a 48 hour shake down system cruise and another for a day trip on the surface.
 
Sorry I thought you were in when they started to do the upgrades. So did you have to come to the bulkhead of a female Area and announce Male Personal on Deck before entering. When I was on the Carl Vincent we had to do this.

Please also noted that I understand that you never have been on a Boomer, I have been on two one for a 48 hour shake down system cruise and another for a day trip on the surface.

There was a watch outside of the set of berthings that women where in, and yes, the "man on deck" thing was required.
 
One of my high school buddies came back from a 2 year excursion under the ocean in the north and said it was utter hell. No privacy, The smell, crushing boredom and endless drills, and no women.

This would solve at least one of their miseries during long voyages at sea. I wonder how many more it would create however.
This looks like an advertisement for job creation in the legal sector. There will be lawsuits out of this if it goes through and theres more jobs for lawyers I would guess.
 
What if they had female only subs?

This sounds to me as if we would be going backwards. What is exactly wrong with banning woman from serving on subs? I cannot think of any reasons why that is wrong.
 
One of my high school buddies came back from a 2 year excursion under the ocean in the north and said it was utter hell. No privacy, The smell, crushing boredom and endless drills, and no women.

This would solve at least one of their miseries during long voyages at sea. I wonder how many more it would create however.
This looks like an advertisement for job creation in the legal sector. There will be lawsuits out of this if it goes through and theres more jobs for lawyers I would guess.

Being an Air Force man I did not realize that the Navy actually had "2 year excursions" for submariners. For some reason I thought that the longest excursion was 6 months.
 
Two-year excursions? Seriously? Wow.

There would, without a doubt, be issues with pregnancies.
 
This sounds to me as if we would be going backwards. What is exactly wrong with banning woman from serving on subs? I cannot think of any reasons why that is wrong.

Just trying to see if the only objection to this is the close quartering issues that were presented.
 
Operation Petticoat!


[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CPWRoKHlBs"]YouTube - It's either her or me in this engine room![/nomedia]
[nomedia="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WsDdl3D11Fk"]YouTube - Operation Petticoat - Tony Curtis[/nomedia]




]I wonder what the submariners think? (it could make those long boring cruises more.........interesting!)
 
Last edited:
Two-year excursions? Seriously? Wow.

There would, without a doubt, be issues with pregnancies.

pregnancies hell that would not be the only problem. If the Navy actually has 2 year + excursions and we allow woman to serve on subs the subs would have to be 3-4 football fileds longs a 1 to 2 football fields wide. We would have to make room for preschool, day care, play grounds with play scapes, along with the manditory prenatal, post natal, in the naval centers, birthing centesr, leche league ladies, and the sub- tenders would have to carry Pampers and Binkeys......


PS Now some MARINES, ARMY, and Air Force people may alrady beleive that the NAVY passes out Binkeys to their personel as standard equiotment LOL !! JUST INTERSERVICE joking !! I think that the squids are doing a great job...
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom