• 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!

Navy will soon let women serve on subs

I then must ask...

If some women met those standards, would you be fine with them in the military?

This is not about them being in the military. It is about certain MOS or Job positions within the military.

I have no problem with women in the military now with the reduced standards. They should not be allowed in a combat MOS.

If they could pass the same physical training tests as the men, no problem. Realistically though, ain't going to happen.
 
Last edited:
This is not about them being in the military. It is about certain MOS or Job positions within the military.

I have no problem with women in the military now with the reduced standards. They should not be allowed in a combat MOS.

If they could pass the same physical training tests as the men, no problem. Realistically though, ain't going to happen.
Well, that was actually what I was referring to.

And how can you be so sure?
 
Well, that was actually what I was referring to.

And how can you be so sure?

Because it has happened in every single case so far. Every military and civilian aplication, with no exception. Including the Marines.
 
Last edited:
How do you propose to staff military hospitals with nurses and doctors, when they fail to meet those standards?
You're off the reservation as usual. We're not talking about those positions, and never have. You're wasting your supply of strawmen.
 
Then any female police officer in the US would also be a combat veteran.

No.

That's an interesting reading of that paragraph.

Are soldiers in Iraq on combat mode right now? Or are they patrolling/policing?
 
I apologize for confusing you with some other liberal.....You have to understand one thing.........I am fighting the good fight against radical liberalism with about 4 people on 4 different threads at the same time...

again I am sorry but I think by now you know my position on the issue.......

bwahahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahahahahahahaahahhahahahahahahaha.

Really. Posting on an internet bulletin board is "fighting the good fight against radical liberalism"?
 
I then must ask...

If some women met those standards, would you be fine with them in the military?

In the military...yes. In the jobs they are currently barred from? No. No. No.
 
Originally Posted by ADK_Forever
Doesn't everyone on board have specific responsibilities? If a woman is in a slot isn't it safe to assume she has proven to be competent in that job? If she needs to carry heavy weight she can either do the job or not, just like a man, right?

Women are performing all kinds of duties in the military that people thought they couldn't do.

That said there are different requirements for men and women.......

I'm not talking about PT requirements. I'm talking about day to day duties when assigned to a job. I doubt men and women have different responsibilities. If so, please describe.
 
Of course, talk to any man in the army they will tell you whether its obstacle courses or other physical requirements they are different.........

Even in civilian life they are different and easier for women.......Why in golf do women tee off much closer to the pin or hole then men? Its easy its because men are stronger and can hit the ball farther.........

Why can't women beat men in any sport that requires strength....Its the same thing..

Anyone who thinks women can compete in any situation with a man where physical strength is involved is kidding theirselves......

You didn't answer my question. Do women in the military reduce the effectiveness of the military because they commonly are physically weaker?

I dont think the average physical weakness will mean that NO WOMEN would be able to serve on subs. There are plenty of very strong women that would be able to serve on a sub.
 
I dont think anyone is taking the position women shouldnt be in the military or that women shouldnt be allowed to do jobs that men do...just that the standards should be high...maintained high...and anyone...man or woman...that cant meet those standards should not be there.

Personally...I'd be fine with the women in the navy on the subs (I really didnt know they werent already). I do have a problem with women knowing they are up for deployment and rotation and ending up pregnant just before they are scheduled out.

My position, is that if women want to serve in the military, they should serve in all female units; even combat arms units.
 
I then must ask...

If some women met those standards, would you be fine with them in the military?

No, I wouldn't. Main reason being that barring females from certain units isn't about the question of a female's ability to do the same job as a male.

It's about unit cohesion and security. It's hard enough to keep a soldier from sleeping at his post when he hasn't slept for two days. It's going to be even harder to keep a male and female soldier from ****ing while standing to post, if they're horny.

How would you feel if the enemy infiltrated your perimeter because the male and female soldiers manning the forward observation post/ listening post (OP/LP) were too busy getting a nut and not looking and listening for enemy movement. That's called a, "breakdown in discipline".
 
No, I wouldn't. Main reason being that barring females from certain units isn't about the question of a female's ability to do the same job as a male.

It's about unit cohesion and security. It's hard enough to keep a soldier from sleeping at his post when he hasn't slept for two days. It's going to be even harder to keep a male and female soldier from ****ing while standing to post, if they're horny.

How would you feel if the enemy infiltrated your perimeter because the male and female soldiers manning the forward observation post/ listening post (OP/LP) were too busy getting a nut and not looking and listening for enemy movement. That's called a, "breakdown in discipline".

Are you actually suggesting that it's easier to suppress the urge to sleep than to have sex? Really?

Come on. Masturbation works wonders if someone is having issues with not being able to control their sexual impulses when they are required to go without it for a couple of years, let alone a few days. Sleep, on the other hand, is a requirement for all of us. Go without sleep for a few days, and your body and brain start to literally shut down. You cannot survive without sleeping for so much time, generally a 5 days makes you sick. Scientists have said that 10-11 days will kill you. I don't think that could ever be said about sex. So if those men and women soldiers aren't professional enough to keep it in their pants for a few months or even a year or so or to, at the very least save it til they're off watch, then I think there's a major problem in our recruiting standards. I know on the boat we had some guys and girls caught while out to sea, but I don't recall any getting caught while on watch. That's just way not worth it and really, really stupid.
 
Are you actually suggesting that it's easier to suppress the urge to sleep than to have sex? Really?

Oooohhhhhh, yeah...:rofl. I've lost alotta sleep, just so I could ****, in my lifetime.

Come on. Masturbation works wonders if someone is having issues with not being able to control their sexual impulses when they are required to go without it for a couple of years, let alone a few days.

Why jack-off when you have a female two feet away that is just as horny as you are?

So if those men and women soldiers aren't professional enough to keep it in their pants for a few months or even a year or so or to, at the very least save it til they're off watch, then I think there's a major problem in our recruiting standards. I know on the boat we had some guys and girls caught while out to sea, but I don't recall any getting caught while on watch. That's just way not worth it and really, really stupid.

We both know what the reality is, don't we?
 
That's an interesting reading of that paragraph.

Are soldiers in Iraq on combat mode right now? Or are they patrolling/policing?

Not comparable. A civilian police officer and a solider patrolling in Iraq are not even remotely the same thing.
 
I'm sure the submariners are thrilled.
 
I'm not talking about PT requirements. I'm talking about day to day duties when assigned to a job. I doubt men and women have different responsibilities. If so, please describe.

I agree there day to day duties are not the problem...Their physical capabilities are........
 
You didn't answer my question. Do women in the military reduce the effectiveness of the military because they commonly are physically weaker?

I dont think the average physical weakness will mean that NO WOMEN would be able to serve on subs. There are plenty of very strong women that would be able to serve on a sub.

1. Yes

2. Most women not all do not have the physical strength to serve on a sub and that does not even talk about accomadations.........
 
Not comparable. A civilian police officer and a solider patrolling in Iraq are not even remotely the same thing.



Yeah in a lot of places in the U.S. the police officers job is more dangerous......
 
You're off the reservation as usual. We're not talking about those positions, and never have. You're wasting your supply of strawmen.


Some people are talking about infantry standards across the board; not MOS specific.

If this doesn't apply to you, then don't respond.
 
Some people are talking about infantry standards across the board; not MOS specific.

If this doesn't apply to you, then don't respond.

Doctors in the Army are officers without command. They are not leaders of men and considered non-combatants. They get the respect of the rank and pay, thats it. Same for Army nurses.

They are civilians in a support role and considered non combatants. They do not go through basic training, they go through ROTC.

They do not have to meet the physical requirements at all. Same with Chaplin's.
 
Last edited:
Doctors in the Army are officers without command. They are not leaders of men and considered non-combatants. They get the respect of the rank and pay, thats it. Same for Army nurses.

They are civilians in a support role and considered non combatants. They do not go through basic training, they go through ROTC.

Then what's with this across the board infantry standards?
 
Then what's with this across the board infantry standards?

What part of "Non combatant" did you miss? They are not considered solders. They get the respect and pay grade, that's it.
 
Back
Top Bottom