CrusaderRabbit08
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 12, 2009
- Messages
- 2,022
- Reaction score
- 741
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
What part of "Non combatant" did you miss?
Medics are non combatants; are they exempt also?
What part of "Non combatant" did you miss?
Medics are non combatants; are they exempt also?
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.
So every one should meet infantry standards, except those who should not meet infantry standards? Gotcha, well thought out position there.
By the way, since this topic is about navy subs, isn't infantry standards kinda silly?
You have got to be ****ing kidding me. That is a recent issue. Since the war in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Yes it is. Aren't we discussing our CURRENT military? :doh
The whining about possibly lowering standards to accept women is happening TODAY. Yet, the military has already lowered its standards to accept sub-par men for four or five years, now.
The ZOMG! :shock: WE CAN'T LOWER MILITARY STANDARDS! argument falls flat.
:roll:
Yes it is. Aren't we discussing our CURRENT military? :doh
The whining about possibly lowering standards to accept women is happening TODAY. Yet, the military has already lowered its standards to accept sub-par men for four or five years, now.
The ZOMG! :shock: WE CAN'T LOWER MILITARY STANDARDS! argument falls flat.
:roll:
Redress, they are not required to have any standards as they are not considered solders. :roll:
When talking about physical requirements, no. But your comment above was.
And yet they are soldiers. So yes, your argument is just as I presented it.
We are talking about navy subs. The navy has physical standards that measure overall fitness, which is appropriate for the navies mission.
I can remember PTs when I was in the Navy.....We use to call them JFKs as he was the first president to start them.........Honestly they were so easy to do.............anyone that could not pass them would have to be very out of shape.........
If you look up the regulations on them, that is the exact point of them, to measure basic overall fitness. As long as you where not very out of shape, you could handle your job in the navy.
No they are not soldiers, they are officers in pay grade only. They are not combatants and do not go through the same training at all. What part of that are you misunderstanding? You are presenting false information to justify an unjustifiable position. I mean I was only in the Army 12 years, what the hell do I know?
They are much the same across the Navy, Army and Air force. The Marines are the only ones with higher standards initially. Except in teh case of Females of course.
Can you prove that statement?
I agree there day to day duties are not the problem...Their physical capabilities are........
And yet females have even lower standards. Hmmm...
What part of measuring overall fitness is difficult for you? You are quick to point out that women are different, so maybe, just maybe, the number of situps to measure overall fitness is different too. And this turns out to be the case. Women also are allowed a higher percentage of body fat, since *gasp* women's bodies are different than men's.
I already did. Try to keep up, old man.
No, you never know you might get boarded when you come up for air and have a fire fight. :lol:So every one should meet infantry standards, except those who should not meet infantry standards? Gotcha, well thought out position there.
By the way, since this topic is about navy subs, isn't infantry standards kinda silly?
So if they cannot pass equal physical standards, the main argument of most here falls flate. :2wave:
"DoD noted that America's prior drafts were used to supply adequate numbers of Army ground combat troops. Because women are excluded by policy from front line combat positions, excluding them from the draft process remains justifiable in DoD's view."
What happens during the next draft if it happnes? Since they will be loosing the safty net of non-combat. Do you want your sisters, wifes and duaghters to be drafted? All things being equal of course.
Since the purpose is to measure overall fitness, and the different standards result in equal levels of fitness(cuz there are differences between the sexes), then in point of fact, they are measuring to equal standards.
Or do you propose we eliminate differences for age in the standards too? Should that 40 year old chief have to meet the same standard as the 18 year old? Are you seeing how illogical your position is yet?
It does not make it fall flat at all. It quantifies it even more.
It [lowering military standards] started with the introduction of females into the regular service.