• 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!

Women Should Be Allowed in Combat Units, Report Says

Whether or not we were taught not to hit girls might matter who who is shooting at our girls, but I seriously doubt it would matter to us on this side.

I would venture to guess on the battlefield we would resort to primal instincts, not societal ones anyway. Its nice knowing that women know more about how a mans mind works than a man does. Amazing, you are amazing!

I am not saying that you do not have that impulse, but you weren't born with it.

And I would need someone with combat experience to confirm this, but I'm assuming that on the battlefield a soldier would resort to their training, not primal instincts
 
Who is full of ****, again?
:lamo
Sorry, gonna call this one definitely lost by you.

lol dude you're a ****ing liberal and so is she. You don't count, but you both have something in common: you both think you know how I was raised in society. How about you stay out of it? If your 2 cents is needed you will be notified. Thanks.
 
lol dude you're a ****ing liberal and so is she. You don't count, but you both have something in common: you both think you know how I was raised in society. How about you stay out of it? If your 2 cents is needed you will be notified. Thanks.

How civil of you. :roll:
 
Moderator's Warning:
Tone it down, now
 
Roger that. I would advise some pratical guidelines...

- Devise meaningful combat qualification screening for females
- Segregated combat units
- Mobilized female strike forces

Offhand, I can't think of too many other modifications due to gender differences.


See above.

I'll never forget the final ordeal in the Negev to earn my jump-wings and maroon beret.

Maybe someday I'll share that experience.

I'm with you on that. I've seen some really tough broads in the military and I've also seen many that couldn't support their weight with their arms monkey climbing a rope over a moat. I watched female after female drop into the water at basic. I was pissed when that was overlooked but it wouldn't have been for me.

One thing that concerns me is males getting hurt or killed to protect a female.
 
Are you ****ing kidding me?

Reality check, women cannot, as a general rule, physically handle the rigors of combat. This is why female PRT and male PRT are DIFFERENT. How's the platoon going to handle one or more members unable to carry the normal full load out of equipment into the field? Start there, work your way through the rest of the reasons women aren't in combat roles.

This isn't just dumb, it's politically motivated politically correct stupidity that's gonna get people killed in the name of "fairness".

We've debated this before.
Generalization in this regard is the wrong path to take.

*Most* can't handle it (we all agree - *most* don't even join the military because it's not interesting to them so the pool that we're even referring to isn't "all women" - it's a small minority *of women*) - but *some* can handle it without qualm - and if *some* can then these *some* should be permitted to do what they prove capable of doing.

I think women and men should be expected to be on the same level - which would actually reduce the number of women in the military altogether - but if you want to be in and equal then you should be all EQUAL in every regard.
 
Last edited:
If women can pass the same requirements as men, and go through the same training as if they were men, I would see no problem with allowing them to enter combat units.

But the woman only have 2/3's the strength of men.
 
lol dude you're a ****ing liberal and so is she. You don't count, but you both have something in common: you both think you know how I was raised in society. How about you stay out of it? If your 2 cents is needed you will be notified. Thanks.

It doesn't matter how you were raised. Unless you've never owned a television or read any books, you've had it ground into you that women need protecting. Damsels in distress, and all that. Not everything you learn comes directly and overtly.
 
Soooooooo funny... I forgot to laugh...

And a stupid comment as usual always referring to his loathing of the left. I wonder if when he drives he refuses to turn left and never gets to his destination?
 
Women should not be allowed in combat units. Not because they cant handle it or are not physically able to. Its because there is a primal instinct for a man to protect women. I believe there would be issuse with the men making sound desitions when a woman was in a life and death situation.

Have you seen some of the women that want to be in a combat role or live like a man? I wounldn't have a problem not protecting them and some don't even like men if you know what I mean.
 
It's not breed in men to protect women, that is all social conditioning.

I agree that it isn't in human biology for men to protect women. Personally, I blame it on the history of western civ, with women being seen as weak and lower than men and thus needing protection. If this had not occurred, there would likely be a large amount of women who are able to fend for themselves.
 
But the woman only have 2/3's the strength of men.

Most women - sure :shrug:
But I've met some hardcore women who are every bit as strong and capable as men of their same weight and height bracket - trust me - they're out there.

While at the same time I've met some men who COULDN'T meet the 'average male strength' capabilities and who didn't make it through boot-camp. . . why is that never harped on?

I don't see how babying down the strength and capability requirements because of gender differences is going to HELP in a battle or war situation - I think it only hurts.
 
I am not saying that you do not have that impulse, but you weren't born with it.

And I would need someone with combat experience to confirm this, but I'm assuming that on the battlefield a soldier would resort to their training, not primal instincts

Even with training you don't know how you'll react when the lead starts flying or the mortars come down all around you. Some people freak and sometimes it's people you would never have thought would freak. I watched a guy start balling just because he thought we had another gas alert drill and he was boiling in his protective gear. He stopped crying when he realized I had imitated a concussion grenade (our signal to go in mop) by tapping my helmet on the tarmac. :mrgreen: This was a big strapping guy but turned out to be a big baby.
 
Last edited:
Separate units, separate combat roles, and there are no issues left.
 
But the woman only have 2/3's the strength of men.

You are looking at averages. One of the hands down strongest ordnanceman I knew in the was a woman, and another women in that job, while she could not lift quite as much, could lift enough and could keep doing it well past the point the guys where all needing to take a break. The military is not average.
 
Have you seen some of the women that want to be in a combat role or live like a man? I wounldn't have a problem not protecting them and some don't even like men if you know what I mean.

Hehe, no I dont know any personally. But I have male friends in combat units. This was more their logic than mine. It seams sound though.
 
You are looking at averages. One of the hands down strongest ordnanceman I knew in the was a woman, and another women in that job, while she could not lift quite as much, could lift enough and could keep doing it well past the point the guys where all needing to take a break. The military is not average.

But they are human. They don't suddenly morph into amazon women when they step on the battlefield. I will stick to my guns, I think it's bad for many reasons, biggest one being that no woman should have to shower or bathe in close quarters with any man not her husband. The issue of men protecting women first is a close second.
 
But they are human. They don't suddenly morph into amazon women when they step on the battlefield. I will stick to my guns, I think it's bad for many reasons, biggest one being that no woman should have to shower or bathe in close quarters with any man not her husband. The issue of men protecting women first is a close second.

None of which addresses my comments.
 
While at the same time I've met some men who COULDN'T meet the 'average male strength' capabilities and who didn't make it through boot-camp. . . why is that never harped on?

You've meet men who didn't make it through boot camp because they weren't strong enough? Are you sure? I saw a few of those that had difficulties but they either got washed back or did remedial traning. The only ones I saw thrown out had physical defects missed in the orginal physicals or punched a drill instructor.

I can see being washed out in Airborne, Rangers, Seals, Special Forces etc. but boot camp?
 
I have an idea. How about we put women in segregated combat units, but where they have the same responsibilities as men and see what happens. That, I think, would once and for all end this debate.
 
None of which addresses my comments.

That would probably be because I don't think physical ability alone should keep them off the front lines. There's plenty of other reasons. I actually agree with you, why I quoted you I don't know I wasn't really addressing anything you said.
 
I have an idea. How about we put women in segregated combat units, but where they have the same responsibilities as men and see what happens. That, I think, would once and for all end this debate.

Israel has already done this, and I'm pretty sure no one wants to **** with the Israel army.
 
Back
Top Bottom