• 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!

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

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

  • Total voters
    87
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
Side note:

Birth control pills (or other means) that negate menstration might be mandatory - bleeding greatly weakens a person and that would not be a variable that an infantry platoon needs. We don't have the extra food and we don't have the extra manpower to support one of ours in a weakened state as a routine matter of operations.
Click to expand...

PMS should be mandatory in a hostile AO..
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

wolfie said:
Apparently..Israel has no problems engaging women soldiers..

8 Other Nations that Send Women to Combat
Click to expand...

In the case of Israel, it's a matter of necessity. Israel is not a nation of 300m people. Without women, and mandatory service, it would not be able to meet its security needs. This, of course, does not imply that such is optimal.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

women want to risk their lives in combat no less than any misogynistic man does.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
In the case of Israel, it's a matter of necessity. Israel is not a nation of 300m people. Without women, and mandatory service, it would not be able to meet its security needs. This, of course, does not imply that such is optimal.
Click to expand...

This goes back to what I said about supply and demand influencing where to set standards.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
In the case of Israel, it's a matter of necessity. Israel is not a nation of 300m people. Without women, and mandatory service, it would not be able to meet its security needs. This, of course, does not imply that such is optimal.
Click to expand...

And quite well. But the point is, they manage to do the job, just as women would if men somehow couldn't. It is important to question assumptions.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Mathematician said:
Strength is found in the proper combination of assets and strategy. You should stick to the grunt work.
Click to expand...

And bean counters should stick to keeping the proper supplies flowing in the correct amounts for those who do the fighting. your opinion of what it takes to make a grunt lacks even a veneer of experience or for that matter basis reality.

But I bet with a little training you could flow chart the supply parameters for a mech inf unit...
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
In the case of Israel, it's a matter of necessity. Israel is not a nation of 300m people. Without women, and mandatory service, it would not be able to meet its security needs. This, of course, does not imply that such is optimal.
Click to expand...

What about the other seven countries?
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
I like the part about smarts over physical strength.
Click to expand...

Of course..women cannot overcome male strength...but they have other virtues..
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

notquiteright said:
And bean counters should stick to keeping the proper supplies flowing in the correct amounts for those who do the fighting. your opinion of what it takes to make a grunt lacks even a veneer of experience or for that matter basis reality.

But I bet with a little training you could flow chart the supply parameters for a mech inf unit...
Click to expand...

Please don't take my comment the wrong way. It's pretty obvious that people should apply the best of their abilities. Whether it's the traditional gender roles in a marriage, or in this case the strategists and soldiers, planned cooperation, rather than the attitude of "you don't know what it's like to have my role", is a key to success. While I don't have the experience of being a grunt, my basis has been the testimony of others who claim they have. Please elaborate on what you think I'm missing about being a quality grunt.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Hmmm. Do I think women in the military really want to risk their lives? Women? As if ALL women think alike? I would think that depends on the individual, and the same question could be asked of many men as well. It's not like men never draft-dodged or went AWOL as deserters. :roll:
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

0bserver92 said:
What about the other seven countries?
Click to expand...

I'm somehow obligated to hold your hand through all of them, really? Look, I provided the reasoning, critical approach and awareness of context necessary to evaluate each case. If you're so interested, then go figure it out. Whether or not I hold your hand through the other seven, my point remains: circumstance might result in great variety but the existance of a variety in no way implies that such is optimal in other circumstances.

Boo Radley said:
And quite well. But the point is, they manage to do the job, just as women would if men somehow couldn't. It is important to question assumptions.
Click to expand...

Managing the job does not equal optimal. I support women in US combat arms, even infantry, but the physical standards cannot be compromised.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

wolfie said:
Of course..women cannot overcome male strength...but they have other virtues..
Click to expand...

And they never will, until they learn the "skills" associated with combat.

Women need to overcome this last bastion of sexism, to put an end to predatory male attitudes.

Although I don't believe for a minute any woman is going into combat for this reason.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Goshin said:
Yup. Lots of grunt work is strenuous and requires considerable upper-body strength and endurance. I'm not ashamed to admit that at 47 I couldn't keep up with a bunch of 11Bravo soldiers in their 20s, they'd run me into the ground no doubt... and I'm not even going to talk about Rangers or Marine Recon. I might have qual'd Ranger in my 20s given the chance, but not any more.

Certain combat units require far-above-average physical ability, and not everyone can qual. If some women can, more power to 'em IMO... but the standards need to be kept exactly as they are and not lowered for any reason. They are what they are for very good reasons: it takes a lot of physicality to do some of these jobs.
Click to expand...

That is because men have been involved up to now. They're not thinkers.










Yes, realise you are a man
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
Managing the job does not equal optimal. I support women in US combat arms, even infantry, but the physical standards cannot be compromised.
Click to expand...

Nor do standards that ay not matter assure optimal. Achieving optimal means constantly challenging assumptions. Do you believe the military does that well? What if they can do the same job, more efficiently, without needing he strength? Would you change your mind? Remember, the job is the test.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Viv said:
And they never will, until they learn the "skills" associated with combat.

Women need to overcome this last bastion of sexism, to put an end to predatory male attitudes.

Although I don't believe for a minute any woman is going into combat for this reason.
Click to expand...

Why does everything have to be sexism..do you not agree it exists..e.g. I can speak 3 languages..I call South America..and arrange for the goods to arrive in Schipol airport in Holland......and then arrange them to be delivered to us..my male boss can't do this...And he earns double my wage!!
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Mathematician said:
Please don't take my comment the wrong way. It's pretty obvious that people should apply the best of their abilities. Whether it's the traditional gender roles in a marriage, or in this case the strategists and soldiers, planned cooperation, rather than the attitude of "you don't know what it's like to have my role", is a key to success. While I don't have the experience of being a grunt, my basis has been the testimony of others who claim they have. Please elaborate on what you think I'm missing about being a quality grunt.
Click to expand...

I agree people should apply the best of their abilities.... which is why your kind should stay logistics and my kind should stay grunt.

I haven't heard you quote anyone, mostly just give your rather wordy theories on women vs men as an athletic event rather than the actual Infantry requirements.

So what is this 'testimony' you have gathered? you seem quite intent on ignoring my 'testimony'. I have listed the differences between how i see the selection process for grunts vs yours. So I see you as willfully ignoring what doesn't fit your spread sheet. you thus far have not referenced ANY Infantry source. Being 'in the military' doesn't make you a grunt.

This isn't a simple 'you have no idea of what it takes to be a grunt so shut up'... no this is a case of you have no idea how wrong your theoretical example is, and refuse to accept it might in fact be flawed.

Now your whole premise of 'for what they do best' is flawed. Like it or not we as a people don't cookie cutter too well into roles others think we are 'best suited' for. we gravitate to what we WANT to do, we are not computers. Hell I know a BUNCH of women who would make lousy mothers, but much better cops, doctors, pilots, techs and even bean counters....

I tested very high in all the various tests screening recruits for military jobs.... I VOLUNTEERED for Light Weapons Infantry, I struggled to make the physical requirements, to endure the pain,rain,dust,hunger,lack of sleep all the while knowing thousands of Pogues and REMFs were getting paid the EXACT same thing I was and for a 8 to 4 job. But I'd be gotohell if I was going to quit the only job I ever had I loved and hated in equal measure.

THAT is the key to a good grunt, one who has to reach and struggle to be blue and fights everyday to stay that way. because in the end the Grunt has to face the unfaceable, endure the unendurable all the while praying he can survive the unsurvivable. unless you shrink down the Infantry to SF size you can't have only the best of the best by your benchmarks.

Which is why the Infantry uses standards, beat the standard and you are good to go.

no spreadsheet covers drive, heart, desire.

But i have said this repeatedly.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

we must be realistic and consider women cant do everything in a combat just as men cant give birth . we are different...))

but they must be voluntary to defend their country and it is another issue.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Viv said:
That is because men have been involved up to now. They're not thinkers.

Yes, realise you are a man
Click to expand...


Thanks Viv. You just proved that some women can be as sexist and ignorantly bigoted as any man... like you.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Goshin said:
Thanks Viv. You just proved that some women can be as sexist and ignorantly bigoted as any man... like you.
Click to expand...





So you think that WAR is about brute force???
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Navy Pride said:
would you want your wife, sister or daughter to serve in hand to hand combat and live in a foxhole?
Click to expand...

Would you ever want someone to serve in hand to hand combat and live in a foxhole? Male OR Female?

The same question could be applied to both genders, if you choose to/want to serve in combat, why should anyone stop you?
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:

APACHERAT said:
I served. I enlisted in the Marine Corps in Dec. of 68. Went to boot camp in Jan. of 69. Got my WEST-PAC orders and was "in-country" from June 69 - July 70.

I enlisted not because I wanted to go to Nam. It was duty to country why I enlisted. Most of us back then served because of duty to country and it was expected of us. I think because most our fathers served during W W ll played a significant part when it came to duty to country.

Did I really want to go to Vietnam ? No. I would have been just as happy serving on a 8" gun cruiser as part of the Marine Detachment or serving my entire tour of duty at Camp Pendleton.

I knew many who wanted to go to Nam but they started having second thoughts once they boarded that Continental Airlines flight headed for Okinawa. From their it was a Cathay Pacific flight to Da Nang. It was a loney war because most of us didn't go over as a unit but as replac ements for those who tour of duty was up. Nobody wanted to get to close to the FNG. I would discover why, if you look at the Wall with all of the names you'll notice that the vast majority who paid the ultimate sacefice were killed with in the first three months of being in-country.

Once you were in-country you had a mission and you did it but it was no longer duty to country but survival. And you learned real quick you couldn't survive on your own. You were dependent on the guys in your team or squad. They watched your six and you watched their six. I survived.

If I would have to do it over again and even knowing what the outcome of the was was going to be, yes.

I grew up in a all Democrat home. I probably looked at my self as being a Democrat when I enlisted even though I was A-political back then. But by the time I got on the freedom bird I was a Republican. I looked at who got us involved in Vietnam, and saw they were the same people who backed stabbed us while we were on the battlefields of Vietnam. By the late 70's I was a conservative.

Women serving in combat would be a huge distraction. You have a mission to accomplish while at the same time trying to survive and watching your buddies six. I think I would end up paying to much attention of watching the six (no pun intended) of a female Marine or soldier and let up on watching my own six.
Click to expand...


I could not have phrased it any better...........Thank you my friend and thank you for your service.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

wolfie said:
So you think that WAR is about brute force???
Click to expand...

In a war you will always have the grunts and the foot soldiers I don't care how technical it is.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
Nor do standards that ay not matter assure optimal. Achieving optimal means constantly challenging assumptions. Do you believe the military does that well? What if they can do the same job, more efficiently, without needing he strength? Would you change your mind? Remember, the job is the test.
Click to expand...

LOL. So anyone that wishes to teach should be hired and given the chance in our classrooms? Qualificatons, tests and interviews have a valid purpose; they assure that further training is apt to be beneficial to the employer. Simply taking all applicants (volunteers) based only upon their desire for the job is an insane personnel practice. When extremely dangerous weapons are involved, as are the lives of others around you, it is not wise to lower your standards simply to be nice or "fair". Not all change is progress.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom