• 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?

Viv said:
You must have somehow overlooked the many posts relating to the revolutionary concept of reducing the weight of the kit.
Click to expand...

"You go to war with the army you have - not the army you might want or wish to have at a later time." -Rummy
 
Re: Do yeally think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:57]

Josie said:
I did have a lot of experience fighting my brother growing up. I learned that I'm strongest when I can use my legs to bring his chubby body down.
Click to expand...

You should be registered.
 
Re: Do yeally think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:57]

TheGirlNextDoor said:
Not all women fight by pulling hair and scratching. Some have been trained to fight just like a man.

Take kick boxing, for example.
Click to expand...

Pfft I could out-kickbox a woman.
 
Re: Do yeally think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?[W:57]

Gipper said:
Pfft I could out-kickbox a woman.
Click to expand...

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

ttwtt78640 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Really, that's not what I said, but what I did say is that we should constantly question the criteria fir a teacher, at all levels, in an effort to improve.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
In my time with the 82nd infantry, despite brutal training and a propensity to consume anything the chow hall could throw at me, I never had excess strength. Strength was required from suiting up on green ramp, to stumbling to the bird, to standing in the bird and jumping up and out 1m, to the mission itself (I often jumped with a m249/saw and/or a radio)... strength, serious strength, was needed every step of the way.

I simply cannot imagine airborne infantry operations not requiring strength that each of us occasionally wondered if we had.

Do you have a cyborg suit you're not telling us about?
Click to expand...

I always sought to work smarter. Dd so in the civilian world as well. The older I got, the more I learned people get stuck on a way of doing things and often miss ways to improve. By working smarter, I changed the way our school handled developmental students, and improved comp I completion in that demographic from 29% to 73%. The point is, the test is doing the job.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
I always sought to work smarter. Dd so in the civilian world as well. The older I got, the more I learned people get stuck on a way of doing things and often miss ways to improve. By working smarter, I changed the way our school handled developmental students, and improved comp I completion in that demographic from 29% to 73%. The point is, the test is doing the job.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I'm just a dolt.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
Really, that's not what I said, but what I did say is that we should constantly question the criteria fir a teacher, at all levels, in an effort to improve.
Click to expand...

How do you define improvement in measuring criteria? It sounds more like you are saying "these criteria aren't benefiting the people we want them to benefit, so lets lower them."
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
I always sought to work smarter. Dd so in the civilian world as well. The older I got, the more I learned people get stuck on a way of doing things and often miss ways to improve. By working smarter, I changed the way our school handled developmental students, and improved comp I completion in that demographic from 29% to 73%. The point is, the test is doing the job.
Click to expand...

I'd agree with you that this is true, but it shouldn't be true. Teachers shouldn't be teaching to the test, because students who are taught to the test don't usually do well on the test. I probably spent less then 1% of my school time working on standardized testing material, yet always knocked them out of the park. Then you have students who are in remedial everything and do nothing but learn the test, and they really are missing what they are supposed to be learning.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
Really, that's not what I said, but what I did say is that we should constantly question the criteria fir a teacher, at all levels, in an effort to improve.
Click to expand...

That is not what was done at all and you know it. What was done is to establish two sets of "minimum" standards for EXACTLY the same job, one for males and another for females, each "normed" to reflect "averages" for that gender. If the same were done based on height, eye color or race an uproar would ensue. Imagine if multiple sets of standards for teachers were adopted for asians, whites, hispanics and blacks with each "normed" for their respective average SAT scoring differences. Either running 3 miles in 13 minutes is, or is not required, but to say that some (males) must do so yet others (females) may do that same run 2 minutes slower and still "qualify" is rediculous.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ReformCollege said:
How do you define improvement in measuring criteria? It sounds more like you are saying "these criteria aren't benefiting the people we want them to benefit, so lets lower them."
Click to expand...

No, I'm sting they may not measure what they claim to measure.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
Didn't say that. Not at all.
Click to expand...

You're discounting my opinion on some kind of "not thinking" basis.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ReformCollege said:
I'd agree with you that this is true, but it shouldn't be true. Teachers shouldn't be teaching to the test, because students who are taught to the test don't usually do well on the test. I probably spent less then 1% of my school time working on standardized testing material, yet always knocked them out of the park. Then you have students who are in remedial everything and do nothing but learn the test, and they really are missing what they are supposed to be learning.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about teaching to the test?
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ttwtt78640 said:
That is not what was done at all and you know it. What was done is to establish two sets of "minimum" standards for EXACTLY the same job, one for males and another for females, each "normed" to reflect "averages" for that gender. If the same were done based on height, eye color or race an uproar would ensue. Imagine if multiple sets of standards for teachers were adopted for asians, whites, hispanics and blacks with each "normed" for their respective average SAT scoring differences. Either running 3 miles in 13 minutes is, or is not required, but to say that some (males) must do so yet others (females) may do that same run 2 minutes slower and still "qualify" is rediculous.
Click to expand...

I thought you were talking to me about what I said. I'm proposing that the criteria be reevaluated. Not to make easier, but to assure it is the correct standard.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ecofarm said:
You're discounting my opinion on some kind of "not thinking" basis.
Click to expand...

No, I'm trying to explain why I disagree.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
No, I'm trying to explain why I disagree.
Click to expand...

Look, tomorrow is great and I'm sure the infantry will have jet packs and cyborg gear. But today is today and stuff weighs.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
No, I'm sting they may not measure what they claim to measure.
Click to expand...

Hopefully that's what they would be saying too. But my experience has taught me to assume that usually the ones who would be making the new criteria are usually just as misguided as the ones who made the old criteria.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
I thought you were talking to me about what I said. I'm proposing that the criteria be reevaluated. Not to make easier, but to assure it is the correct standard.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about? The discussion is OBVIOUSLY about keeping the separate and UNEQUAL gender based, standards, but seeing if they could be extended to more (combat) positions. Surely we are not talking about special forces, simply the average infantry type of combat positions. The military is not at all likely to reduce the current male standards or to eject all of the females that cannot meet them (90%+). What do you think is going on?
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
I thought you were talking to me about what I said. I'm proposing that the criteria be reevaluated. Not to make easier, but to assure it is the correct standard.
Click to expand...

I just want to know who is doing the reevaluating.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

Boo Radley said:
Who said anything about teaching to the test?
Click to expand...

I was more or less building off what you said, on how people can be closed minded when it comes to reaching a goal. But I usually assume the best of the best at something didn't get that way by being creatures of habit.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ReformCollege said:
Hopefully that's what they would be saying too. But my experience has taught me to assume that usually the ones who would be making the new criteria are usually just as misguided as the ones who made the old criteria.
Click to expand...

I'm asking everyone to do it.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ttwtt78640 said:
What are you talking about? The discussion is OBVIOUSLY about keeping the separate and UNEQUAL gender based, standards, but seeing if they could be extended to more (combat) positions. Surely we are not talking about special forces, simply the average infantry type of combat positions. The military is not at all likely to reduce the current male standards or to eject all of the females that cannot meet them (90%+). What do you think is going on?
Click to expand...

Whose discussion? Not mine.
 
Re: Do you really think women in the Military want to risk their lives in combat?

ReformCollege said:
I just want to know who is doing the reevaluating.
Click to expand...

The military, with proper input form the various effected parties. A complete rethinking, focused on what standards matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom