Woman in combat

[klinc]

Originally Posted by randomrogue

Oh you got that right! They want to eradicate homosexuals, atheists, and democrats from this earth and women in a few more combat roles is just the way to do it.

Exactly. Operation Human shield!

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by randomrogue

What the fuck does their sex have to do with anything as long as they're qualified?

Because for a lot of jobs in the military mens' higher physical abilities make them more qualified.

Sure you might find a handful of women who can meet the same standards. But then you have some basic issues like where will female soldiers relieve themselves when out on patrol? Or what happens if the 20 year old male soldiers decide to sneak a peek?

And this assumes that the military will not be pressured to lower standards so that the "right" amount of women are allowed into combat positions.

[Harabec]

See how it works here...
If a woman wants to be in one of the front line infantry units, then 1) training is training, combat isn't merciful just because you have a vagina 2) we have completely separate units. Avoids the troubles of male/female mingling which mostly causes trouble and isn't worth the effort just in the name of "equality".

The support units (such as the AA Hawk missile units etc) have both men and women serving together, however. But that is more like a normal job.

[cwjerome]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Because for a lot of jobs in the military mens' higher physical abilities make them more qualified.

Sure you might find a handful of women who can meet the same standards. But then you have some basic issues like where will female soldiers relieve themselves when out on patrol? Or what happens if the 20 year old male soldiers decide to sneak a peek?

And this assumes that the military will not be pressured to lower standards so that the "right" amount of women are allowed into combat positions.

I see a whole bunch of "what-ifs?" there and not not else. It sounds to me like you're afraid a female could do the job, shattering your primitive worldview and self-worth as the superior sex. After all, you were the guy agreeing with, defending, and making the same arguments as that racist who got vacationed... don't ask me how you got off.

[nehalem256]

Originally Posted by cwjerome

I see a whole bunch of "what-ifs?" there and not not else. It sounds to me like you're afraid a female could do the job, shattering your primitive worldview and self-worth as the superior sex.

Try reading the thread. For example this link from earlier in the thread

http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/a...-created-equal

And the idea that men are physically superior to women is not a "what-if?".

[rudder]

Originally Posted by randomrogue

I don't understand how we can have gays in the military or women in combat. It makes no sense. Everyone is going to be fucking each other and not thinking about their jobs. You're going to have gay men fucking men in the trenches and women giving head during major combat operations.

/sarcasm

What the fuck does their sex have to do with anything as long as they're qualified?

If the enemy starts raping POW's they'll be breaching the Geneva conventions and be getting punished both internationally as well as by our own military.

This is not about physical relations and this thread is not about gays. I gay guy can lug a 70 pound sack just as far as a straight guy. The issue I see is there are a multitude of biological differences. Overall strength being one of them. Even in WW2 if the political climate was there... you would have likely never seen a female combat pilot (well except for the Russians). Flying a P-51 required a lot of upper body strength. Now the only thing a fighter pilot needs to be able to do is make sure blood is flowing to their brain when they pull high g's. So we have female fighter pilots. There is nothing on the ground to help that female soldier lug 70 pounds of shit all over the place.

Several members of our military have also posted about the grueling conditions they endured. Women soldiers also have different standards than men. I think you may be able to find some women who are basically men and can handle the physical aspect... but is this group a large enough number to justify the expense and issues that will crop up just for political correctness?

[cwjerome]

Originally Posted by nehalem256

Try reading the thread. For example this link from earlier in the thread

http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/a...-created-equal

And the idea that men are physically superior to women is not a "what-if?".

Sure, but that wasn't one of your what-ifs. Yours was a list of worries about females in combat. Don't worry your pretty little head, if a woman joins (unlike you) and can do the job (unlike you), it will not reflect badly on your own shortcomings.

The Marine in the link has an opinion, and it's a fair concern that should be considered, and I'm sure those concerns will be by organizational higher-ups. Yes, I trust the proper decisions will be made, or corrected and refined as we learn as we go. I come from an Army perspective, and as the Marine noted, the Army is different and has "rogered up" to the tasking. Opening up a bunch of MOS positions that were male-only will not hurt the force.