Women in the combat ZONE?

[Zebo]

Serving in the combat zone ,

"Special Operations Forces and Marines had to dig with their bare hands to retrieve from shallow graves the bodies of eight more soldiers from the same unit. Among the dead was Pfc. Lori Piestewa, a Hopi Indian and single mother of two young children."

Why has'nt bushy re-enacted the risk rule?

"Glib talk about "sharing the risk" of war ignores the fact that women face unequal and greater risks. Few women have the strength to cope with physical burdens, including high-tech equipment, which exceed weights carried by Julius Caesar's Roman legionnaires."

 

[AmerDoux]

I read that article and disagree with the statement that you dont need combat experience to promote.
I have a family member who served 32 years as a career marine officer. He decided to retire only after he reached a point where his 'limited combat experience' would inhibit further promotion.
Whether they will openly admit it or not, you do need combat experience to promote.

"Few women have the strength to cope with physical burdens,..."

Tell that to the women who crossed the prairies and have served admirably in other war combat zones, not to mention the women who are currently serving.

 

[HappyPuppy]

If women want to serve in the military, earn the same pay and have the same promotional opportunities they will have to take the same chances as the men. Equal opportunity and equal rights have a price. The military is not the place to experiment with affirmative action.

I empathize with anyone who is killed, injured or captured while serving in a hazardous duty zone. I empathize EQUALLY, be they women OR men.

As we used to say in the old days, "Sh!t or get off the pot."

 

[AmerDoux]

As yet, I haven't seen any women complain... just the men!

and before anybody says it, I mean the women in combat not some windbag political committee member

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
If women want to serve in the military, earn the same pay and have the same promotional opportunities they will have to take the same chances as the men. Equal opportunity and equal rights have a price. The military is not the place to experiment with affirmative action.

I empathize with anyone who is killed, injured or captured while serving in a hazardous duty zone. I empathize EQUALLY, be they women OR men.

As we used to say in the old days, "Sh!t or get off the pot."

Exactly.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: AmerDoux
As yet, I haven't seen any women complain... just the men!

and before anybody says it, I mean the women in combat not some windbag political committee member

90% of women enlisted are against it.

My personel view is no way should they be in harms way. Pilot fine, flag officer fine, but no woman should be subjected and treated like that. A society where men are not deferential to women in the face of obvious differences is just wrong. They justify it by promoting "equal effort in PT" not "equal results" we are talking about lives on the line here fellas not some post office job.

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: HappyPuppy
If women want to serve in the military, earn the same pay and have the same promotional opportunities they will have to take the same chances as the men. Equal opportunity and equal rights have a price. The military is not the place to experiment with affirmative action.

I empathize with anyone who is killed, injured or captured while serving in a hazardous duty zone. I empathize EQUALLY, be they women OR men.

As we used to say in the old days, "Sh!t or get off the pot."

Not only do they have to take the same chances as men, they need to be held to the same standards. Having separate physical standards for men and women is blatantly unjust and only serves to undermine the position of women in the military who claim to be able to perform to the same standard. If they can, which some certainly can, then insist that you be held to the same standard.

USMC:
Men (17-26) minimums -- 3 pullups, 50 situps, 28 min 3 mile run
Women (17-26) mins. -- 15 sec flexed arm hang, 50 situps, 31 min 3 mile run

US Army:
Men (17-21) minimums -- 42 pushups, 53 situps, 15:54 min 2 mile run
Women (17-21) mins. -- 19 pushups, 53 situps, 18:54 min 2 mile run
*Differential on the timed run increases with age

US Air Force:
Men (under 24) min. -- 42 pushups, 53 situps, 12:00 min 1.5 mile run
Women (<24) mins. -- 19 pushups, 53 situps, 14:30 min 1.5 mile run
*These figures are pulled from AFROTC standards, couldn't locate the current proposed testing standards.

Couldn't find the Navy's figures and ran out of time, but I think that illustrates the point.

 

[AmerDoux]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl

Originally posted by: AmerDoux
As yet, I haven't seen any women complain... just the men!

and before anybody says it, I mean the women in combat not some windbag political committee member

90% of women enlisted are against it.

My personel view is no way should they be in harms way. Pilot fine, flag officer fine, but no woman should be subjected and treated like that. A society where men are not deferential to women in the face of obvious differences is just wrong. They justify it by promoting "equal effort in PT" not "equal results" we are talking about lives on the line here fellas not some post office job.

On the risk of a female prisoner of war being raped, Johnson told the Sun-Times she didn't know which was worse, "being raped or being hung by your wrists for days,'' which she said is the way male POWS were often treated during the Vietnam War.

"We live in a culture that's not used to seeing women in uniform being injured,'' Johnson reportedly said. "War is horrible. Having males in body bags rather than females makes it no less horrible.''

Sorry, not seeing where you got the 90% of enlisted women are against it ##'s. ???
Let's assume that percentage is correct... then they should leave. The whole point of the military's existence is for war. If you're not willing to put yourself in the position of war (or any of the inherent dangers it brings with it) then don't join. That fact goes for men & women alike. If a woman wants to be in a job position that puts her into a dangerous situation, if she is capable of carrying out all of her duties, then she should be allowed to.

 

[Zebo]

"Military personnel policies regarding women in combat cannot be based on singular stories, however. The views of enlisted women, who outnumber female officers by more than 5 to 1, differ from those who aspire to flag rank. A 1998 General Accounting Office report, quoting a Rand study, found that only 10 percent of female privates and corporals agreed that "Women should be treated exactly like men and serve in the combat arms just like men."



from the first article

 

[AmerDoux]

Got it and re-read it, thanks.
Three points:
a) if they dont want the risk, they never should have joined. the military is a war machine. what do they expect? even nurses inadvertantly get taken prisoner (as they did in WW2)
b) that 90% consists of privates and corporals... they are serving a couple of years and leaving. they are not career, they are not promoting to anything. at a certain point when you are trying to promote and you have 5 people vying for the same position and the only difference between is the one with combat experience, they are going to promote the one with combat.
c) the 10% who are privates and corporals who are willing to take those combat risk jobs, they should be allowed to. the fact that the percentage of these women is (in this particular Rand study) is low, should in no way deduct from their right to have those jobs


statistics can be manipulated, but this isnt about studies or numbers. this is an emotional issue.

 

[Zebo]

Amerdox it still does'nt change the fact you might have to rely on someone to weak to carry you out of a foxhole to safty. Even Andrews male requirements I bet are way dumbed down from the 60's and I think are too low. I bet col hackworth would agree with me.

 

[Corn]

Ah, it's always heartening to see that some liberals still refuse to accept women as equals............they should just stay home and make babies, right Carby? Risking their lives for country is man's work after all, eh?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Corn
Ah, it's always heartening to see that some liberals still refuse to accept women as equals............they should just stay home and make babies, right Carby? Risking their lives for country is man's work after all, eh?

I did'nt know I was liberal but thanks for telling me.

No Read the articles. It effects combat readiness and is dangerous. And I suspect has happered recruitment in the combat arms. As I said Flag Officer, pilot no problem. Read the whiole thread too.

So you have an opinoin on it or just come in here to run your mouth? More specifically ths quote:

" Realities of warfare cannot be denied, but they can be disguised. Gender-normed training standards measure "equal effort" instead of results. Such techniques reduce female stress fractures and create the illusion of equality, but everyone knows there is no gender-norming on the battlefield"

 

[AmerDoux]

there will be women who cannot do it
there will also be men who cannot
and then there will be those individuals, man or woman, who can and who will do it exceedingly well
this goes for every job

i worked a psych floor for 15 years. in that time, i have experienced men who closed the door and hid when it came for some serious rock-n-roll and then there were some women who i trusted to back me up and save my arse.

me/shakes head

 

[Corn]

I'm of the same mind as AndrewR on this issue. Let 'em compete for promotion and serve as equals -- not artificially propped up by different standards as men.

And damn.......why are you so ashamed of being a liberal Carby?

 

[Zebo]

I guess the idiot has left the building and you have something to contribute,..

I can agree with you if the PT test was identical. As it stands now though it seems pretty dangerous for the units as a whole.

 

[jaeger66]

Originally posted by: Corn
Ah, it's always heartening to see that some liberals still refuse to accept women as equals............they should just stay home and make babies, right Carby? Risking their lives for country is man's work after all, eh?

And it's always heartening to know that conseravtives are still incapable of seeing anything other than black and white. Men and women are equals, but to suggest that they are the same physically is to have not only your head but your entire body buried in the sand. Men are usually bigger, stronger, and more physically imposing. Women have better coordination, agility, and are less likely to crack under extreme psychological stress. Calling them unequal by some arbitrary standard of strength is absurd. So I fail to see the big deal about keeping them away from situations where they face MORE danger than their male counterparts.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Corn
Ah, it's always heartening to see that some liberals still refuse to accept women as equals............they should just stay home and make babies, right Carby? Risking their lives for country is man's work after all, eh?

And it's always heartening to know that conseravtives are still incappable of seeing anything other than balck and white. Men and women are equals, but to suggest that they are the same physically is to have not only your head but your entire body buried in the sand. Men are usually bigger, stronger, and more physically imposing. Women have better coordination, agility, and are less likely to crack under extreme psychological stress. Calling them unequal by some arbitrary standard of strength is absurd. So I fail to see the big deal about keeping them away from situations where they face MORE danger than their male counterparts.

Well said jaeger66. It seems some of these guys are ignoring this and are actually advocting increasing the danger to the unit and to the women over politics. Women it seems would make better pilots from what you said.

 

[datalink7]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Corn
Ah, it's always heartening to see that some liberals still refuse to accept women as equals............they should just stay home and make babies, right Carby? Risking their lives for country is man's work after all, eh?

And it's always heartening to know that conseravtives are still incapable of seeing anything other than black and white. Men and women are equals, but to suggest that they are the same physically is to have not only your head but your entire body buried in the sand. Men are usually bigger, stronger, and more physically imposing. Women have better coordination, agility, and are less likely to crack under extreme psychological stress. Calling them unequal by some arbitrary standard of strength is absurd. So I fail to see the big deal about keeping them away from situations where they face MORE danger than their male counterparts.

Physical fitness is only one of the tests you have to pass to be in the military.

I don't see the military lowering the "psychological stress" tests and "coordination" tests for men... why should the physical fitness be lowered for women?

 

[Corn]

Well said jaeger66. It seems some of these guys are ignoring this and are actually advocting increasing the danger to the unit and to the women over politics.

Well said? It completely undermines the rhetoric and politics of the liberal elite! .....besides the fact he completely contradicts himself with "Calling them unequal by some arbitrary standard of strength is absurd."

The strength requirements for men to be accepted into the military are hardly arbitrary--it's the female requirements that give that appearance. The requirements should be the same, and thus the ability to deal with the rigors of war would be equally shared by men and women alike.

Just where do you think this politically correct policy of unequal but equal came from?

The military is no place for whimps or slackers, and life on the battlefield is "black and white". When you say that "these guys are ignoring this and are actually advocting increasing the danger to the unit and to the women over politics" you're completely missing the point that I agree with that statement! I just don't happen to agree with giving equal reward for unequal risk. If you can't pass the strength test, you've got no business taking the space of someone else that can, and who ultimately would place their lives on the line in the battlefield.

 

[Zebo]

It completely undermines the rhetoric and politics of the liberal elite! .....

Why you keep saying this? Bush/repcong has been in power over 2 years and this policy has not changed? Indicates he supports it no? And I never heard of such a ridiculus program I assure I would'nt support it and would be posting as I am now! You really need to get over politics and labels on a serious issue like this.

And um corn in case you could'nt fiqure out from context he meant "equal" and mistyped, read the whole paragraph carefully. I know it's hard to interpolate on missepllings sometimes

 

[AndrewR]

Originally posted by: jaeger66

Originally posted by: Corn
Ah, it's always heartening to see that some liberals still refuse to accept women as equals............they should just stay home and make babies, right Carby? Risking their lives for country is man's work after all, eh?

And it's always heartening to know that conseravtives are still incapable of seeing anything other than black and white. Men and women are equals, but to suggest that they are the same physically is to have not only your head but your entire body buried in the sand. Men are usually bigger, stronger, and more physically imposing. Women have better coordination, agility, and are less likely to crack under extreme psychological stress. Calling them unequal by some arbitrary standard of strength is absurd. So I fail to see the big deal about keeping them away from situations where they face MORE danger than their male counterparts.

Lifting a 120lb piece of equipment is black and white -- you either can lift it, or you cannot. Even in my career field, which is decidedly cerebral, there is still the requirement to load our equipment into a container for deployment. Some of that equipment, like a four drawer safe, is quite heavy. What happens when it's time to load? All of the men have to do it because the women are physically incapable of doing so. Does that affect the mission? You bet, when you have four people working a shift and only one can lift heavy objects, it puts a serious crimp in what happens (that happened recently during an exercise).

Arbitrary standard of strength? There are Department of Labor standards for weight lifting requirements. When a study was done of Army jobs and which ones fell where within those lifting standards, somewhere around 80% of the jobs in the Army qualified as heavy lifting. There's nothing arbitrary about the realities of lifting, carrying, or loading gear.

Obviously saying that women and men are equal physically is incorrect. However, if a man and a woman are competing for the same job which has physical strength requirements, shouldn't they both be held to the same standard of strength? If the man does 20 pullups (USMC) and the woman does a "flexed arm hang" for 45 seconds, how do those two equate? Can the woman even lift her own body weight?

 

[Zebo]

I meant the guys before you who said things like, "if they want to play they have to pay" and "piss or get off the pot" and the administration is risking not you.

 

[Corn]

Indicates he supports it no?

Political expediency does not always equal support. Lest you forget, Bush is a politician after all. Bush is as conservative as Clinton was a liberal, both willing to pander to the "other side" if it meant/means votes.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Corn

Indicates he supports it no?

Political expediency does not always equal support. Lest you forget, Bush is a politician after all. Bush is as conservative as Clinton was a liberal, both willing to pander to the "other side" if it meant/means votes.

Damn shame playing politics with that little girls lives and from the article the UNIT too. Clinton same. I hesitate to say what I'm really think about em'