Womenz on the front line

[coxmaster]

One letter difference, make sense to you now?

What you "fixed" it to is most likely incorrect..

Have you never heard of a fireman carry?

 

[HAL9000]

What you "fixed" it to is most likely incorrect..

Have you never heard of a fireman carry?

In the UK we call it a fireman's lift.

 

[Electric Amish]

I have no problem with it....even with a double-standard.

 

[dank69]

So it's two letters that have been changed / added.

What letter has been changed?

 

[HAL9000]

What letter has been changed?

m --> n

 

[dank69]

m --> n

No, that isn't right. :hmm:

 

[HAL9000]

No, that isn't right. :hmm:

I misread it, I concede your superiority on this subject.

 

[davmat787]

What letter has been changed?

Enough people! We don't need 10 posts about how many letters were changed or whatever! It is obvious what he meant, as soon as I read 'firemans' carry it was obvious. Anyway, now that you know what he meant, do you disagree?

Personally, I don't have a problem with it as long as they are held to the same standards and metrics. These aren't designed to exclude women, many males have problems with it as well. The physical standards are there for a reason: to save lives and I don't think one is sexist for saying so or having these requirements.

There are many roles in the military women are excelling at right now, pilots come to mind. I think the SOAR Nightstalkers (most elite helicopter pilots) have female members as well.

EDIT: Can anyone tell me which country these ladies uniforms represent? Just curious and this thread seems appropriate to ask. I am guessing it will be Scandinavian.

 

[dank69]

Enough people! We don't need 10 posts about how many letters were changed or whatever! It is obvious what he meant, as soon as I read 'firemans' carry it was obvious. Anyway, now that you know what he meant, do you disagree?

Personally, I don't have a problem with it as long as they are held to the same standards and metrics. These aren't designed to exclude women, many males have problems with it as well. The physical standards are there for a reason: to save lives and I don't think one is sexist for saying so or having these requirements.

There are many roles in the military women are excelling at right now, pilots come to mind. I think the SOAR Nightstalkers (most elite helicopter pilots) have female members as well.

EDIT: Can anyone tell me which country these ladies uniforms represent? Just curious and this thread seems appropriate to ask. I am guessing it will be Scandinavian.

Damn, bro! I don't like your comment. Let me just hit ALT-F...

 

[PlasmaBomb]

I have no problem with it....even with a double-standard.

So you can magically become 30% lighter if you are wounded and a woman comes to drag you to cover.

Excellent.

 

[davmat787]

Damn, bro! I don't like your comment. Let me just hit ALT-F...

lol.

There are some ladies here on ATOT, I would be very interested in their opinions. Also if they could share any of their females friends/relatives that they have discussed this issue with as well.

 

[Electric Amish]

So you can magically become 30% lighter if you are wounded and a woman comes to drag you to cover.

Excellent.

No. She just wouldn't be able to drag me to cover...or maybe she would. It depends on the person. I'm sure there are large men that smaller men can't drag to cover.

 

[Capt Caveman]

No. She just wouldn't be able to drag me to cover...or maybe she would. It depends on the person. I'm sure there are large men that smaller men can't drag to cover.

Correct. A friend of mine was on the front lines in Iraq. I feel confident he wouldn't be able to carry a man and return cover fire or just carry a large man for any distance.

 

[JDawg1536]

So if some super physically gifted female is able to carry X lbs over Y distance, can run whatever distance, etc., then she should be allowed out there.

That's just it.... they don't exist.

 

[Nintendesert]

Why aren't women also fighting for equal physical fitness test standards? I'll be all for them serving with the grunts when they are evaluated by the same standards as the grunts. Until then they are still in the Military-lite program.

 

[destrekor]

If someone wants to be on the front lines then by all means we should let them.

no, not this.

I won't go into the arguments regarding gender and sexuality (not that the latter is up for anymore discussion, considering sexuality is no longer judged for U.S. military hopefuls)...
but the ultimate point in why these issues even exist, is based on how the top commanders expect "front line" operations to continue if such decisions are reversed.

War, specifically warfare as practiced by the U.S. military, is not about sending as many able-bodies to the front lines as we can find.

If that was the case, would the Army reject potential recruits who had a minor felony and that's the only thing holding them back?

Our style of warfare is about having quality soldiers who are trained competently, and most importantly, it requires cooperation between every member of the unit. When one person decides they want to act like a child, can't handle the situation, or otherwise act unprofessionally, the entire unit is put at risk.

The quickest way to ruin everything is to put everyone who wants it on the front line. It's only effective if you're going to go the Zerg-rush route, throwing as many bodies as possible out into the fray.
And that is especially counter-productive when almost every military campaign your countries signs you up for is not defending the homeland.

Defending the homeland? Fuck yeah, send every man, woman, child, hermaphrodite, mentally-retarded, or Other that signs up. Not that that would really be a challenge, we have enough extremely nationalistic/patriotic individuals, militia members, and members, or fans, of the NRA. I think we could scrap together enough willing participants to defend against a traditional armed invader.

 

[a123456]

That's just it.... they don't exist.

It's kind of tough to prove a negative. Granted, I don't even know what the exact standards are anyway. If it turns out that it's 0 women that meet the standards, then so be it.

If it's 1 and she wants in, then let her in. If it's 1000 and they all want in, go ahead. I think some of those female Olympic-type athletes would have a shot at meeting the physical requirements. However, I doubt any of them would be interested. Not even giving them a chance to fall short of the physical requirements seems counterproductive since I'm sure tons of males fall short too.

 

[MedicBob]

In the years I did server, I have servered in front line Infantry units and pogue units. In combat zones and in direct combat with both types of units. Females in one and all male in the other.

Females can serve in "front line" units, just not Infantry or Armor. Imangine not having a shower for 3 months, but you do have black water cans that the sun heats up. No way to hide while you take a bath. I kow plenty of males who were hesitant and I do not know any females who would wash up in front of 100 guys.

As far as being able to do the "job," yes they can.

 

[destrekor]

In the years I did server, I have servered in front line Infantry units and pogue units. In combat zones and in direct combat with both types of units. Females in one and all male in the other.

Females can serve in "front line" units, just not Infantry or Armor. Imangine not having a shower for 3 months, but you do have black water cans that the sun heats up. No way to hide while you take a bath. I kow plenty of males who were hesitant and I do not know any females who would wash up in front of 100 guys.

As far as being able to do the "job," yes they can.

That's the only big consideration:

logistics.

War isn't 100% about plotting what lethal armaments are positioned where... how you manage the logistics of the entire war, regardless of soldier proficiency, can ultimately decide the victor.

With that said, logistics for infantry [that is, dedicated boots on the ground with individual weapon systems] is specifically made to be as minimal as possible, because this allows infantry to be the most adaptable and expedient type of large unit. Now, with modern guerrilla combat, it gets a little different, and easier to manage logistics of units on a major FOB... but the whole point is that they need to be ready for the worst possible situation, especially if it's an invasion campaign. Weeks without anything other than what could fit in your pack, and maybe a link-up with Supply personnel... men have extremely simple physiological considerations. Females, genetically speaking, are not nearly as easy to work with. Hygiene, as mentioned, is a major factor.

 

[Sea Moose]

This is an interesting debate.

I like having womenz in military, But not in front line roles.

 

[destrekor]

This is an interesting debate.

I like having womenz in military, But not in front line roles.

Certainly. Women have proved to be just as excellent at performing most Soldierly tasks. Some have gone above and beyond even what some men will attempt, and they have earned accolades for such. I am almost positive the reason women aren't in the few active combat branches here is more out of logistical concerns than gender equality issues.
I mean, they might have an interesting time figuring out how to allow gay men to serve in the infantry. There will be some logistical issues handling that I am sure, but since it is still the same gender, they won't have to do much at all to ensure the collection of straight and any gay men is handled effectively.

 

[BrunoPuntzJones]

Enough people! We don't need 10 posts about how many letters were changed or whatever! It is obvious what he meant, as soon as I read 'firemans' carry it was obvious. Anyway, now that you know what he meant, do you disagree?

Personally, I don't have a problem with it as long as they are held to the same standards and metrics. These aren't designed to exclude women, many males have problems with it as well. The physical standards are there for a reason: to save lives and I don't think one is sexist for saying so or having these requirements.

There are many roles in the military women are excelling at right now, pilots come to mind. I think the SOAR Nightstalkers (most elite helicopter pilots) have female members as well.

EDIT: Can anyone tell me which country these ladies uniforms represent? Just curious and this thread seems appropriate to ask. I am guessing it will be Scandinavian.

Russian Army.

 

[Avalon]

If men can bleed for their cuntry, so can women.

I see what you did there.

 

[irishScott]

We were able to translate it, but I don't understand how he arrived at structuring his sentence that way

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=Fireman+carry

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=M249

It makes perfect sense.

 

[irishScott]

As for my opinion, if a woman can meet the same physical standards as a man then by all means. Otherwise you're just putting soldiers' lives at risk in the name of feminism.