Close

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 62
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314


    Reputation: Yes | No

    Women can now fight in combat

    I feel safer:

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. military will formally end its ban on women serving in front-line combat roles, officials said on Wednesday, in a move that could open thousands of fighting jobs to female service members.

    The move knocks down another societal barrier, after the Pentagon scrapped its "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" ban in 2011 on gays and lesbians serving openly in the military.
    The decision by outgoing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta is expected to be formally announced on Thursday and comes after 11 years of non-stop war that has seen dozens of women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    They have represented around 2 percent of the casualties of those unpopular, costly wars, and some 12 percent of those deployed for the war effort, in which there were often no clearly defined front lines, and where deadly guerrilla tactics have included roadside bombs that kill and maim indiscriminately.

    "This is an historic step for equality and for recognizing the role women have, and will continue to play, in the defense of our nation," said Democratic Senator Patty Murray from Washington, the outgoing head of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee.

    The move was also welcomed by Democratic Senator Carl Levin of Michigan, the head of the Senate Armed Services Committee, who said it reflected the "reality of 21st century military operations." In addition, the American Civil Liberties Union, which filed a suit in November seeking to force the Pentagon to end the ban, applauded the move.


    The decision overturns a 1994 policy that prevents women from serving in small front-line combat units.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaand.. Im out.. no possible positive to this..

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    You sure there is no benefit?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    The world...
    Posts
    1,331
    Rep Points
    1,202.2
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    13


    Reputation: Yes | No
    this whole societal barrier term needs to really be dropped... the only barrier to anything is yourself but no one seems to understand this

    oh and women in combat... sounds to me like dyke feminists more than anything
    2007 335i (100% stock with mods)

    N54 is not a German 2JZ lol

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    I have nothing against it. If they want to go fight let them.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Portillo's
    Posts
    1,503
    Rep Points
    238.2
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    3


    Reputation: Yes | No
    I'm sure the military knows what they're doing.

    Besides, most of our combat troops are being pulled soon anyway Click here to enlarge

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by gary88 Click here to enlarge
    I'm sure the military knows what they're doing.
    Heh, I wish I had your confidence.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,835
    Rep Points
    2,309.0
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Over 150 women have been killed in combat since 911. Women have been awarded the silver star for heroism in combat. They're already doing it. It's going to be a little odd when the first women goes through infantry school or ranger school, yes. I'm not opposed to it though as long as standard aren't dropped. I know women that are more capable than infantry men I've met. It's certainly going to be interesting but I'm not opposed to it.
    2011 335is DCT, JB4 + MHD BEF, stage 2 LPFP, e50 + 50/50 meth, DCI, 7" FMIC, MT ET Streets when needed


  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bigdnno98 Click here to enlarge
    Over 150 women have been killed in combat since 911. Women have been awarded the silver star for heroism in combat. They're already doing it.
    Agreed, it's a logical step.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    13,460
    Rep Points
    58.0
    Mentioned
    318 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    no its not. the 10 year occupation has scewed the concept of what combat actually is. from every war prior to the "war on terror", combat is not just driving down roads, as is what all those women were injured in. The genetic differences are real. you may "know" women better than men, but until a female can survive without facilities for 60+ days, it creates more problems than its worth. they cant think clearly, they cant carry their load, they cannot move as fast. this is fact. There are no positives to allowing women in combat MOS. I challeneg anyone to prove me wrong, as few, if any of you are in a combat MOS, i will gladly argue this, and allow the future to prove my point for me.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,835
    Rep Points
    2,309.0
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Reputation: Yes | No
    So you're saying that no women will ever pass Ranger School? I know many warriors that have gone and failed Ranger School. I know that it is inevitable. One day a women will pass Ranger School. It's a fact. Will it be many, no. It will happen though. I can't argue with you about carrying thier load and physiological differences. That is also fact. What is also fact is that there are men that can't carry their load either. Will a women end up as a mortarman, i hope not. 60mm mortars being carried on their back along with the tube and base plate are not light and i wouldn't want to pick up the slack for someone that couldn't pull their weight. But...... It happends now, just less frequently that it would with women. I will tell you for a fact that women deployed to Iraq in 2003 as part of the intial wave with the 3rd Infantry Division. Were there facilities then? No. They did the same thing the men did. For almost a month too. I'm not sure i'm a fan of women in combat MOS either but the fact is it's here and we have to deal with it. Period.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    no its not. the 10 year occupation has scewed the concept of what combat actually is. from every war prior to the "war on terror", combat is not just driving down roads, as is what all those women were injured in. The genetic differences are real. you may "know" women better than men, but until a female can survive without facilities for 60+ days, it creates more problems than its worth. they cant think clearly, they cant carry their load, they cannot move as fast. this is fact. There are no positives to allowing women in combat MOS. I challeneg anyone to prove me wrong, as few, if any of you are in a combat MOS, i will gladly argue this, and allow the future to prove my point for me.
    2011 335is DCT, JB4 + MHD BEF, stage 2 LPFP, e50 + 50/50 meth, DCI, 7" FMIC, MT ET Streets when needed


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    4,198
    Rep Points
    1,800.2
    Mentioned
    102 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    19


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Sticky Click here to enlarge
    You sure there is no benefit?
    Zero benefit. I can understand the "equality of the sexes argument", but the fact that women are biological suitable for war & combat situations (they bleed out every 30 days, are physically weaker than then average male, etc), there's a MUCH bigger problem when you put women soldiers on the frontline -- the psychological damage that it can (and probably will) cause male soldiers. Studies have been conducted that males are much more susceptible & affected significantly more when witnessing a female's gruesome death (the matriarch; women are seen w/ a type of innocence; think pregnancies/reproduction). If the male soldiers are distracted or more concerned with the safety of a female soldier, it can interfere, distract & reduce a troop's combat effectiveness.

    This is also a generalization, but I believe that men are significantly more capable of handling & accepting the psychological stresses & trauma that are associated with war -- like pulling the trigger & taking a life, witnessing a friend's death, PTSD, etc.

    Are women capable of being effective soldiers & passing the various tests? Sure, but they will never score consistently as well as men. I think we need to remember that we're discussing war tactics, something that gender equality does NOT tactics. I have no problem with women in the military, but I have a problem with them being on the frontline or in combat situations.
    Last edited by benzy89; 01-24-2013 at 10:54 AM.
    COBB AP ProTune by Bren of ///Bren Tuning
    Akrapovic DP | Helix FMIC | Alpina TCM Flash | Walbro 450LPH Fuel Pump


    "The moment money becomes your motivation, you are immediately not as good as someone who is motivated by passion and internal will." -A. Senna

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,835
    Rep Points
    2,309.0
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    It is a fact that men react differently to women suffering than men. That fact is used against Soldiers in a school I've attended. But....... Seeing a friend killed regardless of the sex has significant mental affects on anyone. To say that that would be worse to see a woman die is irrelevant at that point. The damage is already done, the only question is the extent of the damage. I'm pretty sure that wasn't even a topic when the powers that be made this decision.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by benzy89 Click here to enlarge
    Zero benefit. I can understand the "equality of the sexes argument", but the fact that women are biological suitable for war & combat situations (they bleed out every 30 days, are physically weaker than then average male, etc), there's a MUCH bigger problem when you put women soldiers on the frontline -- the psychological damage that it can (and probably will) cause male soldiers. Studies have been conducted that males are much more susceptible & affected significantly more when witnessing a female's gruesome death (the matriarch; women are seen w/ a type of innocence; think pregnancies/reproduction).

    This is also a generalization, but I believe that men are significantly more capable of handling & accepting the psychological stresses & trauma that are associated with war -- like pulling the trigger & taking a life, witnessing a friend's death, PTSD, etc.
    2011 335is DCT, JB4 + MHD BEF, stage 2 LPFP, e50 + 50/50 meth, DCI, 7" FMIC, MT ET Streets when needed


  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,835
    Rep Points
    2,309.0
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Reputation: Yes | No
    We're having this discussion in the office right now. lol my guys are beating me up about it. All I can tell them is that it's coming. No point in argueing about it, they're coming.
    2011 335is DCT, JB4 + MHD BEF, stage 2 LPFP, e50 + 50/50 meth, DCI, 7" FMIC, MT ET Streets when needed


  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    There are no positives to allowing women in combat MOS.
    What about sending them in as a first wave and having them nag the enemy to death? One month and they will surrender. It's a powerful weapon.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by benzy89 Click here to enlarge
    This is also a generalization, but I believe that men are significantly more capable of handling & accepting the psychological stresses & trauma that are associated with war -- like pulling the trigger & taking a life, witnessing a friend's death, PTSD, etc.
    I've seen an ex-girlfriend try to kill a spider. I do not disagree.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LostMarine Click here to enlarge
    no its not. the 10 year occupation has scewed the concept of what combat actually is. from every war prior to the "war on terror", combat is not just driving down roads, as is what all those women were injured in. The genetic differences are real. you may "know" women better than men, but until a female can survive without facilities for 60+ days, it creates more problems than its worth. they cant think clearly, they cant carry their load, they cannot move as fast. this is fact. There are no positives to allowing women in combat MOS. I challeneg anyone to prove me wrong, as few, if any of you are in a combat MOS, i will gladly argue this, and allow the future to prove my point for me.
    Could not agree more. All they are going to do is get people killed. Sure there might be a few woman who have what it takes to survive and be good soldiers - but they are the minority.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,835
    Rep Points
    2,309.0
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Reputation: Yes | No
    So then lets let the system and leaders weed out those who are not capable. Not the peanut gallery or politicians.

    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge
    Could not agree more. All they are going to do is get people killed. Sure there might be a few woman who have what it takes to survive and be good soldiers - but they are the minority.
    2011 335is DCT, JB4 + MHD BEF, stage 2 LPFP, e50 + 50/50 meth, DCI, 7" FMIC, MT ET Streets when needed


  20. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Clarksville, TN
    Posts
    3,835
    Rep Points
    2,309.0
    Mentioned
    44 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    24


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that women are well suited for all jobs and situations in the Army. What I'm saying is that I agree with the SECDEF's decision to lift the ban. The military still has 4 years to decide and reclama whichever jobs/positions they feel that women are just not suited to fill. There will be some, I hope anyways. I don't see it as safe or condusive to operations to have a platoon size element isolated at an outpost 30 minutes from the next friendly forces having 1 or 2 females. This is a recipe for disaster to me. I do trust though that the military leaders will make the right decisions regarding jobs/positions and how to man them. Look at how many people were in an uproar when don't ask don't tell was repealed. I can't even remember when that was now becuase, here, on the frontlines, no one is talking about it. It's not even an issue. I think this will be the same way. Women have migrated into all male units/positions over the last decade and many have not noticed. Has it hindered anything, no because it's obvious that no one has noticed.
    2011 335is DCT, JB4 + MHD BEF, stage 2 LPFP, e50 + 50/50 meth, DCI, 7" FMIC, MT ET Streets when needed


  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Los Angeles
    Posts
    3,230
    Rep Points
    502.1
    Mentioned
    57 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    6


    1 out of 1 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by bigdnno98 Click here to enlarge
    So then lets let the system and leaders weed out those who are not capable. Not the peanut gallery or politicians.
    The problem with that is that during the "weeding out" process some of our troops are likely to get killed because some stupid $#@! was on her period and hesitated or had a moment or self reflection or some other bull$#@! that makes [most] women $#@!in nuts and impossible to deal with.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by LZH Click here to enlarge
    The problem with that is that during the "weeding out" process some of our troops are likely to get killed because some stupid $#@! was on her period and hesitated or had a moment or self reflection or some other bull$#@! that makes [most] women $#@!in nuts and impossible to deal with.
    LOL!

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    le Paris
    Posts
    6,653
    Rep Points
    -257.0
    Mentioned
    48 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    0


    Reputation: Yes | No
    Just disable friendly fire. Always have a been a big help for me in Counter Strike when playing with the girls. Click here to enlarge

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    NC
    Posts
    160
    Rep Points
    487.1
    Mentioned
    7 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    5


    2 out of 2 members liked this post. Reputation: Yes | No
    I just got out of the Army myself, was an 11B(P). I spent about 7 years in, first with 3rd Ranger Bat out of Benning, then with the 82nd here at Bragg. I've deployed three times to Afghanistan, and I can absolutely agree with @bigdnno98 . Woman cannot be equal with men, because theyre women, and were men. Thats pretty much it. There can never be the same fraternal bond with a man and a woman as there is with me and my brothers in arms. The biological tendencies of men are too prominent.

    Before combat, we get all hyped up. We're pump full of testosterone, and then they think its a good idea for a woman to share a unit with these guys? You know how many women get pregnant in the support units while over there? Or raped? Could you imagine in an actual combat unit that rolls out everyday? Women would be too emotionally compromised, or would make the men be emotionally compromised as the men subconsciously try to defend "their" woman. It would be a disaster.
    Click here to enlarge
    471whp on E85

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    117,125
    Rep Points
    31,300.6
    Mentioned
    2055 Post(s)
    Rep Power
    314



    Reputation: Yes | No
    Click here to enlarge Originally Posted by Ammonia Click here to enlarge
    I just got out of the Army myself, was an 11B(P). I spent about 7 years in, first with 3rd Ranger Bat out of Benning, then with the 82nd here at Bragg. I've deployed three times to Afghanistan, and I can absolutely agree with @bigdnno98 . Woman cannot be equal with men, because theyre women, and were men. Thats pretty much it. There can never be the same fraternal bond with a man and a woman as there is with me and my brothers in arms. The biological tendencies of men are too prominent.

    Before combat, we get all hyped up. We're pump full of testosterone, and then they think its a good idea for a woman to share a unit with these guys? You know how many women get pregnant in the support units while over there? Or raped? Could you imagine in an actual combat unit that rolls out everyday? Women would be too emotionally compromised, or would make the men be emotionally compromised as the men subconsciously try to defend "their" woman. It would be a disaster.
    All very valid points...

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •