women in combat/battle

Women will now be fighting on the front lines.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5imeuWViNO3yzlefh-RkAcQ1vSuMA?docId=CNG.2fa952d7995619bbcc9e06bfa27a1dff.281

Thoughts/opinions?

 

Pretty sure minds will change if and when women become POWs. I pray that never happens but, with todays enemies, there's no such things as Geneva Conventions.

 

Works for Isreal does it not ?

 

Thoughts?

If they can hack it, I don't see a problem so long as the logistical issues are worked out.

IF they can hack it.

Our services have standards, and those standards are in place for a reason.
A man has to carry a 60-100lb rucksack. If a woman can do the same, then no problem.
If they lower the standards so women can enter, then the standards need to be lowered for men also, and mechanical equipment needs to be provided for those who can't carry the current complement of gear.

There is a difference between teamwork and supporting each other, and being in a situation where you are expected to literally carry another troop's weight.
It's not the boy scouts.


But they are already discussing that it's going to be at least a 2 year transition because of issues like standards for upper body strength.
That's bullshit. The transition period should be the brass doing what's needed to provide for basic privacy requirements.

 

indeed, it does.

I would argue that the strength issue is way more important than any privacy concern. Not just for humping gear either. I'd sure want everyone on my team to have the ability to carry my 6' 220lb body out of harms way if need be. I would do the same for them

I know plenty of women can already carry out such a task...I would hope the standard to do so remains

I see merit in this thought.

 

Israel is a whole different animal

 

I'm 100% with you.

That's why I'm saying the transition period needs to be to address issues that absolutely will arise with men and women living and fighting together.

The strength issues should be a non-issue... standards should not be reviewed and adjusted for this.

 

Agreed...

There is a certain intimacy (for lack of a better word) with those that you are in combat with. Living, sweating, pissing and bleeding right there with your brothers in arms

 

Same with women on the police force. Just on a smaller scale.

 

Sure, but what is their capacity and function in the service?

 

I can see how that could be so...your response is rather ambiguous, what are your thoughts on the subject?

 

The ones that can hack it will succeed, the ones that cannot will be kicked out, or sent to admin jobs.

I'm neither here nor there with it...women are allowed in all positions in the Coast Guard.

 

Carrying a 200lb meat sack isn't easy

Agreed

 

I hope they don't have different standards like they do for PFT. I understand some women can hack it better than some men but in my opinion..if it ain't broke, don't fix it.

 

As a man with two granddaughters, I don't like it.

 

So you'd rather your grand daughter is told "No-you can't do that job-You are a woman" if they want to try?? It's already been said - This doesn't mean every woman will go to the pointy end of a spear....The are going to have to want it, meet the standards, and contribute to the mission like everyone else. I'm pretty sure it'll be a special type of woman that seeks jobs on the front line.

I think the double standard for males vs females doesn't necessarily make sense...but like any change-That'll work itself out.

 

considering that the traditional sense of a "front line" does not exist in modern warfare it doesn't matter. a bullet, mortar, or IED does not discriminate nor do they target only combat arms troops. there will still be certain jobs not open to them though such as SF or Rangers (they will not change the physical standards), i don't see that changing at all.

 

As if the sexual assault rate wasnt high enough in the military...

 

First it was the gays now its the women..
http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=brj2UkUPjCI&desktop_uri=/watch?v=brj2UkUPjCI

 

Nothing wrong with it....... As long as they can handle the job required of them, so be it. There shouldn't be any 'exceptions' in terms of requirements, expectations, and job performance. If they can't handle it (ALL aspects of it), they shouldn't be there. Same for the men...If they can't handle it, they shouldn't be there.