Panetta to lift ban on women in combat

  • Thread starter Thread starter captainmike
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
LisaA said:
What baloney. As I pointed women ALREADY suffer the emotional and physical scars of combat. I have spoken to them, visited them in the hospital, helped a troop support organization provide technology to allow them to function better with these injuires.

So the reality that women are already suffering means we should ADD to the suffering, add to the cost, add to the potential problems of accommodating them (btw it’s VERY hard for women to get necessary female hygiene supplies at some installations. I guess the gunny will need to add boxes of Tampax to the supply list) and most important put the male troops at greater risk?

All of this to what end? Because some women WANT to enter combat? I bet there are some women who’d love to play for the NFL but I suspect the consequences will be detrimental to the league and to the women…

It’s so funny that the entire Leftist philosophy is for self fulfillment, self gratification rather than self sacrifice. There is no good reason to put women into combat but like gay marriage, like abortion…if someone WANTS it, that’s good enough for the Left.

Lisa
Click to expand...
No one wants to enter into combat, trust me it is not a pleasant experience. Writing off an individuals desire to serve thier country should be comended and far from leftist - how many leftists do you know support the military? How does a womens period put others at risk (except for the enemy)? Look at Isreal (as with many other nations in the world), they have had women in combat for decades and they haven’t “suffered” because of it! Your arguments are vauge to say the least and as one who has served I am proud of the women who have served even outside of combat and would have been more than happy to have any one of them cover my back in a fire fight.

So you know I am so far right of center politically I have a hard time voting for the Conservative party here in Canada. No leftist here!
 
Well the anywhere, anytime is a known. The any condition aspect is something to think about. The US seems to have been implementing this for awhile now. I can’t see how equal applies to combat situations, I would say its un-equal.

Anyway congratulations. Imho we have equal rights confused today. 🤷
 
Anyone else see this as an attempt to distract from the more important issues affecting our country today? Namely the economy and the federal budget?

Keep the talking heads busy with that other stuff, and the masses will forget about this other stuff.
 
Suudy said:
Anyone else see this as an attempt to distract from the more important issues affecting our country today? Namely the economy and the federal budget?

Keep the talking heads busy with that other stuff, and the masses will forget about this other stuff.
Click to expand...
👍

They keep putting out bright shiny objects so we’re distracted from Hillary’s lies on Benghazi, promoting John Kerry to SoS, giving billions of dollars of aircraft to Egypt so they have capability to bomb Israel, an assault weapons ban…

You’re right this is a target rich environment.

Lisa
 
yukonbrad said:
No one wants to enter into combat, trust me it is not a pleasant experience. Writing off an individuals desire to serve thier country should be comended and far from leftist - how many leftists do you know support the military? How does a womens period put others at risk (except for the enemy)? Look at Isreal (as with many other nations in the world), they have had women in combat for decades and they haven’t “suffered” because of it! Your arguments are vauge to say the least and as one who has served I am proud of the women who have served even outside of combat and would have been more than happy to have any one of them cover my back in a fire fight.

So you know I am so far right of center politically I have a hard time voting for the Conservative party here in Canada. No leftist here!
Click to expand...
Again you do not bother to address the issue. The purpose of the military is to defend our country. It is not so GI Jane gets self fulfillment or has a better career path.

The Left is all about self fulfillment and “equality” so this is just another attempt to pretend men and women are identical. I too am proud of the female troops I know and supported and I am sure some of them would have done fine in certain combat roles.

But you keep forgetting the essential question…how is this going to make the military better? Why are we engaging in social engineering instead of reviewing our military to make it function properly with diminished funding?

BTW you are Canadian? What is YOUR country’s stance on women in combat?

Lisa
 
Does anyone know how different the standards are? If a women can handle the exact same physical and mental standards that the men have to then it might make a difference in how I feel about this. I also feel the same way about firefighters and police. I don’t know for sure but I hear they also have different standards.
 
With this administration, we have lost every battle so just accept that women will be in combat—no matter the standards are , doesn’t matter.

I really am looking forward to women in the NFL - why should women be exluded? Let’s go the whole way.

By the way, we are not small like Israel, we are a very large nation with a big tough military which tends to take on allies’ battles.
 
LisaA said:
I also know of the devastating emotional consequences of women deployed even in relatively safe positions, particularly when leaving babies or even teenagers behind. It is only fair that women be deployed if they are in the military. But imagine a woman leaving a baby to go into a combat role…yikes!

I just heard a letter written by a Marine who was deployed during Iraq. He spoke of not only the physical hardship but graphic details about some of the hygiene and health issues when in combat (I noted this earlier but none of the GI Jane supporters responded…hmmmm) He mentioned how dysentery had gone through their unit and because of the heavy gear and protective clothing they had to defecate into empty MRE containers within a few feet of their fellow Marines. Further when arriving back at base they were immediately stripped, their clothing taken by a HazMat type team and burned as they stood there naked being hosed off with a pressure washer. What a great experience for our female troops…total bonding over a feces filled fire.

Will sanity ever prevail? This administration lives in an alternative universe.

Lisa
Click to expand...
Excellent points Lisa. As to your last point about sanity prevailing, with this administration and the left in this country? No, I don’t see it happening in my lifetime I’m afraid 😦 Although I do live by and believe that with God all things are possible. But seeing how they booed God at their convention, I wonder if there’s any hope for them left! 😉
 
tortilla5 said:
Does anyone know how different the standards are? If a women can handle the exact same physical and mental standards that the men have to then it might make a difference in how I feel about this. I also feel the same way about firefighters and police. I don’t know for sure but I hear they also have different standards.
Click to expand...
Army APFT for 17-21 years old

Female (pass/max)- Push ups- 19/42, Sit ups- 53/78, 2 mile run- 18:54/15:36
Male (pass/max)- Push ups- 42/71, Sit ups- 53/78, 2 mile run- 15:54/ 13:00

A female would have to max her push ups and almost max her run (score 96) in order to just pass the male APFT standards.
 
yukonbrad said:
As for the GI Jane supporter comment, call me what you will, but when I served in the US military there were plenty of women working in supply I would have prefered to be covering my back than many of the men.
Click to expand...
That was my comment.

I serve in the US military too.

I serve in a Civil Engineering unit. We get deployed far more then most units.

Our PT standards are not the same as the men. If we are so equal…why do we have different PT standards?

If we aren’t expected to perform to the same standards as men…why are we paid the same?
So few women join the military…and of those…so few are ever going to meet the same standards as a man in an infantry unit in terms of weight, strength, stamina, speed, desire and mental fortitude.
Why are we making such a huge deal about allowing women to enter infantry units when this particular woman is so rare.

Plus…changing the dynamics of an infantry unit and adding a female is nothing but a negative.
Everything has to change within that unit and the focus of the mission is changed. These infantry units sometimes work in the most remote areas of the world and worry about survival of you and your buddy next to you.
Now we need to change these outposts to fit women…including separate tents, facilities and so on.

Is this going to carry over to special forces units?
Do we expect females to make it through SEAL, Ranger, PJ, Recon, Night Stalker, Delta, Combat Com and Green Beret training?
Are we going to change the training to suit females, as PT standards were done, when we begin to realize that females can’t make it through these intense courses?

If a female makes it through training for Green Beret…what will her job be? How can she go behind enemy lines to train and infiltrate the enemy when we are involved in Afghanistan and a culture that treats woman differently then men. Will she go behind enemy lines by growing a beard and dressing as a man as the other Green Berets do or is going to wear a burka?
 
originally posted by Gary Taylor
Ah, you mean the other equal rights, like abortion, gun control etc. Would you say Obamas popularity went up since election?
Click to expand...
I think his popularity is way up - the people who voted him in love him.
Female (pass/max)- Push ups- 19/42, Sit ups- 53/78, 2 mile run- 18:54/15:36
Male (pass/max)- Push ups- 42/71, Sit ups- 53/78, 2 mile run- 15:54/ 13:00
Click to expand...
Maybe the female soldiers could use steroids.
 
captainmike said:
men who have fought in wars have seen the worst that life has to offer. pain, torture, fear, mass murder, loss of friends, desperation, guilt over having killed others, etc., etc., ad infinitum.

and what has been their reward once the wars have ended?

women.

joy, laughter, frivolity (i mean that in the most positive way), softness, femininity, and all of the other wonderful qualities that make women so great.

in the past, a man who came home from war could enjoy his wife’s softness and all of these other qualities.

the left wants to change all that. it wants to make women just as hard as men. in the future, both memebrs of a marriage will return from war with all of the scars that war entails.

it will be horrific and sad.

bottom line is, God made women and men very, very different. the left thinks God got it very, very wrong.
Click to expand...
The biggest objection to women in the armed forces is that they adversely affect unit cohesiveness.

The US has been blessed in that it has not seen war taking place in its soil for a long time. Wars usually take place overseas, so people usually picture the men going off to fight wars overseas while the women stay safe at home.

I feel for people whose homelands are under the curse of war. Women don’t have to be soldiers to fall victim to torture, rape and death.
 
Sarcelle said:
Well there you go then. You don’t have anything to fear.
Click to expand...
Until they lower the standards.

It’s like firefighters. New York refused to lower the standard for women, to be a NY Firefighter you have to pass the same physical standard - man or woman (although the class room testing as been made easier for minorities). There are 25 women firefighters in a force of 11,500. Nationwide women make up 10% of firefighters because the standards have been lowered by most other departments.
 
originally posted by SamH
There are 25 women firefighters in a force of 11,500
Click to expand...
If there is a media news or TV show I bet we see female firefighters telling us about their job and how tough it is.
 
originally posted by SamH
There are 25 women firefighters in a force of 11,500
Click to expand...
And if there is a public school room that needs a firefighter, my bet is it will be a female fighter to explain her dangerous job to all the students

If there is a media news or TV show I bet we see female firefighters telling us about their job and how tough it is
 
chevalier said:
Women should not be exposed to captivity by the enemy.

Also, male captives who refuse to spill secrets will now have to face being forced to watch their female colleagues beaten and raped to make them talk.
Click to expand...
What about women civilians who are caught in the cross-fire? How should they be treated?
 
oldcatholicguy said:
Army APFT for 17-21 years old

Female (pass/max)- Push ups- 19/42, Sit ups- 53/78, 2 mile run- 18:54/15:36
Male (pass/max)- Push ups- 42/71, Sit ups- 53/78, 2 mile run- 15:54/ 13:00

A female would have to max her push ups and almost max her run (score 96) in order to just pass the male APFT standards.
Click to expand...
Air Force PT standards under the age of 30…

Male:
Push ups: min-33 max-over 67
Sit ups: min-42 max-over 58
Waist: min-39 inches max-under 32.5
1.5 mile run: min-at least 13:36 max: under 9:12

Female:
Push ups: min-19 max-over 47
Sit ups: min-38 max-over 54
Waist: min-35.5 inches max-under 29 inches
1.5 mile run: min-at least 16:22 max-under 10:23

Based on the points system…your run is where you get the most points.
Look at the run requirements…there is literally a 3 minute difference between the minimums for males and females. Anyone who runs knows that is a lot of time. You get the same number of points for the absolute minimums between males and females…but a female is allotted an extra 3 minutes to complete her run.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top