You fight like a girl!

[Zeta]

http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/05/19/women.combat.ap/index.html


They're trying to pass a bill that keeps women out of any kind of combat. You know, when we are supposedly short on combat troops, this might not be the best idea.

Anyone else think this may be a preliminary step for a draft? In the unlikely event they actually attempt to reinstate the draft it would include women, and American's would like tossing their daughter's in the line of fire even less than their sons.

 

[Archaic]

Foolishness. Sure, there may be some circumstances in which women are less desirable than men in combat, but they're still bloody effective, so why not use them? I can think of plenty of situations where the women would be more desirable if anything also for that matter. Snipers and Special Forces infiltration and assassination units for starters.

 

[Misty]

Apparently the Republicans want to bring us back to 1900.

 

[Artistshipper]

Foolishness. Sure, there may be some circumstances in which women are less desirable than men in combat, but they're still bloody effective, so why not use them? I can think of plenty of situations where the women would be more desirable if anything also for that matter. Snipers and Special Forces infiltration and assassination units for starters.

why special forces?

I's think fighter Pilots and Submariners. Women can take more g forces, survive on less oxygen, etc.

 

[Gato Gurl914]

bah, i don't care either way.

 

[MistyRocks]

huh, people over here have been wondering if the us is gonna bring back the draft. they couldn't take the women too. people would go nuts. Dunno why they go mad over women being sent into combat and not so much men o_0

altho, america wouldn't be short of troops if they didn't start a pointless war to begin with...

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Alright, seriously...either COMPLETE equality for women, or let's just go back to the 1600s...cause I'm sick of being confused.

 

[Mozz]

As usual, I am the only sane one here.

le sigh.

 

[Murgatroyd]

Before making claims about relative sanity, could you post your position and reasons?

 

[Mozz]

Duncan and McHugh’s amendment is supported by biological fact. An average female soldier is five inches shorter than her male counterpart, and has half the upper-body strength and a lower aerobic capacity. While the courageous women of our military do many things as well as men, the heavy lifting of ground-combat support isn’t one of them.

Of course, these facts mean little to those whose purpose is to make a point about gender equality. ... “More than one general has told me that the objective [of allowing women in forward support companies] is to ‘grow’ the careers of female officers, including their own daughters.”

That’s a fine goal. The thought of its attainment will bring great comfort to the wounded Marine who lies on the ground, bleeding to death, because no one is there to carry him to safety.

http://www.nationalreview.com/editorial/editors200505161044.asp

That sums up my position quite nicely, I think. Now off to bed ^^;

 

[Murgatroyd]

Duncan and McHugh’s amendment is supported by biological fact. An average female soldier...

Not all female soldiers are average. I have an alternative proposal that will deal with that issue better than a gender line division.

Set a standard of physical capability, and keep anyone who cannot meet that standard out of direct ground combat, regardless of gender. Allow those who do meet it to go into combat, regardless of gender.

 

[TK n Happy Ness]

I'm just saying this, but women in the PWOI (Pointless War of Iraq) would be a good idea. They could distract the morons over there while the troops kill their asses. Or maybe not such a good idea.

 

[Mc sweeney]

Women should be allowed into the army, but they should have to be in their own all women divisions. That way they won't slow down the men.

Also, there should be a rule that if a female soldier gets captured, the military just won't bother trying to rescue her (again, so they won't slow down the men).

 

[GrnMarvl14]

Mozz, you make a good point, but how much upper body strength does it take to pull a trigger, detonate a mine, or drive a tank? Of course that's not all the soldiers do, but anything else could always utilize teamwork or something else. And if they can't use bazookas, grenade launchers or otherwise, train them to be snipers or something equally...non-heavy.

 

[Artistshipper]

Mozz, you make a good point, but how much upper body strength does it take to pull a trigger, detonate a mine, or drive a tank? Of course that's not all the soldiers do, but anything else could always utilize teamwork or something else. And if they can't use bazookas, grenade launchers or otherwise, train them to be snipers or something equally...non-heavy.

Snipers are not "non heavy" The recoil from a 50 cal sniper riffle would make anyone grunt, and if you're 96 pounds and unathletic, you might break the bones in your shoulder.

 

[Ice Rabbit]

Why is the world so fucking sexist? We need complete equality.

 

[Mozz]

Yeah, so our Marines die because Molly couldn't carry her wounded brother back to base camp to get adequate medical care.

All in the name of equality.

If the army thinks women can do it and/or they need people badly enough, let them make the decision. Don't have the idiot legislature draft feel-good bullshit forcing inferior troops down their throat.

 

[GrnMarvl14]

I'm all for what Murgatroyd said earlier, set a standard that doesn't have anything to do with gender. This keeps the weaker males out, but lets the stronger females in. No sexism, nice and gender-neutral...and everybody walks away happy. Or as happy as can be when dealing with a body whose sole purpose involves death. But that's another matter entirely.

 

[TK n Happy Ness]

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20050625/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq <---This is another reason why females shouldn't be in the Iraq war.

 

[MondoTR]

Set a standard of physical capability.

There's already something like that.