Women in combat

Falstaff · Dec 5, 2003, 05:29 AM

after the terrible affair in IRAQ with the young soldiers who were captured and ultimately rescued, it appears the debate over women in combat is growing stronger, and it is definitely against women in the combat role for the immediate future.

kuja · Dec 5, 2003, 06:26 AM

Jessica Lynch? I think that was a result of general incompetence within her unit, rather than being restricted to incompetent women.

~~Optimummind~~ · Dec 5, 2003, 07:00 AM

I think it's fair that women go out to combat too. It would be hypocritical of them to demand equal rights and more freedom in everything except for when it comes to mandatory military service during times of necessity. The government should have them sign up for Selective Service like all U.S. men.

Falstaff · Dec 5, 2003, 07:11 AM

I feel that if they volunteer, and take the oath, they should endure as well, but public sentiment is deeply divided on the subject, and the Israeli military is more polorized too,

Markius · Dec 5, 2003, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Optimummind
I think it's fair that women go out to combat too. It would be hypocritical of them to demand equal rights and more freedom in everything except for when it comes to mandatory military service during times of necessity. The government should have them sign up for Selective Service like all U.S. men.

i agree almost completely. A woman could fire a gun like a man but the thing that doesnt sit right with me is if it ever came down to hand to hand combat......i cant see the average woman beating the average man...

im not sexist or anything and hope that doesnt sound sexist...

ToshiroOC · Dec 5, 2003, 08:44 AM

If a woman can stand her own next to a man in the battlefield, and wants to be there, then she belongs there. I don't really know about the draft - I think the women who want to be there will join up anyway nowadays, and those who don't want to be on the battlefield are the ones you wouldn't want on the battlefield anyway. Call me old fashioned, but I wouldn't mind joining up if it meant that a woman didn't have to fight in my place.

UberLord · Dec 5, 2003, 09:58 AM

I think Tosh has this one right

~~Optimummind~~ · Dec 5, 2003, 12:16 PM

I know a few women who could probably beat me one-on-one. Or, rather, beat me by sitting on me and swinging their trunk-like arms.

wertret · Dec 5, 2003, 12:26 PM

I'm sure women can be exceptional warriors (i have to deal with one everyday) and they deserve the right to fight for their country.

Falstaff · Dec 5, 2003, 01:57 PM

History is replete with examples of women that have fought and died bravely side by side with men, however in America, some groups are calling for an end to this, and petitioning political leaders to force the military to cut way back on women in support roles as well, citing the inevitable situation that occured with Jessica Lynch and another female in her unit. I have first hand knowlege of women that served in combat and I embrace them as fellow soldiers and sailors, they have proven they have the mettle to fight with men.

Nailzzz · Dec 5, 2003, 04:25 PM

The issue that has been neglected in this thread is not so much the female soldiers ability to physically compete with the male on the modern battlefied but the role the male plays in this much debated topic. I spent almost 12 years in the 75th Rgr regt and was med retired in 1990 due to wounds recieved in Dec of 89 when the US invaded Panama.Im of a different generation of soldier than the current warriors we have defending liberty.Im from a generation where the female was to be respected and defended.To place her in a direct combat role in a conventional combat unit IE armor ,infantry,spec ops, would endager lives. Before you blast me for being a woman basher allow me to explain.The normal American male born anytime after WW2 and up to the late 60s was brought up to defend the proclaimed (weaker sex).If you incorporate this attitude to the battlefield the mission no longer becomes the #1 priority. Defending the women of your unit becomes your stated objective.It has nothing to do with the physical capabilities of a female.Trust me on this one the amount of weight you can hump or your prowess at hand to hand combat doesnt win battles. If your more concerned with protecting women because Mom and Dad raised you from a young age that this was proper behaivor instincts kick in and thats what you will do if you confront a female in trouble on the battlefield.Ive noticed that the teens in alot of FPS forums tend to first flame a individuals mother or sisters sexual abilitiesfirst before they flame the individual. This was unacceptable behavior for anyone in the past and just not done in the circles I or those like me ran in.Long story short IMHO if a male soldier can concentrate on the enemy and not
protecting the women folk of his unit than she has every right to be there.I doubt that in the Army women will ever be allowed in the ranks of the grunts who hump the hills and eat the mud but the 21st century battlefiled will place them closer than ever.I couldnt trust myself to not hesitate to help a fallen American female soldier in the heat of battle and hesitation causes death on the battlefield not whats swinging between a soldiers legs....

GOG · Dec 5, 2003, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fallang_jeff
History is replete with examples of women that have fought and died bravely side by side with men, however in America, some groups are calling for an end to this, and petitioning political leaders to force the military to cut way back on women in support roles as well, citing the inevitable situation that occured with Jessica Lynch and another female in her unit. I have first hand knowlege of women that served in combat and I embrace them as fellow soldiers and sailors, they have proven they have the mettle to fight with men.

For once I have to agree with Jeff here

. The Russians had women as snipers and pilots in WWII and they did a really good job. However, women in special forces with a high physical factor is not so clever, I think. Maybe it's suitable in the American army, though they're meeting inferior resistance 99% of the time.

Nailzzz · Dec 5, 2003, 06:28 PM

For once I have to agree with Jeff here . The Russians had women as snipers and pilots in WWII and they did a really good job. However, women in special forces with a high physical factor is not so clever, I think. Maybe it's suitable in the American army, though they're meeting inferior resistance 99% of the time.

Are there any superior forces left to dispute your claims? Obviously being safe and protected in Sweden you have never faced the working end of an assualt rifle.You speak in generalities while the grunt speaks in life and death.
The days of hand to hand combat have been gone for 40 years. Your implication of females being okay for American Spec Ops I find quite insulting and a very typical Euro comment.The American grunt has defeated every enemy he has confronted on the battlefield since 1776.The US military wasnt defeated in Korea or Vietnam they were betrayed by their own political machine.They never left the battlefield in defeat.60 years ago you boneheads didnt have such high praise for mother Russia or how it fought its wars..thats right you have no need for the brash arrogant Americans anymore. We obviously had nothing to do with there being no superior military resistance. Im still attempting to recall where the fantastic Swedish SF school is located..I base my opinions on being a graduate of various inferior American SF schools not the BBC or whatever Euro anti propaganda news media or Internet news source you gain your intellect from...GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

GOG · Dec 5, 2003, 06:42 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nailzzz
For once I have to agree with Jeff here . The Russians had women as snipers and pilots in WWII and they did a really good job. However, women in special forces with a high physical factor is not so clever, I think. Maybe it's suitable in the American army, though they're meeting inferior resistance 99% of the time.

Are there any superior forces left to dispute your claims? Obviously being safe and protected in Sweden you have never faced the working end of an assualt rifle.You speak in generalities while the grunt speaks in life and death.
The days of hand to hand combat have been gone for 40 years. Your implication of females being okay for American Spec Ops I find quite insulting and a very typical Euro comment.The American grunt has defeated every enemy he has confronted on the battlefield since 1776.The US military wasnt defeated in Korea or Vietnam they were betrayed by their own political machine.They never left the battlefield in defeat.60 years ago you boneheads didnt have such high praise for mother Russia or how it fought its wars..thats right you have no need for the brash arrogant Americans anymore. We obviously had nothing to do with there being no superior military resistance. Im still attempting to recall where the fantastic Swedish SF school is located..I base my opinions on being a graduate of various inferior American SF schools not the BBC or whatever Euro anti propaganda news media or Internet news source you gain your intellect from...GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Hehe, if your SF were betrayed by your own politicians all the way - maybe it's time to turn the assault rifles the other way?

@/2ct!< · Dec 6, 2003, 06:26 AM

Im really undecided on the draft part... I really dont think anyone should be part of the draft, so I guess women shouldnt be either. If they want to sign up, thats fine with me.

BluntmaN · Dec 7, 2003, 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Nailzzz
The issue that has been neglected in this thread is not so much the female soldiers ability to physically compete with the male on the modern battlefied but the role the male plays in this much debated topic. I spent almost 12 years in the 75th Rgr regt and was med retired in 1990 due to wounds recieved in Dec of 89 when the US invaded Panama.Im of a different generation of soldier than the current warriors we have defending liberty.Im from a generation where the female was to be respected and defended.To place her in a direct combat role in a conventional combat unit IE armor ,infantry,spec ops, would endager lives. Before you blast me for being a woman basher allow me to explain.The normal American male born anytime after WW2 and up to the late 60s was brought up to defend the proclaimed (weaker sex).If you incorporate this attitude to the battlefield the mission no longer becomes the #1 priority. Defending the women of your unit becomes your stated objective.It has nothing to do with the physical capabilities of a female.Trust me on this one the amount of weight you can hump or your prowess at hand to hand combat doesnt win battles. If your more concerned with protecting women because Mom and Dad raised you from a young age that this was proper behaivor instincts kick in and thats what you will do if you confront a female in trouble on the battlefield.Ive noticed that the teens in alot of FPS forums tend to first flame a individuals mother or sisters sexual abilitiesfirst before they flame the individual. This was unacceptable behavior for anyone in the past and just not done in the circles I or those like me ran in.Long story short IMHO if a male soldier can concentrate on the enemy and not
protecting the women folk of his unit than she has every right to be there.I doubt that in the Army women will ever be allowed in the ranks of the grunts who hump the hills and eat the mud but the 21st century battlefiled will place them closer than ever.I couldnt trust myself to not hesitate to help a fallen American female soldier in the heat of battle and hesitation causes death on the battlefield not whats swinging between a soldiers legs....

Good point there but let me ask you one thing. In todays world are women equal or not? Since they are equal to men they should be allowed into combat. There are many armies out there that deployed women as soldiers (not to mention kids) and have won battles. It is up to the army to train the soldiers to be effective killing machines at all times with women present or not. A woman is not a mystical creature it used to be they dont like flowers anymore they like fast cars, they dont sit at home waiting for the king they are in control so let them fight if they want to. People talk about the army as if it is a man's club that should not take gays or women f@ck that the army has only one primary objective kill the enemy or make them run this is it; no other job in reality it is not a swish army knife they are trained killers so what difference does it make?

bird chest · Dec 16, 2003, 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by BluntmaN
Good point there but let me ask you one thing. In todays world are women equal or not? Since they are equal to men they should be allowed into combat. There are many armies out there that deployed women as soldiers (not to mention kids) and have won battles. It is up to the army to train the soldiers to be effective killing machines at all times with women present or not. A woman is not a mystical creature it used to be they dont like flowers anymore they like fast cars, they dont sit at home waiting for the king they are in control so let them fight if they want to. People talk about the army as if it is a man's club that should not take gays or women f@ck that the army has only one primary objective kill the enemy or make them run this is it; no other job in reality it is not a swish army knife they are trained killers so what difference does it make?

I do not want to sound sexist but women in physical speed and strength are inferior to men. I just would like to add in that they are superior in many other things for example they live longer. I would say if they can do what a man can do then put them in but the truth is the military is not a place for social engineering. I am in the army and have to say there are some dumb people in the military! There are a lot of things that guys might do in the field that they should not if women were there. Earlier somone said men might try and protect women on the field and that is bad!!! Also what would opposing armies do to women not something I would wish upon my worst enemy. Men and womne could also become attached on the field and if either one dies often times people will go into a blind rage and this is not a good idea either infact it is bad. What we have right now works why mess with it? Why take the chance of something going wrong?

Davidgt · Jan 2, 2004, 02:16 AM

Being former military I can say that no a woman shouldnt be in frontline combat. Weman can do tons of things but on the battle field a womans body cant handle it. I remember in AIT most the females ended up with shin splints ( fractures) just from PT. That just running around and execurize

Falstaff · Jan 2, 2004, 02:58 AM

I went through field medical school in 1977, and we had nearly half the class as women. I went to IRAQ with 12, and we launched missles with a tactical officer that was female. She commands a ship now. but in combat, I know from experience, if we had women when our helo was shot down, we would have probably taken a disasterous course of action because the flight crew was injured. Had I had to carry two injured women, pehaps we would have been too patient, too concerned for their welfare. it would have slowed us down. Not because I was that concerned, but when it comes to leaving a terribly injured man to die and sacrifice himself for the benefit of the unit, the men would probably try to preserve the females out of a sense of duty and honor...
misguided honor.

Davidgt · Jan 2, 2004, 06:23 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by fallang_jeff
I went through field medical school in 1977, and we had nearly half the class as women. I went to IRAQ with 12, and we launched missles with a tactical officer that was female. She commands a ship now. but in combat, I know from experience, if we had women when our helo was shot down, we would have probably taken a disasterous course of action because the flight crew was injured. Had I had to carry two injured women, pehaps we would have been too patient, too concerned for their welfare. it would have slowed us down. Not because I was that concerned, but when it comes to leaving a terribly injured man to die and sacrifice himself for the benefit of the unit, the men would probably try to preserve the females out of a sense of duty and honor...
misguided honor.

great point! I remeber once in the field one of the females got injured and they were cs gassing us. Man that shit sucks lol. I felt it was my duty to help her walk cause there was know way should have made it I even put on her mask for her and helped her clear it.

Falstaff · Jan 4, 2004, 01:05 PM

Can women perform along with men in combat, or independently, of course they can, but can our judeo/christian society accept the sacrifices of women made in combat, Can we absorb the terribly liability of women dying in combat. And the horrors of women and men in the frontlines, History has perhaps forgotten the fantastic efforts of women in combat. But from my own personal experience, they can muster a great deal of strength when the moment calls for it, and die as well as men in battle.

View Poll Results: should women serve in combat
Yes, and endure the same hardships as men	18	62.07%
No, restrict them to remote support duties	6	20.69%
Remove women from the military completely	1	3.45%
indifferent, this the military's problem, let them work it out	4	13.79%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 29. This poll is closed

Dec 5, 2003, 07:11 AM	Thread Starter #4
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	I feel that if they volunteer, and take the oath, they should endure as well, but public sentiment is deeply divided on the subject, and the Israeli military is more polorized too, __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Dec 5, 2003, 08:44 AM	#6
ToshiroOC Unbiased. Join Date: Jun 2002 Posts: 4,812 Rep Power: 0	If a woman can stand her own next to a man in the battlefield, and wants to be there, then she belongs there. I don't really know about the draft - I think the women who want to be there will join up anyway nowadays, and those who don't want to be on the battlefield are the ones you wouldn't want on the battlefield anyway. Call me old fashioned, but I wouldn't mind joining up if it meant that a woman didn't have to fight in my place. __________________ [img][/img] [color=White]Peace be with you, Joe.[/color] Driverheaven Staff Member (Supermoderator)

Dec 5, 2003, 09:58 AM	#7
UberLord A Legend in Underwear Join Date: May 2002 Location: Unknown Posts: 5,255 Rep Power: 0	I think Tosh has this one right __________________ Gentoo Linux - Developer (baselayout) Read my blog "I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours." Stephen Roberts

Dec 5, 2003, 12:26 PM	#9
wertret Still watching... Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Orihuela (Spain) Posts: 1,560 Rep Power: 0	I'm sure women can be exceptional warriors (i have to deal with one everyday) and they deserve the right to fight for their country. __________________ "They who dream by day are cognizant of many things which escape those who dream only by night."

Dec 5, 2003, 05:29 AM	#1
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	Women in combat after the terrible affair in IRAQ with the young soldiers who were captured and ultimately rescued, it appears the debate over women in combat is growing stronger, and it is definitely against women in the combat role for the immediate future. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Dec 5, 2003, 06:26 AM	#2
kuja DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: May 2003 Posts: 45 Rep Power: 0	Jessica Lynch? I think that was a result of general incompetence within her unit, rather than being restricted to incompetent women.

Dec 5, 2003, 07:00 AM	#3
~~Optimummind~~ Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Orange, California Posts: 632 Rep Power: 0	I think it's fair that women go out to combat too. It would be hypocritical of them to demand equal rights and more freedom in everything except for when it comes to mandatory military service during times of necessity. The government should have them sign up for Selective Service like all U.S. men.

Dec 5, 2003, 12:16 PM	#8
~~Optimummind~~ Banned Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Orange, California Posts: 632 Rep Power: 0	I know a few women who could probably beat me one-on-one. Or, rather, beat me by sitting on me and swinging their trunk-like arms.

Dec 5, 2003, 01:57 PM	Thread Starter #10
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	History is replete with examples of women that have fought and died bravely side by side with men, however in America, some groups are calling for an end to this, and petitioning political leaders to force the military to cut way back on women in support roles as well, citing the inevitable situation that occured with Jessica Lynch and another female in her unit. I have first hand knowlege of women that served in combat and I embrace them as fellow soldiers and sailors, they have proven they have the mettle to fight with men. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Dec 5, 2003, 04:25 PM	#11
Nailzzz DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 2 Rep Power: 0	The issue that has been neglected in this thread is not so much the female soldiers ability to physically compete with the male on the modern battlefied but the role the male plays in this much debated topic. I spent almost 12 years in the 75th Rgr regt and was med retired in 1990 due to wounds recieved in Dec of 89 when the US invaded Panama.Im of a different generation of soldier than the current warriors we have defending liberty.Im from a generation where the female was to be respected and defended.To place her in a direct combat role in a conventional combat unit IE armor ,infantry,spec ops, would endager lives. Before you blast me for being a woman basher allow me to explain.The normal American male born anytime after WW2 and up to the late 60s was brought up to defend the proclaimed (weaker sex).If you incorporate this attitude to the battlefield the mission no longer becomes the #1 priority. Defending the women of your unit becomes your stated objective.It has nothing to do with the physical capabilities of a female.Trust me on this one the amount of weight you can hump or your prowess at hand to hand combat doesnt win battles. If your more concerned with protecting women because Mom and Dad raised you from a young age that this was proper behaivor instincts kick in and thats what you will do if you confront a female in trouble on the battlefield.Ive noticed that the teens in alot of FPS forums tend to first flame a individuals mother or sisters sexual abilitiesfirst before they flame the individual. This was unacceptable behavior for anyone in the past and just not done in the circles I or those like me ran in.Long story short IMHO if a male soldier can concentrate on the enemy and not protecting the women folk of his unit than she has every right to be there.I doubt that in the Army women will ever be allowed in the ranks of the grunts who hump the hills and eat the mud but the 21st century battlefiled will place them closer than ever.I couldnt trust myself to not hesitate to help a fallen American female soldier in the heat of battle and hesitation causes death on the battlefield not whats swinging between a soldiers legs....

Dec 5, 2003, 06:28 PM	#13
Nailzzz DriverHeaven Newbie Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 2 Rep Power: 0	For once I have to agree with Jeff here . The Russians had women as snipers and pilots in WWII and they did a really good job. However, women in special forces with a high physical factor is not so clever, I think. Maybe it's suitable in the American army, though they're meeting inferior resistance 99% of the time. Are there any superior forces left to dispute your claims? Obviously being safe and protected in Sweden you have never faced the working end of an assualt rifle.You speak in generalities while the grunt speaks in life and death. The days of hand to hand combat have been gone for 40 years. Your implication of females being okay for American Spec Ops I find quite insulting and a very typical Euro comment.The American grunt has defeated every enemy he has confronted on the battlefield since 1776.The US military wasnt defeated in Korea or Vietnam they were betrayed by their own political machine.They never left the battlefield in defeat.60 years ago you boneheads didnt have such high praise for mother Russia or how it fought its wars..thats right you have no need for the brash arrogant Americans anymore. We obviously had nothing to do with there being no superior military resistance. Im still attempting to recall where the fantastic Swedish SF school is located..I base my opinions on being a graduate of various inferior American SF schools not the BBC or whatever Euro anti propaganda news media or Internet news source you gain your intellect from...GRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

Dec 6, 2003, 06:26 AM	#15
@/2ct!< HardwareHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Not Vegas, anymore :( Posts: 1,391 Rep Power: 0	Im really undecided on the draft part... I really dont think anyone should be part of the draft, so I guess women shouldnt be either. If they want to sign up, thats fine with me. __________________

Jan 2, 2004, 02:16 AM	#18
Davidgt Car Audio Guy Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Atlanta, Ga Posts: 499 Rep Power: 0	Being former military I can say that no a woman shouldnt be in frontline combat. Weman can do tons of things but on the battle field a womans body cant handle it. I remember in AIT most the females ended up with shin splints ( fractures) just from PT. That just running around and execurize __________________ Sales/Support Manager Taraautosound.com wonderful sig by tastyweat

Jan 2, 2004, 02:58 AM	Thread Starter #19
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	I went through field medical school in 1977, and we had nearly half the class as women. I went to IRAQ with 12, and we launched missles with a tactical officer that was female. She commands a ship now. but in combat, I know from experience, if we had women when our helo was shot down, we would have probably taken a disasterous course of action because the flight crew was injured. Had I had to carry two injured women, pehaps we would have been too patient, too concerned for their welfare. it would have slowed us down. Not because I was that concerned, but when it comes to leaving a terribly injured man to die and sacrifice himself for the benefit of the unit, the men would probably try to preserve the females out of a sense of duty and honor... misguided honor. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jan 4, 2004, 01:05 PM	Thread Starter #21
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	Can women perform along with men in combat, or independently, of course they can, but can our judeo/christian society accept the sacrifices of women made in combat, Can we absorb the terribly liability of women dying in combat. And the horrors of women and men in the frontlines, History has perhaps forgotten the fantastic efforts of women in combat. But from my own personal experience, they can muster a great deal of strength when the moment calls for it, and die as well as men in battle. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."