E-mail updates
Follow on Twitter
Subscribe to RSSWomen who rode into Iraq during the 2003 Coalition invasion or who withstood on-base mortar attacks that killed other U.S. troops raucously cheered news of the impending lift of the female-combat ban, shouting the same three spirited words.
“It’s about time!” said Laura Cannon, a 2001 West Point graduate who rolled into Iraq with the Army’s 3rd Infantry Division, spending seven months there. “Women have been on the ‘front lines,’ per se, for years. Now they're getting credit and authorization that is long overdue. The landscape of combat has changed so much that front lines are ambiguous, and frankly, what I believe to be an obsolete concept.”
“Yes!” added Julie Weckerlein, a Air Force veteran who served in Afghanistan and Iraq. In 2007, she sought cover and was not far from Army Sgt. Trista Moretti, 27, who was killed when mortars exploded on their base in Nasir Lafitah, Iraq. “There is definitely a sense of ‘it's about time.'
“This decision means the military is finally removing that useless ‘attached, but not assigned’ verbiage that meant absolutely nothing on the field, with the boots on the ground,” she added. Weckerlein worked as an Air Force combat correspondent, traveling throughout Iraq and Afghanistan, documenting the missions of Air Force joint terminal air controllers and Army infantry soldiers at remote provincial reconstruction team locations and at forward operating bases. In other words, she shadowed military men who were doing “male only” jobs.
Women now compose about 15 percent of the U.S. armed forces.
Placing American women in combat is “a great idea,” especially because "my gosh, women have served in the military since World War I," said Terri Kaas, an Air Force veteran who spent time in Bahrain and Germany.
“Women in the military should be able to do the same jobs as men, whatever the mission is. Though the military has desegregated, women are still treated differently,” in part because they have been held back from combat, Kaas said.
“I know, you still hear: 'It’s a man’s military.' But we are all service members,” she added. “Look at the Marine Corps — they have equal standards of fitness for both genders. If the men can’t respect women for the job they’re doing maybe these men shouldn’t be in the military.”
In fact, argued Cannon, the policy and political path is now clear for Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta to eliminate “gender-based restrictions on military jobs and career paths altogether.”
“I think every branch should have its own set of criteria and physical requirements, instead of the basic, existing standards that say: men need to do this and women need to do that,” Cannon added.
“Pilots in the aviation branch certainly don't need to physically perform to the same levels as that of infantrymen. So have new standards applicable to every job. Then, if a woman can achieve all of the requirements necessary to enter the infantry — by all means — let her!”
Related: Defense chief Panetta to clear women for combat roles
Leave a Comment:
i think the easiest way to solve this is to have complete female combat units to study their effectiveness i don't think ones ability to withstand child birth is anything pertinent to the conversation or is their monthly worthy of this study either
Good thing what you think doesn't matter. Women are already on the frontlines. The question isn't even if they should fight, because they're already dieing. The question is if they should get credit for it.
You wouldn't have enough experienced women to form a female-only combat unit that would accurately assess their viability in combat. This would actually probably be the most difficult, inefficient, and unreliable way to determine effectiveness.
CWO 2,
First thank you for your service, second I think that's a bad idea because of the emotional draw to protect the women from themselves as well as the enemy. Combat is not a place to send "second string" players and I'm sorry to all those feminists who disagree but it is as it is. You send women to fight they will lose, because a Man will not surrender under any circumstance to a woman.
Flame.
kittstar if a chief warrant officers opinion (Oh, sorry that means he's in the military) doesn't matter then why do you think yours would????????????
No one persons opinion matters, it's the collective of opinions that make a democracy. Welcome to the America?
Kitt; we live in a republic, that means every ones opinion matters..... The collective thing is the socialist thing so now we definitely understand you better!!!!
You are a progressive liberal with a socialist mentality that you think all should be required to abide by, that means you are not a true American so your opinion does not matter!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I had to come back to this! After thinking about these posts most of the women who REALLY served don't particularly like the idea. One did have some exposure to combat situations but I don't think she is thinking it all the way through, but who am I to say. Then there's the spoiled troll that has NEVER served and throws insults at combat veterans calling them names, ie. pizza and others. I'm not going to get worked up as I was, especially over some snot nosed, opinionated kittstar who has NEVER served and will NEVER serve. So, kittstar I was man enough to apologize I suggest you apologize to those on here who have served, know first hand what combat is like, and have the RIGHT to express an opinion about horrors that YOU have never seen. Talk is cheap and you talk way too much about something you know nothing about.
No, like I said I've never served in the military but I know how things go down. And i have volentered with CCS and seen villages in africa burned, I've had my life threatened by the people we were there to help. Don't dictate to me about anything because you don't know @!$%# about me.
The fact is women are in the military in front line combat situations and they get no credit for combat, it's wrong and you're still an idiot. Go @!$%# yourself.
Yeah, you're right maybe I am an idiot even for talking to you. But, you little snot nosed brat. You insulted a combat veteran who is a double amputee, just to prove some little BS that you know nothing about. You insult those women who have and still are serving! You don't even realize it. Those women who died were serving their country and by God, using them as examples to further your little civilian cause of some equal rights crap won't bring a one of them back and won't lessen the load on their grieving families. You keep throwing your crap out there and insulting people who have served but it doesn't make you look any better. You're telling me about women dying you brat. I went to one of the funerals when I was at the 101st,it wasn't combat but she was dead and I knew her so what are you saying. Her death meant less because she wasn't KIA??? Wasn't called a front line combatant? You need to think about this stuff. And, you are wrong there are NO WOMEN in true front line operations that is what this whole story is about. There are plenty who have served and been involved in combat like the pilots, the nurses, medics, water purification people, etc. You saying they are diminished some how? No, they are NOT! Now go ahead and call me anything you like, I served just so you can enjoy those freedoms.
Face it drew, you just got REJECTED! :) Personally I don't care whether if they return or not just that are free to go if they wish.
Now, on the other hand. You are to be applauded for your service. You put your neck out there evidently and tried to make a difference and I applaud you for it. I hope you have a great life, and I hope you get to do all the things your heart desires. I wish you no ill will, you just ticked me off bad when you insulted that combat veteran. But, good for you for caring for women and hoping the best for them. Good for you! I mean that. I probably shouldn't have called you a snot nosed brat, but then again.......
Oh really? Look up Ashley White, and explain why even tho she was a special force lt who died on the front lines, she was still never eligible for a 5 stars promotion? That was in 2011. Your facts are wrong and you seem more clueless than I am. Atleast I admit I never served.
dahwat, I don't care if you think I got "rejected" I'm not trying to be accepted. I'm pointing out that a snot nosed brat insulted a combat veteran.
kittstar I could give two hoots what you think of me. I was a sergeant in the 101st Airborne and I'm proud of my service. Like I said, you are clueless and your little talk is just that. And, what kind of an idiotic question are you asking me about some poor Lt. who got killed not ever being able to make a 5 star promotion. I'll clue you in, because she is dead! She paid the ultimate sacrifice and how dare you use her as an example for your little midnight rant. And, you were the one that said "my sisters in arms"implying that you had served. Who cares? You're just not getting it, why don't you go back to insulting combat veterans who have been permanently injured so that you could be free to talk your crap.
dahwat, you really said you don't personally care if they return or not? You really said that? You're quit the piece of work! Wow! Just that they be allowed to go! Well, clueless number 2 they've been allowed to go for years. They died as nurses at Pearl Harbor and as nurses in Vietnam. Maybe you should spend less time watching reality TV and read up on a little history.
Kittstar,
Ashley was a cute little lady who provided support to SF, she shouldn't have been there. She would still be alive. We don't kill women, we don't put them in harms way. Men are designed to protect women. I don't understand a society that would not do so. This Country has lost it's moral foundation that which made it strong. I am saddened by what I have seen and knowing history what is the inevitable.
Oh please, some women don't want or need your stupid protection. Take that sexist chauvinistic crap back to the 60s where it belongs. The instinct for men to protect women was fine when the species was struggling for survival, but if you haven't noticed the population isn't at exactly at risk of running low anytime soon.
When I say allowed to go I meant allowed to fight on the frontlines. Nice job putting words into my mouth. And how am I a peice of work? Why should I care if they live or die? I don't know them and I'm not going to bother putting myself through the emotional stress of getting to know them just so I can feel bad when they die.
If they want to go and risk get their heads blown off then fine by me, heck I'll even support them in that endevour if that is their wish. Just don't expect me to be at their funerals.
Wow, you said why should I care if they live or die, but ask me why you're a piece of work. It's pretty obvious.
No it isnt. Give me one good reason why I should care if their own choice brought them to that fate. Life is uncaring and cruel why should I be any different? If you see the need to hurt yourself by getting close to these people just so that when they die you can feel bad then be my guest.
Kitt; showing more of your ignorance. There are already female generals with the rank of four stars even. You do not need to be in the front-line to become a Four Star General..... as a matter of fact it used to be if you went hard core special forces you could kiss your chances of ever becoming a General goodbye!!!!
Also the LT that you are talking about, she was not special forces!!!!! Sorry..... She was in a support role assigned to assist a special forces unit with support and nothing else..... Get your facts straight. That being said it is sad that she lost her life but if she had lived she had just a good a chance of becoming a General as any man, probably a better chance because she is a woman and the military is giving stars to them to try and make up for there not being very many women Generals!!!
Will women now have to obtain a Selective Service card and a draft status card as I had to in the '60s?
I believe in gender equality. I told my Step-Son years ago that if they re-instituted the draft I would drive him to Canada. I would do the same for my Step-Daughters. I would not have children I love fighting to preserve our oil interests. I served in the Army during a time when everyone risked combat because we had a draft system. I would feel much better about our country if we had a draft. So much more careful thought would go into any decision to send troops if some of those troops were the children of congressmen or billionaires or CEO's.
Obama knows what it's like to be treated differently because you're black so he was able to understand what it's like to be denied something because of your gender. I think that also helped him to come out in favor of gay marriage. In any case, I'm so glad we didn't get that stiff privileged old white male dufus Romney. You're off to a great start to your second term Obama. Keep it up.
Women were restricted from combat roles because of their physiological inferiority due to their gender. So with your logic above, are you inferring that the president was previously denied political office because he was indeed inferior in some capacity because he was black...? Or that gays weren't allowed to be married because they were indeed inferior in some capacity due to their sexual orientation...?
It's apples and oranges...
Physiologically inferior? What century are you from? No really, show me this scientific study that shows women are in ANY way inferior to men?
There are plenty of women who could meet the physical requirements but were still denied official combat roles and the resulting benefits (ie. promotions). Similarly, Obama has dealt with brain dead racists all his life who assumed he couldn't do X, Y or Z, or was X, Y, or Z because he was black. It's great to finally have a president who understands what it's like to be discriminated against.
You are now in first place for jerk of the year.
That would be you.
Yeah reasonable really? You and your little clueless friend don't have any idea. Neither of you served,neither of you know what combat is like, and both of you are basically clueless on what you are talking about. Women have been flying helicopters and jets for years, they died at pearl harbor as nurses, and in vietnam. They have served with distinction and they don't need some paper shuffle to prove that distinction. It's a ploy from the suits in DC and it works well on people like you. You don't even recognize the distinction and sacrifices women have already made, and both of you are insulting little brats. But we served so you can have your little midnight cause and rant so have at it. Hope when you grow up a bit you have some respect for those who did serve, and sacrificed who you have both repeatedly insulted.
I don't know if I would even need to rely on a medical study for this...merely observational and anecdotal evidence would be sufficient for most rational minds. For example, we could take the area of professional athletics, since it is basically a pure test of physiological capability. Why don't women compete with men...?
I am not aware of a single sport in which women can attain a level of ability compared to that of a man in that class. Even in sports which are traditionally known as female-dominated sports (figure skating and gymnastics comes to mind), men due to their physiological superiority are simply stronger and better than their female counterparts.
Perhaps it's the semantics of the term "inferior" which causes distress...it certainly can come with a very derogatory tone, even when not intended...
But we know you need combat arms for some promotions in the military and even tho women are in combat situations they weren't getting that credit. How can you argue with such basic logic? Are you really that sexist?
reasonable; why not show offf your bigotry and hatred while you are at it.... As a matter of fact obama is a spoiled white and half black man. He only claimed the black so he could get the special priviliges that come with it.... The Gay thing is him giving back to those who bribed him and helped him get elected, nothing else. Haven't you heard how he truly felt about gays prior to his needing them to get elected??? Do some research and look up obamas stance on gays in 2007....
Typical lib moron~~~~~~
well to be honest, yes there is more of a chance for them to be raped. However, they now that going in. As i have said before ill say again. If you can pull my ass out of the fire when i am shot and get me to safty ANd you can hold the line with me and not break and retreat. Then by all means fight by my side. If not then well dont go combat arms. As far as i care they need to be able to do this:
1. can they lift an average person with combat gear and get him or her out of combat?
2. Can they hold the line and not run?
3. can they put the lives of others before their own life?
If yes to all of these then go ahead and be combat arms.
Be careful what you ask for ladies, you just might get your wish. More power to them as long as the physical/emotional standards for these combat positions remain unchanged. My experience with these things, it eventually tends to turn into a mandated quota system for commanders to meet. When quotas can't be met, standards get lowered. It's a fact of life.
You are very correct. I wonder how much of this is politically motivated? Do females really want to go into combat or is it just a way to fill quotas becuase to many of the men are banged up, suffereing from PTSD or not fit to return to duty and using females is the only resort? I worked among Marines and I have a hard time recalling any female rejoicing at the idea of deploying, much more to be put in a frontilne combat situation...it just does not make sense to me.
Combat comes with risks and rewards. Combat experience helps to move you up the ranks. Why don't you ask why any man goes into combat under your logic?
Reasonable; you just proved more of your ignorance. Woman move up in rank just like men do and they make General just like men do.... There are Four Star women Generals and all others already!
Men go into combat because they are ordered to, the same with women. Women have been going into combat for years and some have combat jobs, the issue is that they were not allowed into the spec ops or hard core combat positions and that is all. Now they will possibly get to but, that is if they can pass and if they can't will the standards be dropped? If so then they are no longer special forces!!!!!!!
Reasonable, it is evident that you never served in the military. Women are not promoted on the basis of combat experience. The Commandant of the Marine Corps doesn't even have a combat action ribbon, yet he is the highest ranking officer in the Corps. Just take your liberal uneducated self somewhere else.
I've worked very closley with Marines for several years in Camp Lejeune as a sick call medic. Based on my opinion from being stationed there for ten years, I have seen a lot of women motivated to deploy and upon their return most wished they wouldn't have volunteered to go into combat- and we are not talking frontline combat here. There are the ones who are very focused on what they do- but believe me they are few and far in between and usually more senior in rank. I see many female Marines come in because of trivial matters such as hip pain, pain in the toe, wrist pain and headaches! While the culture of the military seems to coddle females men are told to suck it up. Trust me, these women are not the G.I. Janes that you civillians who are commenting have in mind, many females in the Corps nowadays are very young and immature, which probably explains their passion to serve on the frontlines. I am all for equal rights, but I've been around boot campers in School of Infantry, and I would seriously worry if one of these females had to watch my back.
You failed to demonstrate how they are any worse than the male marines.
Do you think maybe these green soldiers joined because they had the impression they wouldn't see combat? Part of the problem is the military does allow women in combat situations but it doesn't give them credit and it leads some women into thinking they'll never see combat so they join for an easy ride. SUPRISE!
And you failed to read and comprehend what I wrote. Contrary to what is reported, most of the females I've worked with in School of Infantry get injured easily due to training routines and are always in sick call. I gather you don't know what sick call is, but this is a place where Marines/Sailors/Soldiers go when they are injurred. If you want a very immature person who can barely make it through training to have your back, then you clearly do not understand the dynamics of what I'm talking about. Not to mention other readiness issues that come with deploying females...as I said, if one is a civillian, and have not been around some of these female Marines then I don't expect you to understand why this is not the greatest idea. But everyone has his or her own ideas and opinions and we can agree to disagree on this one.
Kittstar is now ready to be Commanding the Joint Chiefs!!!!
Kittstar that is a very good point you brought up!! A lot of young men and women who join the military see it as a ticket to get away from living under mom and dad's roof after graduating high school. They see the "cool" side of signing up, such as gaining independence, getting a pay check and marrying their high school sweetheart; thanks to the recruiters who sell them the sweet side of serving without the bitter. When it comes to combat, for some that's another story. I have seen people fake all sorts of aches and symptoms do avoid deployments, there are some who do get a rude awakening when reality hits and they realize that what they've signed up for is no joke. But the ones with this mentality seldom make it past the four year enlistment mark.
They also break under combat and thats one of the biggest liabilities to soldiers in the field. I can't see any harm coming from giving women combat credit, they're already in danger just by being deployed. Even com officers are at some risk. I've heard them talk about brushes with combat before.
I agree with what you're saying, if they see combat, then they deserve the credit.
The world is laughing at the united states military. Gays and now women, what's next? kids?
Better than brain dead idiots.
Well reasonable speaking of brain dead idiots, guess you won't have to be worrying about combat anytime too soon.
They actually have kids in some militarys. Child soldiers are amoung the meanest nastiest little mother @!$%#ers you will ever lay eyes upon. Imagine stuff that looks like it belongs in the congo coming out of a ten year old boy. Imagine him laughing as he cuts out your eyes or removes your hands. Sound pleasent?
That's Africa.
There are one or two things I don't understand about this new policy.
Since women now can be in the combat arms does that mean they are subject to be ordered to be tankers, infantry soldiers or artillerists as the men soldiers are and have always been? Even with an all-volunteer military, the armed forces are not a democracy. There are those who give orders, those who take orders though many do both.
I'd also like to hear how enlisted women, not women officers, are greeting this new "equality". Not so enthusiastically, I suspect.
It's completely subjective. If they joined under the impression they wouldn't see combat they're not happy about it and they shouldn't be there anyway because it makes them a liability. If they joined for a career they're happy about it because now they can get the same combat credit and promotions as the men. They're already in combat situations and dieing on the front lines they're just not getting credit. Look up Ashley White. The fact is if you're deployed in the military, you could see combat. It doesn't matter what your job is.
From my understanding, just in the Marine Corps, women are still barred from the combat arms as their primary MOS. However, they are now allowed to serve within combat arms units in a limited number of combat service support fields to include admin, logistics, intelligence, logistics, supply, communications, etc. They will not be infantrymen, tankers, artillerymen, or trackers but now have the opportunity to serve in those units. And from what I've seen at this point in time, it's on an experimental, voluntary basis.
And, how many of these women have you personally spoken with kittstar????
Well said. When I read the news I was thinking to myself that this may deter many women from joining the Corps, as opposed to enlisting.
Are you familiar with the term behavioral analysis? Because I have a behavioral and analytical thinking degree. It basically means I understand how people think, I also doubt you've ever served in the military, otherwise you'd understand why this whole credit for combat thing is such a big deal. So give it up Drew.
Where'd you get that degree Kittstar? What is it called on your the diploma? Can you get a job with it? Name the University or College that gives that kind of degree in thinkings. There are millions who need to enroll.
Clemson University, Behavioral Science, and with criminal psychology it can lead to a nice job in criminal profiling.
So this change is more apparent than real, a way for that 15 percent to draw combat pay or get their ticket punched (officers) without actually getting shot at?
Great Kittstar. Clemson has several good programs. Looking at your description I'm guessing you have or are working on a BS degree with a technical emphasis in law and criminal justice or something similar. That's only the ground level in psychology. To be classified as a bona fide psychologist you'd need one of the two PhDs offered at Clemson. It's really difficult getting paid on a professional level without a PhD. Even with a Masters (MS) in psychology you still have a long way to go and you're not there yet. You seem to know just enough to be very confident in your opinions. That's not really science at it's best and psychology at its best is still a soft science. But I don't begrudge you this pleasure after what you must have had to pay for your education (and are still paying I imagine). Yes it can lead to a nice job in criminal profiling but don't spend your money before you get your first check. You most likely may be looking at a long road of additional training ahead. You must know that the military has money to pay off school debts. If you should decide to join the military they may have some jobs in the Psych area. There are several Psych units. Or you may prefer an MP job. But that's a combat type position. A young female MP I know earned a Silver Star in Iraq as an MP for heroism under fire. It can get "hot" out on the roads and trails. I personally know dozens of service men and women who were injured, shot, burned, blown out of vehicles, etc. That's the real world. But still, it's great to be young, proud and feisty. However, wisdom comes with experience. Stay safe and as sane as possible. Good luck.
Well said Johny, now we know that she is just a little girl wanting to act like she is an adult!!!! I wish they would make mandatory service for people like her that way she can practice what she is preaching.
As far as her supposed education i doubt it but more power to her if she is in the course of study she is claiming. Earlier she said she had traveled to Africa and was in I think the civilian core or something like that and now she is a DR of phsycology, Wow!
Kitt, that's a pretty good argument for keeping women out of combat zones entirely.
You have also to consider the reaction in civilian society to women coming back in body bags or coming back maimed or disfigured. Are we ready for that?
In Desert Storm a handful of women lost their lives or fell in enemy hands and it was a very big deal. Their names became household words for a time.
Some here feel the USA is already too quick to intervene with military force anywhere in the world. The likelihood of our women being killed or captured would certainly be a deterrent to any rapid deployment. Our leaders would have to consider carefully whether our vital interests really are at stake.
These comments are a good example of why we should never elect a republican again. Irrational bigots should have no say when it comes to policy.
Really, and how many tours of duty have you done there "reasonable" none I can assure you because you don't believe in free speech just your socialist liberal agenda.
Narrow minded people are awesome! They make those of us who can see beyond the basic layers of our own reality seem like total geniuses.
kittstar don't you have some disable combat veterans you should be hurling insults at here. For your "cause" That you don't even want to serve. Real good. Send them, let them get killed but I won't go, yep you and reasonable should hook up.
@ Drew
You should get help for your PTSD. You're displaying classic symptoms. I'm putting you on ignore now.
How much do you get paid for your ranting and whining Reasonable. George Soros must be scraping the bottom of the barrel if he hires neo-facsists to defend his Progressive agenda on the net. I'd like to agree with you and your sidekick Kittstar on some points if you weren't so brain damaged obnoxious and foolishly arrogant, self-righteous an un-American.
Drew says he's a soldier but he's not, no soldier would be under the delusion that any role in a hostile deployment is safe or that any soldier shouldn't get full credit for combat. You can't deny women see combat in places like Afghanistan reguardless of their role, so why shouldn't they get full credit? He's no soldier I can almost guarentee it, if he is he's an extremely sexist one, or the dumbest grunt on the planet.
Reasonable, you have the wrong username. You are the opposite of reasonable.
WHat a load of s***
What a load of Romney
I dont see what the big deal is anyway, who else do expect to make sandwiches on the frontline??
@ Drew
Your little rant isn't about me it's about you. You haven't addressed a single thing that I said in my comment. Frankly, your screed is a bit incomprehensible. I don't know who or what you are at this point but if you're bigoted against women then I don't have an ounce of respect for you regardless of your time in the military.
I am far from bigoted against women. I saw to it that my daughter took lots of martial arts, played about every sport there was. Was there when she beat a boy in a karate tournament and rooting her on. But I don't want her going into combat just so a bunch of politicians in DC can talk about how progressive they are. Women are serving with distinction right now, women have died serving with distinction in the military. This is nonsense from washington, period.
Reasonable, I have a few questions for you. Are you active duty? Do have a close friend or relative who is serving in the Corps? Have you been around our injured veterans? If you can't answer yes to any of these questions, then you are completely clueless about this topic. Are you considering signing up? Because you sure seem very passionate about this issue which you appear to know very little of. You can't hurl insults at veterans; the people who have been there and done that- this is real world stuff, things that you can't learn in a college classroom so while Drew may sound "incomprehensible", understand that he may be seeing things from a different but very real perspective.
Reasonable, I noticed you frequently call everyone with an opinion different than your own a "Bigot". I assume from your posts you believe all republicans/conservatives are bigots, but somehow your not because your a liberal. That's very distorted. According to Webster's the definition of BIGOT is : a person who is obstinately or intolerantly devoted to his or her own opinions and prejudices. So please explain why you are not a bigot.
His view is delusional at best, seems more malacious and jaded towards me spacifically. Facts are facts.
Women are in combat situations and they aren't getting combat credit.
&
It leads to the misconception that women have "safe" roles in the military.
These aren't positive things.
WHAT IS WRONG WITH YOU???????????? What's with this combat credit? If a person is in combat, they get combat pay, what other kind of credit do you want women to get? Do you want them to have their own TV show or their own newspaper column? Or do you want them to wear some kind of idenification saying they are a combat veteran? I never went to college, so I'm probably not as smart as you are, "book wise", but for common sense and living in the "real" world, I'm far superior than you are. You do know that being in combat isn't a reality TV show. Once you're in combat, you're there, you can't be saved and removed from the show during a commercial break. I find all of this happiness about females going into combat as a very sick and disturbing behavior.
Someone has to make sandwiches on the frontline people!!!
It is all hunky dory until they get Number 6 !
I'm a veteran and served under fire in a combat zone. I can tell you from first hand experience that not all women are cheering this PC move. But I can understand why some would since the lines between friend and foe are ambiguous in the kind of UN authorized police action/occuption/nation building semi-fiasco perpetrated in the Muslim world by our political leaders. Males who have questions about how this will be implemented and played out in the real world are thinking with the grey matter above rather than the PC sthinker on the bottom. The trouble occurs when a workable idea gets into the hands of the brass kissing, apple polishing PC crowd and a workable plan gets RPG'd with regulations written by monkeys typing randomly at a word processor and the Pentagon style lawyers that train them. To suggest that females seriously want males to leave the military if they are uneasy about the implimentation of this change is simply Media baiting of idiots and uninformed blockheads. In a WWII type conflict with a draft of young women and 1000s of casualties and many more 1000s wounded, maimed, tortured and raped, etc. it will hit the public in the solar plexus and go over like a HIV outbreak in a gay bathhouse. Meanwhile the children of the rich and famous and the politically connected will find ways to avoid this meat grinder and stay safe at home or underground in a taxpayer funded, government emergency shelter.
Wow! It's amazing how so many whiny men commenting here are so insecure and terrified of women who are anything other than an Ann Romney Stepford wife robot. The fear that men serving in combat are so pea-brained as to be incapable of focusing on doing their jobs in the presence of women is an old myth formerly used as an excuse for discriminating against women seeking professional jobs in offices, and is only an argument as to why men aren't fit to serve in the military (or to handle an office job). That old excuse that women shouldn't serve due to the risk of being captured by the enemy and raped is so transparent - if any of you making that claim actually gave a rat's ass about the issue, you would be doing something to stop the high rate of sexual violence against women in this country, but you're not, I guarantee it. And of course you overlook the fact that male POW's are just as likely to be raped. But seriously, why would you possibly care, when these women are willing to risk their lives to protect yours? Your argument is so paternalistic and patronizing; maybe you should be legally restricted from reading news articles about women's equality since it's not good for your blood pressure.
Moreover, it is well past the time that the military's institutionalized gender discrimination for employment, promotion, and compensation come to an end. Women have been systematically denied the opportunity to serve in combat postions and get paid the increased combat pay, as well as to obtain promotions and rise through the ranks to management positions, which is almost impossible to do without first serving in combat. So, now that women will now officially have the ability to serve in combat and consequently end up in high-level management, perhaps in 20 years the military's misogynistic culture that promotes rape of female servicemembers and punishes the victims for speaking up about it will be a thing of the past, or at least slightly decreased. And the whiny wussy men who are so threatened by women who are tougher than they could ever hope to be will have died off.
Lalaw; Well we now know you have never been in the military.... Women make rank just fine without being in combat. Look Up four star women generals, or any other general....Women already serve in combat and some even get combat pay for the position they hold which is a combat situation. Pilots are the biggest group of female combat units.
If you actually read the posts on here the majority said fine as long as the standards were not lowered so women can pass. It is already lowered so women can get into the military. Do some real research and quit listening to the lies!
Lalaw I don't drink or do drugs, but I want whatever you are taking or doing.
As an auto mechanic, one of the very best automatic transmission mechanics I've ever encountered was a woman. I don't question any woman's abilities, because I've seen them perform remarkably well in the real world. However, having said all of this, I question the wisdom regarding women in combat.
Rape, as a general guideline, shouldn't disqualify women in combat; as I've already seen the argument - and it's a good one - that men AND women are likely to be raped when captured. However, a male soldier's rape isn't as effective a psychological tool as a male soldier being forced to view the repeated rape of a female soldier. Whether we like it or not, chivalry is built into every - well, almost every, I should say - man's DNA. In knowing this, men are likely to give up vital intel if they're forced to watch the brutalization of their female counterparts in a POW situation.
I scream bullshi% sandwiches. I served in the military for many years. You put the strongest woman in the ring with me, and I'll beat her ass to a pulp. Offended? Well then you are, maybe you arn't on the side of letting women into combat.
Love to see you go 1 on 1 with Gina Carano.
The most ridiculous decision ever made! I did have respect for Panetta until now. Women do not belong in combat roles, let alone in the military at all, period! If they remain in our military they should be on separate bases only, and assigned only non-dangerous roles, of which there are many. They create all sorts of sexual related problems, they have special hygiene requirements, and worst of all, if they are captured by enemies whose attitudes towards women is negative to say the least, anything can and will happen to them while being contained. Stupid, stupid decision!
TED C. Are you serious man??
If women want to be in combat, then let them. I would not mind being in a foxhole with a female soldier. Besides, some women could be better than some wimpy men I have seen in combat. When I was in combat we carried excessive amount of gear and its not easy at all, not even for men, so good luck women. Ex-Sgt. Joe
"Cake and Eat it too". Now they get extra pay but when the it come down to it and combat comes around they claim they cant due to PMS or just get knocked up. I know I am a sexist pig right? Every job I have ever had that a woman had to do cause she could do it just as good wound up this way. "Hey we have a huge Drywall delivery job to do today. Oh I am cramping really bad." Its all a joke. Everyone wants equal treatment but not really. Hide and watch you will see.
They claim it is for sexist reasons they aren't allowed in combat but it will be sexist reasons they use to actually stay out of combat.
If they offically allow women for combat roles there would be no room for excuses. That's the whole point. Some women and men join thinking they'll have easy none combat roles, but combat can happen anywhere if they're deployed. They want to reduce the number of soldiers breaking under fire do to misconceptions of "safe" combat roles.
Kittstar-2720691
Women have no business in combat. They can't cut the mustard. The physical strength and endurance test requirements are lowered because they are WEAK!. Let them do what they are good at.. meddling in other peoples affairs. ha ha
The two main arguments feminists advance for women to be allowed in combat are:
There are also significant arguments against putting women in combat as well—arguments that are far weightier than the above ones. However, in our culture the rights of women are increasingly put above the importance of human life (this can be seen most horribly in abortion). Therefore, feminists may shake off these arguments with their illogic and emotional fury by stating that their right to be in combat outweighs the damage they do to military readiness and fighting strength. However, the arguments must still be put forth:
Therefore, it is clear that mindless feminist ideology is inflicting enormous damage on the readiness and fighting capability of the armed forces of the United States. Every other career is open to women. There is no reason why access to combat roles, for which they are not suited, has to be open as well. But political intimidation by radical feminists is so powerful that there seems little prospect that the continuing feminization of the U.S. military can be reversed. At least not until some engagements are lost, or won at unacceptably high costs, and women and the men who tried to protect them being coming back in great numbers in body bags.
Don't even need to read it to know this guys a jaded poster, just look at the name.
LOL!!! And this is the common mindset and attitude that females have to put up with in the Marine Corps on a daily basis, so kudos to the gals who work with these tools!
Great comment. I certainly think there's a lack of public awareness or simply selectively refusing to accept certain realities because it runs counter to someone's ego...
I say let them serve in combat. That's one way to thin out the herd.
It is all politically correct until they get number 6 !