Women in military

I respect what you're saying Assari, but I think this whole gender thing is getting a little ridiculous. Women are just as capable as men, should be treated no differently, and if a woman wants to serve her country in the military then let her do it.

Here are the problems with women in combat Harley....

1-Women, on the whole, are weaker and not as durable as men. I would be ok with the theory of women in combat ONLY if they are held to the exact same standards as men, and those standards are not lowered at all from their current levels.

2-That said, even though in theory it sounds ok to have women in combat if they can do the same things as a man; the reality is that women have periods; are not as aggressive as men; and, in a combat situation, a man might do more to risk himself to help a woman out than he would a man. There is also the whole sex aspect of women in combat. We all know that if a men and women are together alone, there's gonna be hooking up, and that sort of thing can put missions at risk
 
I respect what you're saying Assari, but I think this whole gender thing is getting a little ridiculous. Women are just as capable as men, should be treated no differently

Oh my goodness...

Well, it is my fault that the readers get the wrong idea.

My intentation is not to say that the female soldiers would be treated differently, or that they would be unable in any way.

I was trying to say that it is sad if women think of war as a heroic thing because it is not.

In my view national defense is morally acceptable thing, but if someone goes to war because of money then I think it's wrong reason.
 

bahodeme

Closed Account
Oh my goodness...

Well, it is my fault that the readers get the wrong idea.

My intentation is not to say that the female soldiers would be treated differently, or that they would be unable in any way.

I was trying to say that it is sad if women think of war as a heroic thing because it is not.

In my view national defense is morally acceptable thing, but if someone goes to war because of money then I think it's wrong reason.
I think there were two groups when I was in. One group thought that during the cold war both sides were not too keen on mutually destroying each other. The other group was tired of practicing and wanted to fight. A lot of times war is romantized. It is until someone you know has died or is permanently injured. What has happened previously in the U.S. is promotions were easier to attain in combat positions. Since women were not placed in combat positions, it was harder to move into positions of authority, thus being able to change policy. Also think if you were a pilot, all the "wow factor" planes are designed for combat. The same goes for ships.
 
Here are the problems with women in combat Harley....

1-Women, on the whole, are weaker and not as durable as men. I would be ok with the theory of women in combat ONLY if they are held to the exact same standards as men, and those standards are not lowered at all from their current levels.

2-That said, even though in theory it sounds ok to have women in combat if they can do the same things as a man; the reality is that women have periods; are not as aggressive as men; and, in a combat situation, a man might do more to risk himself to help a woman out than he would a man. There is also the whole sex aspect of women in combat. We all know that if a men and women are together alone, there's gonna be hooking up, and that sort of thing can put missions at risk

1. Yes, there're jobs in the military where you will not see many women doing like 11 Charlie, Infantry mortarman and 13 Bravo, Cannon crew member. Those jobs are extremely phyiscal jobs and jobs like that may stay closed to women.

2. Many women have already been in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. In many cases, insurgents usually will not target combat units because of the fire those units have, so they will support units that women were assigned. You can never tell who will freeze up in combat. Most of troops are highly disciplined, but hookups could be a problem.
 
Zolf doesnt really have a problem with women being given the same opprotunities as men

The battlefield tho is a sacred place and should be for men and men alone

Other than that I got no problems with a woman being CEO of CSX or Intel or whaterver.
 
1. Yes, there're jobs in the military where you will not see many women doing like 11 Charlie, Infantry mortarman and 13 Bravo, Cannon crew member. Those jobs are extremely phyiscal jobs and jobs like that may stay closed to women.

2. Many women have already been in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan. In many cases, insurgents usually will not target combat units because of the fire those units have, so they will support units that women were assigned. You can never tell who will freeze up in combat. Most of troops are highly disciplined, but hookups could be a problem.

The other thing with hookups is....a combat unit relies largely on camaraderie. It's hard enough to get a group of guys to all like each other. Now, throw women in the mix, and men are competing for attention from them....and guys will get pissed at each other if one of them gets that attention and the other doesn't...rapes will be inevitable...there is just a whole mix of crap that happens when you throw women into combat units.

In theory, I'd like to see it...in some ways, I think it would be awesome to have some all-female unit just wipe out a group of al-qaeda insurgents. But is that realistic? The military is not the place to be conducting social experiments. The job of the military is to kill people and destroy stuff, and secondarily to control occupied lands. If they fail, it means a LOT to the US. I'm not sure we should be playing around with a formula that works.
 
The other thing with hookups is....a combat unit relies largely on camaraderie. It's hard enough to get a group of guys to all like each other. Now, throw women in the mix, and men are competing for attention from them....and guys will get pissed at each other if one of them gets that attention and the other doesn't...rapes will be inevitable...there is just a whole mix of crap that happens when you throw women into combat units.

In theory, I'd like to see it...in some ways, I think it would be awesome to have some all-female unit just wipe out a group of al-qaeda insurgents. But is that realistic? The military is not the place to be conducting social experiments. The job of the military is to kill people and destroy stuff, and secondarily to control occupied lands. If they fail, it means a LOT to the US. I'm not sure we should be playing around with a formula that works.

Yeah, Combat Arms troops are usually really rough. Fights happen all the time, and usually they're broken up before someone gets seriously injured. You are right, some of the situations you mentioned would happen. But in the Irag and Afghanistan Wars battlelines have become increasingly blurred, it has become less and less possible to keep women out of combat conditions. And due to a shortage of troops, women are temporarily attached to direct combat units.

The military will not fall apart because men and women are in combat units.
 
Im cool with woman wanting to join up if they want too
 
What pisses me off the most about women in the military is that all the hotties seem to join the Air Force!!!! I wish they would join the Marines cause they have the tailored uniforms. Imagine a girl that looks like Jynx Maze in tailored class charlies.......:drool2:
 
"In Finland there are 32 privately owned firearms per 100 civilians..."

Dig deep, and arm yourself... (Surely you have neighbors?)

I'm pretty sure that all Finns that have done anything even remotely important, have done so by a GTFO strategy.. :dunno:

If you wanna stay, God bless... :surprise:
 
Top