Vulchor:Interesting topic. I will agree that so long as all standards are equal, they can serve as they want. But the woman better be able to carry my wounded a$$ out of battle, like I would physically be able to do for her.I think the women being more precious thing, or to be protected is the only sexist statement in this post and a true "feninist" would hate that statement because its about equality, not being better. I refuse to say that a man is better than a woman, but I equally refuse to concede that a woman is inherently more valuble or precious than a man.
Thewelder:I say no because of the shear fact that nobody wants to hear on the nightly news about somebodies daughter getting captured or killed. As much of an uproar there is about men getting killed there would be a bigger one if 30% of those were women.
jlzimmerman:I am fairly concerned about females joining the submarine fleet and combat units. Here's why.... There are some women who would be able to perform on par with their male counterparts, and some better than their male counterparts, but that number is few. The amount of time, attention, and money that would be thrown into a program to find the Vesquez's of the world (see: Aliens) wouldn't be very fruitful. How many millions it's going to take to alter submarines to allow the 3 women who actually want to serve on a sub do so? It is bad enough to see male POW's on TV and hear the horror stories of their captivity. The blatant misery that our women POW's would endure would be too much for the American public. We, as a whole, would not and could not stand the thought of our service women being raped by scores of men while they're being held and then touted all over the news. Lastly, the reason why I wouldn't want women in my infantry unit is because of camaraderie and discipline. Women don't want to hear it, but it's a simple fact that we, men, operate better as a fraternity.....a brotherhood. Cohesion, morale, and discipline are improved when there aren't any mammaries around to *** up our radar. If they want to make an all female company/battalion/regiment, have at it. I don't know if there's actually written policy about it or not. I have read on sites like military.com that there have been voluntary and involuntary command changes with the Army based on this women-integrated philosophy. I've also read thing here and there written by field-grade officers in all branches on the topic, but again, I don't know if it's part of policy or manual somewhere. I also want to note that there are men that can't or shouldn't make it in the infantry. There are some male pantie-wastes out there that have no business on the front lines or on a sub/ship. Again, ladies, I'm not saying some women couldn't do the job well, but when you stick a couple chicks with 200 men in very, very tight quarters for very long periods of time, everybody's radar gets jammed. There are reasons all-male or all-female schools have much better academic results than those of co-ed schools. Same reason.
TatuajeVI: leemarshall337: TatuajeVI:While this is a bit of a gross exaggeration, but I would say that anyone who argues women should be allowed in combat has never been in combat before. I have served in combat, and that WOULD be a gross exaggeration. Do I believe women should serve in combat arms MOS's? No, but that is a different argument. I served in Iraq and there were a few women in MP units who actively patrolled in combat environments, but VERY few. I don't disagree they should be allowed to serve in the military in a country like Iraq, but I do feel they should be kept in relatively safer environments. I guess I should have specifically stated "not in combat MOSs."
leemarshall337: TatuajeVI:While this is a bit of a gross exaggeration, but I would say that anyone who argues women should be allowed in combat has never been in combat before. I have served in combat, and that WOULD be a gross exaggeration. Do I believe women should serve in combat arms MOS's? No, but that is a different argument.
TatuajeVI:While this is a bit of a gross exaggeration, but I would say that anyone who argues women should be allowed in combat has never been in combat before.
leemarshall337: TatuajeVI: leemarshall337: TatuajeVI:While this is a bit of a gross exaggeration, but I would say that anyone who argues women should be allowed in combat has never been in combat before. I have served in combat, and that WOULD be a gross exaggeration. Do I believe women should serve in combat arms MOS's? No, but that is a different argument. I served in Iraq and there were a few women in MP units who actively patrolled in combat environments, but VERY few. I don't disagree they should be allowed to serve in the military in a country like Iraq, but I do feel they should be kept in relatively safer environments. I guess I should have specifically stated "not in combat MOSs." I don't meant to be touchy about it, my wife earned(and I do mean earned, not just being mortared or something) the Combat Action Badge for being engaged and engaging the enemy in close combat. She received and returned shots fired in anger. However, I agree that isn't the same thing as an Infantry unit that is tasked to seek out and destroy. Combat arms should remain males only.
