Pentagon to open SEALs, Army Rangers to women

[Trigger Time]

Fixed to give insite to a similar historical perspective using the same logic.

Wow man. That was a big stretch is your groin ok?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Ones who are or have been in those units most likely don't want to advertise it to the whole lot on here and would be the last people to bash other units or servicemembers of the military.
But I believe their opinion on who has their six does count more than those that aren't at risk next to them and never will be or have been. Kinda like how cops don't like civilians spewing uneducated **** about how to do their jobs. Since your an Leo maybe you'll finally get that one.

See, now you'rer just talking to talk. I don't think anyone that supports my POV is telling the SEALs how to do their job. In fact, I believe that it's been made clear, repeatedly, that how the SEALs currently "do" their job, is the standard that should endure. The only disagreement is that who is allowed to participate, once those very strict standards are met.

And yes, their opinion does count, but other than an un-documented "claim," I have yet to see their opposition to it. And assuming they are as "low key" as you advised, it would be doubtful to see it made public, correct?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Wow man. That was a big stretch is your groin ok?

If you think that's a stretch, you should smack you history teacher....


....hard.
.... as in pimp slap.

 

[Trigger Time]

See, now you'rer just talking to talk. I don't think anyone that supports my POV is telling the SEALs how to do their job. In fact, I believe that it's been made clear, repeatedly, that how the SEALs currently "do" their job, is the standard that should endure. The only disagreement is that who is allowed to participate, once those very strict standards are met.

And yes, their opinion does count, but other than an un-documented "claim," I have yet to see their opposition to it. And assuming they are as "low key" as you advised, it would be doubtful to see it made public, correct?

Whatever guy. No they will make it public, just not in an official capacity just like you didn't wanna advertise which department you work for.
Guys still in those rolls face backlash from a administration that already hates our country and especially the military. I don't blame them for not wanting to stick their junk into Something that resembles moochells mouth.
Your the only one talking to talk.

 

[Trigger Time]

Hey, I was a victor and a wiskey niner.

Oh, I bet 95% of the people have any idea what victor designation mean, and fewer will know W9 means.

RLTW!

All the way!

You are old school! Bloop bloop bloop bloop

 

[Kutnupe14]

Whatever guy. No they will make it public, just not in an official capacity just like you didn't wanna advertise which department you work for.
Guys still in those rolls face backlash from a administration that already hates our country and especially the military. I don't blame them for not wanting to stick their junk into Something that resembles moochells mouth.
Your the only one talking to talk.

For NOT being a SEAL, you sure have taken a few liberties with their opinions and knowledge of how they do business. Might I ask why you are so much in the "know," where so many aren't?

 

[Trigger Time]

For NOT being a SEAL, you sure have taken a few liberties with their opinions and knowledge of how they do business. Might I ask why you are so much in the "know," where so many aren't?

We aren't just talking about SEALs here if you go back through the thread. No I never said I was anything. You can ask anything you want. The opinions I have are mine and others share them. Just like some people surely share yours although I'm not sure what that is because you talk in circles and no answer seems good enough for you. The only opinions that truly matter are the guys who are active in those units. That doesn't mean the Rest of us can't have opinions.

 

[Jerchap2]

I agree. The standards are set, whomever meets them is eligible to be on the team. Simple. There is no standard that says a member must be male. If a female qualifies under the same guidelines as a male, let her in.

If she can do it, she can do. It's very simple, cut and dried. It's an objective measurement.

So simple as to be laughable. You just don't get it. The objectivity of your measurement is severely complicated by the very nature of human existence and the male/female relationship and differences.

 

[Jerchap2]

I stand by my earlier point. This radical egalitarianism is an ultra left wing Utopian strawdog that defies the natural order and ultimately will destroy what is right and proper. Don't succumb to their falsehoods and lies. There is a natural order that makes sense and that works, and has since the beginning of time -- one that has only been challenged by the Godless left in the last few liberal secular decades. Men and women are different. We each have our roles. Both are equally important, but not interchangeable. They are complimentary.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I stand by my earlier point. This radical egalitarianism is an ultra left wing Utopian strawdog that defies the natural order and ultimately will destroy what is right and proper. Don't succumb to their falsehoods and lies. There is a natural order that makes sense and that works, and has since the beginning of time -- one that has only been challenged by the Godless left in the last few liberal secular decades. Men and women are different. We each have our roles. Both are equally important, but not interchangeable. They are complimentary.

Did you really just try to justify the waging of a secular war with relgious references? Lol, oh BOY!

 

[gunsisgood]

I stand by my earlier point. This radical egalitarianism is an ultra left wing Utopian strawdog that defies the natural order and ultimately will destroy what is right and proper. Don't succumb to their falsehoods and lies. There is a natural order that makes sense and that works, and has since the beginning of time -- one that has only been challenged by the Godless left in the last few liberal secular decades. Men and women are different. We each have our roles. Both are equally important, but not interchangeable. They are complimentary.

+1

 

[cobber]

Fixed to give insite to a similar historical perspective using the same logic.

Gender and race may both be protected categories under law, but historical discrimination against the two was not on the same basis.

There was no rational basis to exclude other races from military service.

There was a rational basis to exclude women qua women from certain jobs within the military. Now that that barrier is falling, just wait for the lawsuits over accommodation (private quarters, sexual harassment claims, etc.) to start rolling in. Which will certainly detract from the mission.

 

[Expat]

So you are saying that putting young men and women into positions where they may be sleeping side by side for days at a time could lead to .... issues? Wow, never thought of that. You really think some guy might try to get in a girl's pants after seeing her half nekkid off and on for a couple of days in the field? Well that just flies in the face of.... well something.

 

[cobber]

So you are saying that putting young men and women into positions where they may be sleeping side by side for days at a time could lead to .... issues? Wow, never thought of that. You really think some guy might try to get in a girl's pants after seeing her half nekkid off and on for a couple of days in the field? Well that just flies in the face of.... well something.

I haven't perused this entire tortured thread, but I recall hearing somewhere that in mixed units the men often ended up trying to 'protect' their women comrades, rather than furthering the mission. And that seeing wounded/killed women soldiers was psychologically devastating.

But how about something like this?
Women's Battalion - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Libertarian01]

To All,

I have attempted to contact Admiral William McRavens office to get better details and information regarding this topic.

When I learn something I will pass it along.

Regards,

Doug

 

[jdwhitak]

Does anyone here seriously think women are going to be lining up at the opportunity to be a Seal or Ranger? It's a complete PR move.

 

[Libertarian01]

An official comment

To All,

I have a response I will post here from Admiral McRavens office:

"Mr. ******,

Thank you for contacting us and for your interest in US Special Operations Command and the men and women of the Special Operations Forces. We are addressing the matter of integrating women in special operations units in a very deliberate manner. ADM McRaven fully supports the decision to open as many career fields as possible to women, but no decisions have been made concerning integrating women into SOF units. USSOCOM is conducting an assessment that will include studies reviewing every task and the implications of integrating women at the small team level. The command is also having Rand provide an independent analysis of the behavioral and cultural aspects of integrating women into small teams that work in remote environments.
As this process develops, USSOCOM leadership will keep the Secretary of Defense, Congress and the American people informed of our findings.
Very Respectfully,
Lt. Cmdr. Ligia Cohen
U.S. Special Operations Command Public Affairs"


So it would appear that things are not yet set in stone but are moving in a positive direction for full equality of treatment.


I may follow up with the Rand group to see what their study finds.


I hope this sheds some light on the issue.


Regards,


Doug

 

[actaeon277]

In the Army, the Delusion Keeps Rolling Along? | US Defense Watch

Don't want separate standards... then change the test.
After all, there is no difference.

 

[Libertarian01]

My opinion remains the same. Set standards that are necessary to achieve mission goals, and not with the purpose of being so high as to exclude some people. In other words, if the military needs special ops to march 30 miles a day with full pack - fine. However, don't set the limit at 40 miles just to keep some folks out.

The mission objectives should determine the standards sought. If that TRULY limits people under 5'5", or women, or whomever, I am fine with that. But the standards should not be lowered just to let those people in. The standards should be set and then whomever qualifies is good to go, in my opinion.

Regards,

Doug

 

[Trigger Time]

In the Army, the Delusion Keeps Rolling Along? | US Defense Watch

Don't want separate standards... then change the test.
After all, there is no difference.

For **** sake. The **** show continues