Pentagon to open SEALs, Army Rangers to women

[IndyDave1776]

Also for all the people who think its just about the physical it's not. To try and explain it terms people with no military background or even those that do have a basic military background. Imagine going for your m.d. Or law degree and then being deprived of food shelter and sleep while having the **** smoked out of you and making judgement calls with lives In the balance while also supporting your fellow classmates so they don't fail.
It's still not all the training they will get one assigned to a ranger or seal unit. Like was mentioned before, not all who attend the school will be assigned to a ranger battalion (tabbed & scrolled). Some will take what they learned in the school (tabbed) and take it back to their regular units to be leaders and teachers. The ones who stay in batt are the best of the best and learning never ends but they are part of something very special and historic and a family that's close for life.
I think it's good that women have great qualities as women and men have qualities that make men men. The two are made different for a reason because in life they compliment each other. But I think women are not as well designed to handle mental and physical stresses combined as men. So it's much more than just about how many sit-ups they can do or how far you can run. The standards of just what an average soldier must hump on a march is higher in real life than what the manual says and now put them in a special operations unit and it goes up even more. Most women are just not built big enough structurally to maintain these standards. It's a physical improbability based on design. Not impossible but improbable. I think women who try it at not only going to dor but they are going to get hurt badly which in the end cost the tax payors money.
If they make it through with the same standards then give it to them, but still do you let them into a battalion? Or just let them go back to their unit. I still say NO women in battalion in that capacity. Nor SEAL units.

Given the rigors of such service, PROVIDED THAT DOUBLE STANDARDS ARE NOT ESTABLISHED FOR POLITICAL PURPOSES, in the event that any of this becomes a problem, it should be self-curing probably before entry into a critical situation. Regardless of one's preferences, objective standards (of the type that most people on both sides of the issue don't like) are the best bet for building effective units.

 

[Jerchap2]

How is thus destroying our military? If they can do the job why should they be excluded?

Are you serious? How can you be so obtuse? Mixing genders in a theater of war is suicide. Real men will protect women. Most women are not strong enough to drag a wounded man out of harm's way. And what will the enemy do to captured women? Real men soldiers know what they will do, and at that point discipline breaks down, melts down. This radical egalitarianism is an ultra left wing Utopian strawdog that defies the natural order and ultimately will destroy what is right and proper.

 

[mloney2]

Women in a combat mos

I am currently a sgt in the us army and I am a infantry soldier I believe that if women can pass the training and keep up with us then they should be allowed to be in a combat mos

 

[Kutnupe14]

Are you serious? How can you be so obtuse? Mixing genders in a theater of war is suicide. Real men will protect women. Most women are not strong enough to drag a wounded man out of harm's way. And what will the enemy do to captured women? Real men soldiers know what they will do, and at that point discipline breaks down, melts down. This radical egalitarianism is an ultra left wing Utopian strawdog that defies the natural order and ultimately will destroy what is right and proper.

Tell that to the Roman, Celts, and Ethiopians, when CQB actually meant something. Hacking a guy to death with a axe/sword > shooting him in the head with a well placed bullet (and less messy too).

But aside from ancient history... women have served, successfully, alongside men in Russian, N. Vietnamese, Israeli armies, and a number of other modern campaigns.

 

[Kutnupe14]

I am currently a sgt in the us army and I am a infantry soldier I believe that if women can pass the training and keep up with us then they should be allowed to be in a combat mos

That's the big "if." I don't believe many women actually can pull of the feat, BUT why in the hell do you universally deny those few that can? As long as the standards stay static, let them in. If the standards are lowered, then I'll be one of the first to rally against it.

 

[Trigger Time]

I am currently a sgt in the us army and I am a infantry soldier I believe that if women can pass the training and keep up with us then they should be allowed to be in a combat mos

Thank you for your service Sgt. But with all due respect we are talking about women being allowed to attain a higher level than just an 11 bang bang. We're talking Victor designator here bro. Tier 1,2,3.
I'm cool with women in basic combat mos's

 

[Jack1861]

Tell that to the Roman, Celts, and Ethiopians, when CQB actually meant something. Hacking a guy to death with a axe/sword > shooting him in the head with a well placed bullet (and less messy too).

But aside from ancient history... women have served, successfully, alongside men in Russian, N. Vietnamese, Israeli armies, and a number of other modern campaigns.

Curious.... where are the romans, celts and ethiopians these days?

But enough with ancient history.

Where are the russians, n. vietnamese, and israelis these days?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Curious.... where are the romans, celts and ethiopians these days?

But enough with ancient history.

Where are the russians, n. vietnamese, and israelis these days?

Curious, given the topic, are you implying that the ancient societies from history that I gave examples on, are no longer in existence because they used women as warriors?

And as for the modern examples, I'm assuming you have access to a world map. If you do not, I am more than willing to send you, one on my dime, a copy marked with the nations you seem to have trouble finding. PM if needed.

 

[HeadlessRoland]

It doesn't matter. At least by allowing women to engage in combat, we can all feel good about ourselves as the mightiest military ever to exist on the face of this planet crumbles into dust. We can hold hands and sing 'Kumbaya' and eat s'mores while the bombs drop. God knows we won't be doing much in the way of actual warfare. So draw up a seat, one and all, to witness the destruction of the greatest fighting force the world has ever known - from the inside, out.

 

[Blackhawk2001]

Curious, given the topic, are you implying that the ancient societies from history that I gave examples on, are no longer in existence because they used women as warriors?

And as for the modern examples, I'm assuming you have access to a world map. If you do not, I am more than willing to send you, one on my dime, a copy marked with the nations you seem to have trouble finding. PM if needed.

I think the point he is making is that for the countries named, women compose the Reserve forces and are not trained to the level of men for combat roles, nor are they routinely put in combat roles.

During their various wars-for-survival, all of them used women in combat roles as needed, but they are not so used nowadays. If ever we are in a war-for-survival on our own turf, I imagine our women - some of them, anyway - will fight alongside their men as well.

What most of us keep coming back to, and what you keep ignoring, is that most of us are sort of "okay" with women in combat roles as long as they can meet the same standards as men. The trouble is many of us know, the military WILL lower standards to meet political goals. Upthread, I gave examples from my personal knowledge and experience - and Army Aviation isn't even a particularly physically taxing environment for pilots. And I have to say that as a 58-year-old Guardsman taking my final APFT a few years ago, it STILL galled me that that 17-year-old female had to do fewer situps, pushups, and a slower 2-mile run than I did. . .

 

[Kirkd]

Thank you for your service Sgt. But with all due respect we are talking about women being allowed to attain a higher level than just an 11 bang bang. We're talking Victor designator here bro. Tier 1,2,3.
I'm cool with women in basic combat mos's

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!

 

[actaeon277]

Gee, if only the asked the guys doing the job what they thought of the idea. Oh wait, they did. Now if I could find the dang thing.

Basically, it said more were against it than in the other subdivisions of the military. Not unanimous, but pretty one sided.
Unfortunately, I cant find it. It might have been in the army times.

 

[Trigger Time]

Gee, if only the asked the guys doing the job what they thought of the idea. Oh wait, they did. Now if I could find the dang thing.

Basically, it said more were against it than in the other subdivisions of the military. Not unanimous, but pretty one sided.
Unfortunately, I cant find it. It might have been in the army times.

@ actaeon, yep that's because they are the guys that take the biggest risks daily (nightly ) and will be the ones that will get killed because the military lowered the standard to put the women in there.

How would you guys feel about a doctor who only went through half the medical school of a regular surgeon, performing open heart surgery on your wife or husband? That's basically the same thing if you lower the standards in special operations schools!

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

Just curious , to all of those who say "look at this country , they do it" , have you folks actually served ?

 

[Kutnupe14]

Just curious , to all of those who say "look at this country , they do it" , have you folks actually served ?

You're right... any SEALs on INGO? That's what you meant, of course, right? Because if you're not a SEAL, I don't see how serving has any bearing on the discussion. Because the SEALs far and away outclass all other units, right?

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

You're right... any SEALs on INGO? That's what you meant, of course, right?

Actually no , not at all . Although you might be surprised to know we've had a few of those types post here .

I'm just wondering where the liberal mind set is coming from .

The folks that do that job didn't ask for women (although I understand a few work with them on occasion) and the majority of them don't want women in their ranks , the prior service folks are saying it's a bad idea , but it doesn't seem good enough .

Then we get compared to every other nation that's done it really ?

Because America is sooo much like any other place on the map .


But don't worry , if obummer and the libs keep getting their way , they'll get the mess they demanded .

 

[Kutnupe14]

The folks that do that job didn't ask for blacks (although I understand a few work with them on occasion) and the majority of them don't want blacks integrated into their ranks , the prior service folks are saying it's a bad idea , but it doesn't seem good enough .

Then we get compared to every other nation that's done it, (like Canada and the United Kingdom) really ?

Because America is sooo much like any other place on the map .


But don't worry , if Truman and the libs keep getting their way , they'll get the mess they demanded .

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

 

[Trigger Time]

You're right... any SEALs on INGO? That's what you meant, of course, right? Because if you're not a SEAL, I don't see how serving has any bearing on the discussion. Because the SEALs far and away outclass all other units, right?

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.

 

[2ADMNLOVER]

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

Hardly the same logic .

My logic dictates that if it's not broken , STOP trying to fix it .

 

[level0]

What exactly can't they do? I could care less of the motives of the politicians. I see no reason to exclude an entire group because we want to twart persons from taking advantage of it, for political fain. IF one SINGLE woman can do the job, then she's entitled to the opportunity.

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.