It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Report: Women should be allowed to serve in combat

page: 3
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
Wait, a movie based hundreds of years in the future didn't really happen?


Nope, it didn't. At least, not yet.



Originally posted by TupacShakur
No, don't lower the standards to make it easier for women, if they fail, they fail. That's like saying make the driving test easier so 10 year old's can pass it, so then we will have a bunch of sub-standard drivers on the road, and that will get other drivers killed.


But do you honestly think that will happen? They'll send the first batch thru, they'll fail, and then everyone will be up in arms saying that it's discrimination. Then they'll lower the standards to allow women to pass into Infantry.

It's not about "being" infantry, it's about "saying" they're infantry. People are saying that because women aren't allowed into that branch, they are being denied promotion opportunities.




posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by sbctinfantry

Keep in mind, the majority of women in the military are pregneant, trying to get pregneant or a single mother. Don't believe me? Sign the contract.


Why would they be pregnant, and how would they be able to get pregnant? Unless they get raped, and then whoever raped them would also be discharged.

Sexual relationships are strictly forbidden while serving, in Canada anyways.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by InvisibleAlbatross
Many nations already have women in these roles. Those militaries have not broken down. Soldiers are expected to follow orders; if they do not, they must be punished.


Just because other nations do it, it means the US must also do it? That makes no sense.

"Follow order or be punished". So, if they allow women into the infantry and they aren't suited for that job, the "punishment" might be dead grunts.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:26 PM
link   
these countries that have woman in there infantry have they been to a conflict or war?? probably not so how does any body know if it can work, i stick by my original post



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowspirit
Why would they be pregnant, and how would they be able to get pregnant? Unless they get raped, and then whoever raped them would also be discharged.

Sexual relationships are strictly forbidden while serving, in Canada anyways.


You haven't been on a field exercise with men and women, have you? Young kids, males and females mixed together? They find ways, trust me.


We had a base map when I was deployed. The Base Commander had a pin on it for every location that the security police found men and women screwing around. Every conex box, shed and bunker.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


Thanks. I'm aware of the differences.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by sbctinfantry
Second, an all female brigade would be sent to combat and evaluated, then a few years down the line, women can be slowly introduced into combat roles.


The USMC already has FET teams. Not sure how they are making out (no pun intended).



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by stealthXninja
But why do you get to choose what rights people have? Why do you feel that anyone should get to choose that? Would you want someone to refuse you a right because of your sexual preference?


It's not a right to serve in the military; it's a privilege.

And it's not about sexual preference. I mean, I love to see women in all sorts of positions.



That was a mistake on my part, I meant gender not sexual preference. I'm on mobile and trying to hurry, it's hard to keep up on my phone.
About it being a privilege, that's fine but it sounds like your're saying it's only a privilege for men. It's a privilege but women can't do it.... In my opinion, if they qualify with the same requirements as the men, then they proved they earned that privilege. I think they definitely shouldn't have to do less to qualify, but if they pass the same testing that the men did then how are they any less qualified?



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:30 PM
link   


You haven't been on a field exercise with men and women, have you? Young kids, males and females mixed together? They find ways, trust me. We had a base map when I was deployed. The Base Commander had a pin on it for every location that the security police found men and women screwing around. Every conex box, shed and bunker.


now this must just be the american army like i say im british army i work alongside loads of woman in the army (they shouldnt be front line) and all the men and woman in the army no matter of age are disciplined enough to keep there pants on! i suppose thats why we are the best army in the world



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:31 PM
link   
reply to post by gluetrap
 

Maybe after you reach puberty, and get a few lessons in human anatomy, you'll figure something out.

YES.

Women stink more than men.

Under particular circumstances, at particular times.

You'll likely get a better understanding within a year or two of getting pubes.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:33 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


When other nations have been doing it successfully for decades, it disproves the argument that women can't do it.

Why are you assuming that women in charge will fail, leading to dead grunts? I am pretty sure that male commanders fail, leading to dead grunts. I see no reason why women would be more likely to fail.

Yes, follow orders or be punished; it's real simple. Soldiers are expected to follow orders.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by snowspirit

Originally posted by sbctinfantry

Keep in mind, the majority of women in the military are pregneant, trying to get pregneant or a single mother. Don't believe me? Sign the contract.


Why would they be pregnant, and how would they be able to get pregnant? Unless they get raped, and then whoever raped them would also be discharged.

Sexual relationships are strictly forbidden while serving, in Canada anyways.


Most get pregneant before they deploy, so that they can give birth in the states and then take maternity leave ( which doesn't count against their normal accrued leave days, might I add, it's treated like Convalescent Leave ).

The ones that don't get pregneant before they deploy get pregneant in Kuwait. Then they are sent back home shortly after they get to Iraq.

The ones that don't get pregneant at all are still held to lower standards than men, and end up working in an office by choice. Keep in mind that even in the infantry MOS, you still need someone to file paperwork and type, so you can imagine most women taking those roles.

There's already a lot of anger about women assuming those roles that infantry batallions would normally give to their injured awaiting recovery. Now instead of giving the injured a value adding job to do, many are relegating to sitting on their hind ends for months doing nothing, or getting sent to WTB's (Warrior Transition Batallion/Brigade).

It is not uncommon to see E7's who are women that have never been deployed. It is more the norm than the exception. I have personally seen an E-7, never been deployed, with gold teeth, an complaints about a non-existent leg injury. She retired with five children at 30. She retired, having never accomplished anything, her subordinates and superiors will tell you that much.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:36 PM
link   
The only Nation's military that seems to use women effectively in combat roles is Israel. AFAIK, no other military has had women actually serve in combat. Women may "see" combat while in support roles, but that is different.
edit on 15-1-2011 by sonofliberty1776 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:37 PM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 





But do you honestly think that will happen? They'll send the first batch thru, they'll fail, and then everyone will be up in arms saying that it's discrimination. Then they'll lower the standards to allow women to pass into Infantry. It's not about "being" infantry, it's about "saying" they're infantry. People are saying that because women aren't allowed into that branch, they are being denied promotion opportunities.


I don't buy it. If women want equality, then they should have the same tests as men to get into a position of combat. If they have an easier test, then that is not equality. They can't pull the "equal rights" card, and then when they have an equal opportunity and don't live up to their own expectations, start screaming "discrimination".



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:38 PM
link   
reply to post by simples
 


Yes, several of the nations that have women in infantry have seen conflict.

Here is an example of a woman who could be in a combat role. She already did it and received the Silver Star.
Sgt. Leigh Ann Hester



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:40 PM
link   
reply to post by InvisibleAlbatross
 


good point however im no the one saying woman couldnt do the job, im saying that putting woman on the frontline put other men in danger when they become wounded read my first post.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by simples



You haven't been on a field exercise with men and women, have you? Young kids, males and females mixed together? They find ways, trust me. We had a base map when I was deployed. The Base Commander had a pin on it for every location that the security police found men and women screwing around. Every conex box, shed and bunker.


now this must just be the american army like i say im british army i work alongside loads of woman in the army (they shouldnt be front line) and all the men and woman in the army no matter of age are disciplined enough to keep there pants on! i suppose thats why we are the best army in the world


Canada is very strict also. When a couple get kicked out for "relations", it's broadcast nationwide across the news. Apparently a good deterrent.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:43 PM
link   
reply to post by snowspirit
 


there is nothing wrong with relations between serving members however there is a time and place to be and act like a couple and that place is not when you are working together



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by TupacShakur
I don't buy it. If women want equality, then they should have the same tests as men to get into a position of combat. If they have an easier test, then that is not equality. They can't pull the "equal rights" card, and then when they have an equal opportunity and don't live up to their own expectations, start screaming "discrimination".


Dude, I'm agreeing with you 100%. You and I know that, but I don't think the people that are pushing this know that.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 05:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
The only Nation's military that seems to use women effectively in combat roles is Israel. AFAIK, no other military has had women actually serve in combat. Women may "see" combat while in support roles, but that is different.


www.cbc.ca...

In May 2006, Canada experienced its first loss of a female soldier during a battle against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Capt. Nichola Goddard died in active combat on the front lines. (DND)


Active combat.




top topics



 
14
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join