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: 8
14
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 09:26 PM
link   
i dont know if its the way the op presented this thread but it seems wrong. its like Hatshepsut joined the army and lord knows you cant train your enemy to respect your informalities. never had a female battle buddy; and doubt i would focus on training as intently as i did if i had. im sure rules pertaining fraternization will have to relax; if not its a logical trap.
edit on 15-1-2011 by Ausar because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 09:42 PM
link   
Im sorry this may be gross and may be banned but I have to speak up, we get something men don't, you know what it is, its what ends a sentence...

unless they can make iron tampons, we should not lead in combat...nuff said.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:06 PM
link   
People need to wake up and smell reality rather than just try to fit in with the politically correct group

Report: Women at War Suffering More Mental Health Conditions Than Men


A new study says female military members returning from Afghanistan and Iraq are more likely to suffer from mental health conditions than their male counterparts.

In June 2009, the VA reported almost 20,000 female military veterans from both Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts had been diagnosed with some form of mental disorder, including nearly 8,500 women diagnosed specifically with PTSD.

www.wtvr.com...



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by hapablab
Im sorry this may be gross and may be banned but I have to speak up, we get something men don't, you know what it is, its what ends a sentence...

unless they can make iron tampons, we should not lead in combat...nuff said.





Well, I guess that's a good point...er, period.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
People need to wake up and smell reality rather than just try to fit in with the politically correct group




This has nothing to do with political correctness... I can't stand all the pc crap... This has to do with living in a free country and being treated as equals. It's about not allowing people to tell you that you can't make a decision for yourself. What if I said you can't post anymore?



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:20 PM
link   
reply to post by sbctinfantry
 


I say do it. You want people not to worry about gays? Put women there. You want them to fight for something? love. Put a woman there.

It's better all around. If the person isn't fit for command you dump them. Put someone else in.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by stealthXninja
This has nothing to do with political correctness... I can't stand all the pc crap... This has to do with living in a free country and being treated as equals. It's about not allowing people to tell you that you can't make a decision for yourself. What if I said you can't post anymore?


I do not disagree with you
There's many hard choices associated with a free society
this is one of them

Women should be able to serve as men do
they should just be discouraged to do it

also male POWs most likely won't get raped, male POWs cannot get pregnant with the enemy as the father

It is a man's job to protect women, it's men that take sacrifices that threaten life
that's why when there's a fire or an evacuation it's women and children first

they should not be anywhere near the line of fire, but at the same time govt. should not involve themselves
individuals sign up not women or men

But i'm just saying.......



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Interesting argument, especially the POW one. To be extremely presumptive, wouldn't that encourage them to fight harder? And God help the captures if she gets free.

The differences and issues with that should definably be noted and given to the soldier.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gorman91
Interesting argument, especially the POW one. To be extremely presumptive, wouldn't that encourage them to fight harder? And God help the captures if she gets free.


I think it's safe to assume that any gender in the line of fire will fight with as much might as they can muster



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:34 PM
link   
I've no problem with this personally. I don't view it as equal rights for women; I view it as equal rights for men. Why should it only be men who get sent to the front lines and into combat zones? That's garbage. It's not like we have to have all the women we can get for reproductive reasons; there's more than enough of us.



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 10:54 PM
link   
If only there was no combat for anyone, man or women, to be in. Oh well...maybe someday.

hotpockets128



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by ModernAcademia


I do not disagree with you
There's many hard choices associated with a free society
this is one of them

Women should be able to serve as men do
they should just be discouraged to do it

also male POWs most likely won't get raped, male POWs cannot get pregnant with the enemy as the father

It is a man's job to protect women, it's men that take sacrifices that threaten life
that's why when there's a fire or an evacuation it's women and children first

they should not be anywhere near the line of fire, but at the same time govt. should not involve themselves
individuals sign up not women or men

But i'm just saying.......


I can definitely see your point. It's been instilled in us for a long time to save women and children first. I am actually unsure what I would do in an emergency situation regarding women.. For sure I would save a child before myself, and most likely a woman if it came down to it... Probably any life for that matter... As far as women pow's getting pregnant, that is something the individual would consider before making a decision... We can think of many what if's but when it comes down to it, she can decide for herself if it's something she is willing to risk. It's not my place to tell her she can't just because something might happen to her. About it being my job to protect women, I have to disagree there... I would protect anyone if it needed to be done, not just a woman... Them needing to be protected goes along with the equality thing in my opinion... They shouldn't claim they are equal when it benefits them and then cry helpless woman when that is better for them.. I feel you're either completely equal or give up your equal paying job and get back in the kitchen....



posted on Jan, 15 2011 @ 11:51 PM
link   
Shocking.

Against men and women serving in the military, (the ones who happen to be gay), and also against women serving an equal role as a man.

Americans, serious?



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:06 AM
link   
reply to post by sbctinfantry
 


I'm all for equality, however it must be equal and that's where the issue really annoys me.

If a woman can carry the same weight, if she can run the tests in the same time as men without so called equalising measures, then she should be allowed to fight like any man. However most women simply won't be able to do this because their genes are against them, it's a simple fact of science and nature. Men generally are stronger and able to carry heavy weights further and faster, something which is rather important for certain jobs.

It just really annoys me that in many physical jobs women demand to be given the same opportunities without performing at the same level. That is not equality.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
reply to post by sbctinfantry
 


I'm all for equality, however it must be equal and that's where the issue really annoys me.

If a woman can carry the same weight, if she can run the tests in the same time as men without so called equalising measures, then she should be allowed to fight like any man. However most women simply won't be able to do this because their genes are against them, it's a simple fact of science and nature. Men generally are stronger and able to carry heavy weights further and faster, something which is rather important for certain jobs.

It just really annoys me that in many physical jobs women demand to be given the same opportunities without performing at the same level. That is not equality.


I can't argue with you there. My first job was at a grocery store and before you get hired you had to sign that you can fulfill the required job duties. Getting shopping carts, being able to lift 50 pounds, etc. Never failed that when a girl was on shopping carts or had to lift something heavy she would come to me and pull the whole but I'm just a girl thing... I told them if you can't do your job then quit... Why should I have to do my job and yours for the same pay?



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SimplyGord
It always seemed odd that at home a woman cannot face a drunk husband. Women's Olympic hockey practices against boy midget leagues. Female boxers are a joke and would be torn apart in a ring by a male. So how can it be that once a woman is in uniform, she can take any enemy soldier under any conditions; hand to hand, knives, and win. No problem. Taliban fighters must die of shame to be whipped by girls.
This being the case, all women should be drafted and serve in combat as a method of defeating domestic violence.
I say like an earlier poster. Men should stay at home for once. Gays and girls want to fight, demand to fight, let them go.


You are right about one thing: Women should go! (Women follow me on this one. I'm about to pull a St Peter!)

You are so right. Women have been conditioned over thousands of years to be every little thing men say they are, weak and undereducated. But that is because all this time you had religion telling women their place, social commentary bozos howling how bad women are at this or that. Beatings, burnings...Yada Yada Yada.
Know what ladies?
Men are chefs, they don't need us to cook.
Men are in fashion, they don't need us to dress them.
Men only seem to have good conversations with other men - so they don't need us for socialization.
Sex? They've even invented this! I'm sure they will never stink!

So in short, ladies. We've obviously have damaged men beyond belief (according to so many posts here) just by us existing. We shouldn't do it to them anymore. Let's just take our stinking, undereducated, non driving selves somewhere far away from men so they can have their jobs back where they no longer have to be pc (so damaging to they're psyche), where they can stay out all night with the boys and not hear a woman's mouth. Where they don't have to go to jail for beating us because we deserve it so much. Where they can be free to have all the wars they want w/o having to hear our voices or see and smell our bodies and the like. Oh, there won't be anymore kids either for them to worry about. Ching Ching (coins sound)!
I say let's give them what they've been begging for all this time - a world without stinky women.
end sarcasm:
edit on 16-1-2011 by DaWhiz because: correct typo. God I stink! LOL



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by stealthXninja
I can't argue with you there. My first job was at a grocery store and before you get hired you had to sign that you can fulfill the required job duties. Getting shopping carts, being able to lift 50 pounds, etc. Never failed that when a girl was on shopping carts or had to lift something heavy she would come to me and pull the whole but I'm just a girl thing... I told them if you can't do your job then quit... Why should I have to do my job and yours for the same pay?


I've done that and i got reprimanded as it was apparently sexist for me to ask a woman to do her job, she cried to the boss apparently. The irony is that she was the sexist demanding special treatment because she was a woman.

I don't agree with people who say that women should not be in combat, i've never understood the reasoning behind that. If they can perform the job to the same standard as a man then they should absolutely be able to serve in all the same positions as a man. However most women simply won't perform at the same physical level as most men.

This is a generalisation of course and that should always be remembered.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:26 AM
link   
reply to post by DaWhiz
 


Your post gave me a good laugh. I quoted that same post earlier, it was a little extreme for sure.



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:30 AM
link   
reply to post by glome
 


That's totally crap. Women cannot join any Special Operations Force in the US military. Contrary to what many feminists will have you believe, women cannot match men physically at the level required for special forces, so thankfully no they are not allowed...



posted on Jan, 16 2011 @ 12:35 AM
link   
reply to post by sbctinfantry
 


I too am a former 11 Bravo, and I can agree with you on the fact that women in charge of large groups of guys can go down hill pretty quick regardless of how bad ass and aggressive she may be. I noticed while I served that often times when a women was in charge that they had to over compensate for the fact they were a woman by being "extra" harsh if you will. This of course meant little or nothing to us male soldiers because we looked at it as almost a game. We found ourselves mumbling and talking crap and generally losing discipline and our military bearing when we would not have done so had a man tasked us out to something instead.

That being said, I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that a woman can effectively fight in combat. There are numerous historical occurrences of women whupping backside effectively. My problem is the men. This view may not be shared with everyone but as a man, I think we have an instinctual desire to protect females. I know I do.
I once had this female lieutenant who was still in training, we were having an exercise and she was taken out by a sniper. Funny thing is so were about 3 other guys including a captain. Who did all the guys run to? The Chick of course. Go figure! lol All I can say was thank God it was only training.

Women in combat are a distraction to men. Especially younger men who have barely escaped puberty by the time they join the military. Like I said it's not the women that are a problem it's us men, naturally. I have nothing against all female combat units however. But mixing them up will negatively effect the combat effectiveness of the military in my opinion.
edit on 16-1-2011 by snowen20 because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
14
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join