It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Should Women fight in war?

page: 1
<<   2 >>

log in


posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:37 AM
OK,This question arises from the recent capture of an American Woman serving in the US Army.Should women fight Yes or No?

My own view is that they should not.If they want to serve at base very well but this is bad.Bad not only for the men who serve with her but also for the Iraqi men who are ordered to shoot at women.

[Edited on 23-3-2003 by John bull 1]

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:45 AM

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:46 AM
This-I know-is going to stirr up a bunch of controversy but not only do I think they should NOT fight in war but I also think they should not be in the military at all. I have been down this road of topic with many military friends and my husband and I stirred up all kinds of mess by my opinion. But I feel this way and much like a tiger, my stripes aren't changing.
So my answer is NO NO NO!!

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:52 AM
Earlier in the day, J-B, I'd be asking about "should"; "fight"; and "war" - and dishing out Semantics-101.
That aside, I'd wish that no one should fight in a war; and counter it by insisting that "only" women should have military rank and duties: at which point - given their inherent superiority -peace would have a chance.

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:53 AM
Women had to fight and in cases give up their life in order to get the right to vote and have equality, having got this far why should they be denied the right to die as men do....

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:56 AM
So, having had to suffer for the first two dubious gifts, it is only fitting that they die for the third?
You bade farewell to rationality when??

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 10:59 AM
Female soldiers served with Russian forces in WWII and proved to be extremely capable fighters. Female soldiers also served with Israeli forces, and continue to do so today, again, proving themselves to be equal to, if not better than thier male counterparts.

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:05 AM
"it is only fitting that they die for the third?"

estragon did n`t mean it quite like that, the point is they have every other right to do what they want in society and fought to get it why deny them the right if they want it?

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:10 AM
I do not agree that there is a place within western civilisation for violence towards women.
There are many useful jobs women can do in the military but they should not be put in the position where they might have be involved in hand to hand fighting.

Iwould defend my country if it were attacked but how would I feel if I was looking down the sights of my rifle and a woman was advancing?
Is my country worth defending if it asks me to not abide by my own moral code?

Please remember to add your vote to the poll.It is already distorted compared to the replies.

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:12 AM
You can say NO all you want, but you can't say NO for all women. I know Nans would probably go ballistic if she was denied the right to fight in the military. So my point is, that due to the freedoms of civil code under our constitution, one can't be denied the right to such freedoms. Decide for yourself. No law needs to be made to ban women from anything, that is not where women are going with this world. I have always thought that the women are the real leaders of the world. It isn't their time yet because of the evils of men, but in time the women will adapt to new awakenings and will most likely surpass the men in all things that make the world go round. Stay strong sister, those forces I spoke of lurk in the mind of the inable and the acceptant. I wish the women of this world were not so materalistic.

I know on thing that will wake ALL women up and would MAKE THEM WANT TO FIGHT. That being the brutality of the Diamond trade. That is a horror no one will forget.

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:19 AM
I know Nans would probably go ballistic if she was denied the right to fight in the military. Posted by Abraham Virtue

Please remember that Nans is French... Her gender has little to do with the fact that when facing any armed opposition, she, along with the rest of the french military would never be denied the right to hastily surrender...

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:23 AM
Could you explain??

[Edited on 23-3-2003 by Abraham Virtue]

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:31 AM
Believe me I already know women have that right. Remember, I'm a military dependent and alot of our friends are military women. And as I already stated, I've been down this road with friends already. But they nor you, can change my mind. Though I do understand the argument from there side and they understand the argument on my side. So with that being said...I'm not going "there" again lol
But I do not think they should have ever been allowed to join the services at all.
Thank You

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:38 AM
Generally speaking, women are not physically suitable for the demands of war, they hinder movement on the battlefield. I'm sure I am not the only one that has seenthis to be true when training in the army. There are, of course exceptions.
Another reason why they should not be subjected to wr is as John succinctly and accurately pointed out, it goes against our western tradition and view of women. It is bad enough that fathers must go to war, but to subject mothers to war is unthinkable.

There are plenty of duties in the military that women can accomplish without being involved in direct combat.

Cassini, the correlation between suffrage and suffering is ridiculous. Do not let political correctness go beyond the boundries of reality and common sense.

As far as the Russians, it isn't surprising their women would be adept to combat. They can throw a shot put (cannon ball) further than most American males!


posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 11:48 AM
Have you ever seen Full Metal Jacket? At the end of the movie the Marines come under fire from a sniper. When they finally get to the sniper, turns out it was a hooker that the boys had met earlier. My point is that woman are extremely capable of fighting men.
Whether or not they should be fighting is something else. I couldn't imagine having to shoot at a woman in a conflict like this, since the majority of the Iraqi army are conscripted. If it was fighting against an army that was determined to kill me though, I wouldn't think twice. Second, I couldn't imagine fighting next to my girl. I'm a "romantic" so other than that aspect of it, there's not much else. She's innocent and good in my eyes, and I don't think that she deserves to see that kinda thing. The only time I want to see her fight is if our country is being over run by a foreign army. Plus, what would happen if I saw her die. I wouldn't care anymore, I would just keep killing and killing and killing. They could shoot her, then surrender, and I'd still kill them. It's bad enough to see close friends die, but someone you cherish that much, and their was nothing you could do about it. I wouldn't care about my own safety or the safety of others, just as long as I took as many of them down with me.

So I guess my stance is: Woman are fine in support roles, but when it comes to the actual combat, I think the men should handle it.

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 12:02 PM
Just as none can tell another to do so or not.

No thank you.....

[Edited on 23-3-2003 by Abraham Virtue]

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 12:03 PM
well if FMJ did it then we should
i just have a question for feminists how wud u feel if women became eligable for drafting shud the situtation arise ?

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 03:54 PM
if women want to fight sure, they are not as strong as men pyhsically, but mentally they are the same so if they want to then why the hell not....

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 04:29 PM
When they mentally pick up 120 pounds worth of equipment, can carry the m-60 and a can of ammo and make 2-5 second rushes for any length of time, then fine. Combat isn't a game, and it isn't a movie, and the defense of the nation is not a place for social experimentation or engineering.
On the other hand, how about as officers. Just as long as they aren't allowed to use the map and compass, but that goes for any lieutenant.

posted on Mar, 23 2003 @ 08:03 PM
In all fairness, it doesnt take a great deal of physical ability to aim and pull a trigger. I know from personal experience that women in general have better hand/eye coordination than men, as well as better depth perception/range estimation.

The Russian female snipers employed during the seige of Stalingrad in WWII struck terror into the hearts of the Nazis, as they had well over 4x the kill rate of the German male snipers (many of whom fell victim to the female snipers).

Israel to this day produces some of the best long range tactical marksmen in the world, on a par if not better than the USMC scout snipers (regarded as the world standard for tactical marksmen): Approximately 2/3 of Israels snipers are women.

top topics

<<   2 >>

log in