PDA

View Full Version : Panel to Recommend Allowing Women in U.S. Combat Units



ex Strathcona
01-14-2011, 08:32 AM
good
ten characters...

usm2b
01-14-2011, 08:52 AM
Too soon after DADT IMO. That's a LOT of social change for the military in a short time frame while still engaged in multiple wars. Frankly, that panel needs to STFU. At least for right now.

Dragonscript
01-14-2011, 09:06 AM
All we need to do now is to allow *********** people to serve openly and we will be one of the most stylish Militaries in the world.

dava
01-14-2011, 09:12 AM
Unlike the DADT-policy, this won't change much. I had 2 women in my combat unit out of 300 guys.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 09:14 AM
Lets see a chick move a MK19 or .50cal.

dava
01-14-2011, 09:18 AM
The "chicks" that are able to get through training aren't exactly what you think of when you say chick.
Perhaps you won't put them in a heavy weapons team but that's about it.

Chauncey
01-14-2011, 09:37 AM
All we need to do now is to allow *********** people to serve openly and we will be one of the most fabulous Militaries in the world.

Fixed it for you mate ;)

Breerman
01-14-2011, 09:38 AM
No wars fought with women here but they together with one other major demograhical change is part of a huge drop in combat ableness during the last decade. There was a recent survey in which almost all of the interviewed officers indicated that their units were merely able to hand low-intensity conflicts and peacekeeping.

ABN MP
01-14-2011, 09:43 AM
Gets Better:

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2011/01/11/us/AP-US-***********-Veterans.html?_r=1&ref=news

He/She/It wants back in



Probably won't happen. It was diagnosed with bi Polar disorder and was arrested at the White House fence. Hopefully like the LT neither will get in with their criminal records.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 10:02 AM
RAND STUDY RELEASED

The latest RAND study, titled "New Opportunities for Women: Effects Upon Readiness, Cohesion and Morale" comes with the usual feminist spin. Thousands of military occupations were opened to women three years ago, but few have been filled with female soldiers.

Never mind that the majority of women might be avoiding unpleasant, previously all-male near-combat jobs, or are simply unqualified for them. According to Army figures, every time a person is mal-assigned to an occupation beyond their physical capabilities, it costs at least $16,000 to transfer them elsewhere. Nevertheless, ideologues suggest that gender quotas should be used to force women where they shouldn't or don't want to go.



CONTINUED
http://www.cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp?docID=263

Winger
01-14-2011, 10:06 AM
The "chicks" that are able to get through training aren't exactly what you think of when you say chick.
Perhaps you won't put them in a heavy weapons team but that's about it.

I've met one or two that could deadlift a Mk19 with tripod and all...and hussle 100 yards with it. They are by far.....the smallest of small exceptions. Just keep the standards the same and everything will work itself out.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 10:09 AM
I've met one or two that could deadlift a Mk19 with tripod and all...and hussle 100 yards with it. They are by far.....the smallest of small exceptions. Just keep the standards the same and everything will work itself out.

Picking it up for a few seconds is different from having to ****-it X meters/miles while also carrying your own gear.

Yeah, you totally met "one" or "two" females that ran a 100 yards with a MK19. And then you woke up from you dream.

Winger
01-14-2011, 10:36 AM
Picking it up for a few seconds is different from having to ****-it X meters/miles while also carrying your own gear.

Yeah, you totally met "one" or "two" females that ran a 100 yards with a MK19. And then you woke up from you dream.

I said "could". They were WMs who's arms were probably the thickness of your neck...not kidding. Saw one of these particular "females" deadlifting some serious weight in the gym among other things. But, I digress.....keep the standards the same and it will all work itself out.

Hollis
01-14-2011, 10:53 AM
Part of the all of this is the change in battle scape. The days of massing the troops for a major assault is long over, especially for the major powers. Massed troops are extremely vulnerable to modern weapons. As in the stabilization of Iraq and A-Stan, troops take on a more mixed role. Anything between from being similar to a police officer to combat troops. For many of these roles, women can fit in and should probably be there, much like the USMC Lioness program. Where there is a strong cultural segregation and extreme attitude between men and women, women are best to deal with the women population in that country.

We would probably not see women in SpecOps or deployed with any to the teams, except in special circumstances.

The days of being out in the Bush for months in large units are pretty much over. So in the FOB, reasonable accommodations can be made for women and men. So star ship troopers showering together is only in your fantasies guys, sorry. There are many jobs in the military that women are more than capable of doing and would be a very valuable asset to have.

Wendigo
01-14-2011, 11:07 AM
Fozzy, while I agree that females in combat arms positions can drastically effect Readiness, Cohesion and Morale, there are plenty of male soldiers who cannot **** around a 50 or one of your sexy grenade launchers. But again the majority of females seem to react more poorly to stress physical strain and fatigue than their male counterparts.

It's only a matter of time before you guys to the south start accepting ***********, hermaphodites and whomever else into your uniform. You're going to deal with harassment classes on how to work with these types and probably sensitivity training.

People get REALLY worked up over this stuff. Maybe I'm just getting old but more and more I'm caring less and less about what "the army" does as a whole and worrying more about PT twice a day, what the company is doing and whats going on in the platoon. How is training, everyone fed? No one in jail? Whens the next mess party, time to noobtube people on MW2.

Hollis
01-14-2011, 11:15 AM
Wendigo, good points. We adapt, we overcome and we persevere. So what else is new? There are more important issue, like what's for chow? Maybe this all about making news out of no news.

Dc5-driver
01-14-2011, 11:22 AM
Let the CPL,SGT and LT vote becuse they have the best view and they vote for Quality!
Those panel office champs are politicians not soldiers.... Do they served whitin the lower ranks of a combat unit?
They only see it on paper and have no clue about the practical part which means all.
They vote political correct while in combat its all but political correct.

Drop standards or accept a 1% woman units.... Quality or social BS?

They shoult test it and see dramatic results...

Kit
01-14-2011, 11:25 AM
A Marine once told me that combat changes a man. The stress is high, testosterone is surging, and even choir boys will cuss up a storm. He holds his Marine brothers in high regard, but he is unsure how a woman will be treated in a such an environment. The combined stresses of war might open up a higher possibility of ****** harassment or assault.

Hollis
01-14-2011, 11:29 AM
A Marine once told me that combat changes a man. The stress is high, testosterone is surging, and even choir boys will cuss up a storm. He holds his Marine brothers in high regard, but he is unsure how a woman will be treated in a such an environment. The combined stresses of war might open up a higher possibility of ****** harassment or assault.


I think it depends on what is the definition of combat is and how it is done.

Dc5-driver
01-14-2011, 12:00 PM
I think it depends on what is the definition of combat is and how it is done.

A unit must be trained and fitted to forfill all definitions of combat..
How coult that be questioned?
Sometimes you just have to deal whit situation and you have no choice brutal or not.

Hollis
01-14-2011, 12:03 PM
A unit must be trained and fitted to forfill all definitions of combat..
How coult that be questioned?
Sometimes you just have to deal whit situation and you have no choice brutal or not.
And its a must to be prepaired for the worst.


Not all roles in combat are the same, not all combat is the same. Google the USMC Lioness program. The battlescape has been changing, so has the weapon systems and ROE and other assets.

IMTT
01-14-2011, 01:12 PM
As I predicted in another thread on this topic a week of go and for the exact reasons I sited prior. Now I say no special considerations for gender, no special rights and no slack. Step up, ruck up and shut up Sally. Make them all register for the draft, make them go in the Infantry and if they fail sorry baby girl discharge and out. They want it!? Give all to them there you go sweetee... God, I'm glad I'm retired and only do occasional contract work.

This will be a hard pill to swallow but the CSM ranks will take it all without a whimper and fail to report real effects or problems. I know "Hoorah, threee bags full Sir!" Works perfect no problems SIR!

This is great stuff Gays and Girls all in one month. Now about that war fighting thing? Heck who cares its about diversity and the PC agenda.

FROM THE REPORT;
But Elaine Donnelly, president of the conservative Center for Military Readiness, said the commission’s recommendation confuses troops in harm’s way with those assigned to front-line, offensive combat missions. Performing heroically in an ambush is not the same as grueling front-line combat.

“Physical differences between men and women do matter,” she said. “If the purpose of the change is to help with career advancement and diversity, it’s fine. But if the purpose is to help better defend the country, then it’s divorced from reality.”

Donnelly said barring women from some military jobs does not diminish their contributions, but instead recognizes that only a small percentage of female troops can meet the strength and endurance requirements mandated in “brutal and uncivilized” front-line fighting.


I got it; there is a difference so we need to adjust for little Suzy...And we will! The PC crowd marches onward.

RedKatushya
01-14-2011, 01:32 PM
Combat effectiveness aside, it does make sense in the term of COIN.
In cultural context, male soldiers have difficulty crossing cultural barriers to talk with women in Afghanistan and Iraq.

KEEPER0311
01-14-2011, 01:51 PM
Combat effectiveness aside, it does make sense in the term of COIN.
In cultural context, male soldiers have difficulty crossing cultural barriers to talk with women in Afghanistan and Iraq.

You tend not to even talk to the women in those countries.

IMTT
01-14-2011, 02:00 PM
Combat effectiveness aside, it does make sense in the term of COIN.
In cultural context, male soldiers have difficulty crossing cultural barriers to talk with women in Afghanistan and Iraq.

In your veiw of the world...While in A-stan; the few times we had females it caused problems with the Tribesmen & elders and but they were effective in getting to see the property of the Tribesmen; the women and children for HA and MEDCAP type missions. All deals were strcit with the men and we even had issues with our young males soldiers who were clean shaven for lack of respect in some villages with the leaders.

BloodyTalon
01-14-2011, 03:25 PM
I said "could". They were WMs who's arms were probably the thickness of your neck...not kidding. Saw one of these particular "females" deadlifting some serious weight in the gym among other things. But, I digress.....keep the standards the same and it will all work itself out.
This.

The panel's not requesting that the standards of combat arms units get dumbed down in favor of gender equality. They're simply recommending to leave the process open for the odd female that somehow does have the means to hack. You know, just like every other branch in the armed forces which mysteriously hasn't completely collapsed after the males only restriction was lifted.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 03:53 PM
If we allow women in in combat MOSs, then we are condoning violence against women. That is not the country I grew up in or want to live in if this measure is adopted.

Ratamacue
01-14-2011, 03:56 PM
They really want to test this out? Take a small number of existing FETs ranked Lance and below and put them in a single infantry battalion as, for all intents and purposes, 0311s. Let them live in coed barracks, go through all the workup training, and then deploy. See what happens. If things aren't as problematic as I'd predict, maybe THEN we can start talking about lifting the restriction on women in combat arms. But somehow I doubt that the results will be quite what all the politicians and pogues expect.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 04:07 PM
Hell, even the USSR during WW2 didn't let women into the ranks of their beloved Guard Divisions.

Flounder
01-14-2011, 04:31 PM
Maybe not in the Guards Divisions as you say, but they did have female snipers, some of them racked up some very impressive records during the war. Lyudmila Pavlichenko for one.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 04:34 PM
but they did have female snipers

http://rob.nu/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/facepalm.gif

Hollis
01-14-2011, 04:40 PM
Fozzy you might want to research "Lyudmila Pavlichenko". Pretty impressive combat record.

Beowulf
01-14-2011, 04:48 PM
keep the standards the same, that's fine. There will be some other problems, but its not like we don't already have tons of other shyte to work through, so what's a little more?

Universals
01-14-2011, 04:55 PM
Shouldn't be a problem as long as it's based on merit (performance and ability) not some affirmative action/fairness BS. I think the NFL and NBA should be open to women also. As long as it is by merit.

Fozzy Bear
01-14-2011, 04:59 PM
Fozzy you might want to research "Lyudmila Pavlichenko". Pretty impressive combat record.

No thanks. I would like to elaborate on Soviet propaganda but that would mean I would be going off topic. And 90 percent of my books cover OST Front.

The point we have here, is that the only people supporting women in the military are those that (1) condone violence against women and (2) never been in a combat MOS. If they were in the later, they would know that women get special privileges because of feminine hygiene issues and never have to dig fox holes or any other labor intensive work.

HollywoodMarine
01-14-2011, 05:12 PM
It's glorified Motor-T (aka, pouges). ;)

MashTaters
01-14-2011, 06:35 PM
If it an equality issue then the standards have to be equalized across the board. Drop the male/female different PT standards for all branches and just go with one standard and we'll see how they feel about it then.

HollywoodMarine
01-14-2011, 07:13 PM
Here is the problem... women's equality rights groups will say that gender neutral standards will need to be fair for both men and women, so both genders can perform on the same level. :roll:

BAF
01-14-2011, 07:15 PM
hehe first the gays and now the womens, man i can feel the "pissed offness" radiating trough my computer screen.

TheEvian100
01-14-2011, 07:20 PM
hehe first the gays and now the womens, man i can feel the "pissed offness" radiating trough my computer screen.

Come to think of it though, certain women -a minority, ok- have the physique and mentality comprable or equal to most male soldiers. Let them in, test them in the same standards and whoever makes it let them stay.

BAF
01-14-2011, 07:24 PM
yeah same standards, untill one starts *****ing and they lower every standard there is and they get it way easier.

Hollis
01-14-2011, 07:28 PM
yeah same standards, untill one starts *****ing and they lower every standard there is and they get it way easier.


The standards thing concerns me. War only has one standard.

Universals
01-14-2011, 07:30 PM
Here is the problem... women's equality rights groups will say that gender neutral standards will need to be fair for both men and women, so both genders can perform on the same level. :roll:

I don't see the military bending much more. If it bends anymore to pacify folks, it will break.

BloodyTalon
01-14-2011, 09:44 PM
Here is the problem... women's equality rights groups will say that gender neutral standards will need to be fair for both men and women, so both genders can perform on the same level. :roll:
And we will take said complaints and throw it in the shredder along with demands by Code Pink that we cease drone strikes for moral and ethical reasons and all suggestions to change the doctrine made by 2LTs. Boom! Problem solved!

Honestly I doubt we're gonna see a drastic change to Infantry, Armor, Combat Engineers, Arty, etc. out of this. Putting aside the fact that most women will likely not be able to hack it, a lot of them simply don't have the desire to do so. Almost every female I've met and worked with sofar has been more interested in Intel or Medical, with the most badass going into MP or Engineer (construction only). A change in regulation is only going to affect the odd tomboy amazon that is pretty much a **** and sack away from being a dude anyways. At worst there maybe be a couple dozen overly cocky feminazis each year that will talk a big game about her woman power, fail to make combat arms, and then gets mocked at incessantly for trying to play Airborne Ranger.

Dominique
01-14-2011, 11:40 PM
I see there are already some people saying that physical standards need to be reevaluated to that they're "fair" to everyone, not just males. :roll:

Alfacentori
01-14-2011, 11:54 PM
Lowering standards for combat roles is not gender equality, it is foolish in the extreme. The next thing they will want will be different standards for different ethnic groups...

This sort of thing is all bad.

Alfa

Ratamacue
01-15-2011, 12:03 AM
I see there are already some people saying that physical standards need to be reevaluated to that they're "fair" to everyone, not just males. :roll:All's fair in the battle for the all-important quality of "diversity."

HollywoodMarine
01-15-2011, 01:53 PM
Lowering standards for combat roles is not gender equality, it is foolish in the extreme.
I agree with you Alfa. As one Marine puts it...


They inside and outside the military are using social expermintation to forward their agenda, and to hopefully neuter the military into European style worthlessness.

Cpl. Shane E.
I wonder what our fellow Euro and Canuck brothers have to say about women serving in Line units.

dava
01-15-2011, 02:03 PM
As far as I know the standards were the same for both men and women. Don't go expecting that this change of legislation will lead to much change in the field. Most women are not interested in line units and the few that are, are able enough.

Euroamerican
01-15-2011, 02:08 PM
And yet I still don't see women insisting that they themselves be made to sign up for Selective Service or have their government benefit eligibility be curtailed if they don't.

Steak-Sauce
01-15-2011, 03:05 PM
I wonder what our fellow Euro and Canuck brothers have to say about women serving in Line units.
How does Cpl. Shane E. defines "European style worthlessness" and what does it has to do with women serving in frontline units?

dava
01-15-2011, 03:31 PM
On a sidenote, I thought the US was standing firmly in defense of equity - equal opportunity for everyone.
Noone is asking for 50/50 male/female but for a chance to show the world you are worth it.

I can't understand the comment as well that allowing women to serve would mean that we condone violence against women. Does that mean that we condone violence against men right now?

dava
01-15-2011, 03:36 PM
A Marine once told me that combat changes a man. The stress is high, testosterone is surging, and even choir boys will cuss up a storm. He holds his Marine brothers in high regard, but he is unsure how a woman will be treated in a such an environment. The combined stresses of war might open up a higher possibility of ****** harassment or assault.

I think you are ready to convert. It sounds exactly like the excuses used by islamists. We keep our women at home or covered with burqa's for their own safety against vicious males.

Sloppy Joe2
01-15-2011, 03:44 PM
Might make piss-test days kind of awkward.

Ratamacue
01-15-2011, 03:47 PM
Might make piss-test days kind of awkward."Hey, uh...you're going to have to have a male piss-check you because we don't have any female NCOs." I can totally see that happening in my battalion too.

IMTT
01-15-2011, 06:28 PM
We're going to have to lighten those weapons and combat loads as well as reduce the speed of road marches. We must be more sensitive to the soldiers needs and set aside the realities of war. Gays, Women, Trans-gender, handicapped folks, mentally disabled and so many others are being denied the opportunity to serve. This must stop and we must address this overt desrcimination and control the military to greater degree so they are more inclusive and open regardless of the mission or what is required for combat effectiveness. Open the flood gates, get it done forget thousands of years of lessons learned... Besides real war can't happen it doesn't work that way anymore. We have had a major paradiem shift in the face of warfare. Its now clean, short, high speed and technical requiring more intelligence then brute strength... Besides if it gets too bad you just halt hostilities, take a break and relax.

So now the squad leader has to deal with silly savage boy, suzy home-maker and the she/he besides the ****** harrassment training and sentivity orientation courses.

I'm going to cut my wrists; who comes up with this stupid shzt? A. ****ing retards, idiots and bedwetters don't forget the anti-military liberal pukes. Banging my head on my desk top...

Dc5-driver
01-15-2011, 07:09 PM
The standards thing concerns me. War only has one standard.

And adjust it to every war? And how fit shoult a soldier be?
Most army`s are trained to fight a full scale ground war..
And if your Hummer gets hit you have to move your low standard *ss..
Standards are needed if you have to do it by foot becuse 30km a day it`s not for everyone.
It`s not how to operate in the perfect situation it`s how to operate in the worst situations. If there are wounded mates they included there gear have to go whit you. Improvise all the time becuse war is in most of the times an ERROR and is`nt staged in Hollywood.
And in such f...up moments you don`t need extra BS becuse you platoon is as good/fast as it`s worst/slowest soldier...

To me combat units are a diffinent class a other level and the culture makes them work harder to be the best let`s keep them it that way.
They sometimes feel corrected enough by the rulles and sometimes it`s difficult enough.

Dc5-driver
01-15-2011, 08:53 PM
How does Cpl. Shane E. defines "European style worthlessness" and what does it has to do with women serving in frontline units?

The politicians here (EU) are puching like 5 years whit far lower standards for females then men.They made even a TV programe and comercials till special woman days all those years..:cantbeli:And still 99% of the units are men.

But the European worthlessness BS comment shoult be tested and see what happens...;-)

HollywoodMarine
01-15-2011, 09:33 PM
How does Cpl. Shane E. defines "European style worthlessness" and what does it has to do with women serving in frontline units?
This is what he wrote...

The European style worthlessness- some things stand foremost, skeleton/small military, small budgets, the inability to "project force" in a serious manner, "without the aid" of the United States. Their assistance in Afghanistan is defined almost entirely by "caveats", only a small few have been very aggressive in actions against the enemy there, and many of those forces are leaving. The military complex in most of Western Europe has been "a job", that a very small minority have chosen to do- their monies were spent instead on the social concept of the "cradle to the grave entitlements", defense was an American problem, that they would augment and "support".

In both Iraq, and Afghanistan, US troops have had to come in and assume/assist the duties of European/NATO allied powers, or send in forces to tip the balance- because those units were unable to do it themselves.

Cpl. Shane E.

muck
01-15-2011, 09:53 PM
So the discussion is at that point again: Europeans allow women and gays and whatnot in their troops because they don't know jack about warfare and even don't wanna know it.

That one really did make me giggle though:
In both Iraq, and Afghanistan, US troops have had to come in and assume/assist the duties of European/NATO allied powers, or send in forces to tip the balance- because those units were unable to do it themselves.That may be the definition of Allied Force (Kosovo) but it can hardly describe the situation in Afghanistan and as I understand it, it's utterly out of place with regards to Iraq.

Dc5-driver
01-15-2011, 10:10 PM
This is what he wrote...

ROE`s change the ability for 90% of units/county`s in Astan....
We have lefties they rather spend on heathcare and the results are abvious yes..;-)
And so for the defence budget it`s low and the cuts are a blow in the face.
But the comparison between the troops.....come on it`s useless to say ho`s best.

Lets do wargames MCTC/MILES Or physical games and see ho`s shape is best..
US marines VS Dutch Marines(totaly Expiditionairy!!!)p-) :-P
No just joking it`s useless to judge ho`s best..

CPL Trevoga
01-16-2011, 12:27 AM
Does that mean that women will have to register with Selective Service?

BloodyTalon
01-16-2011, 01:34 AM
This is what he wrote...
lol you add an extra chevron on a specialist/lance corporal and he assumes he's the next Musashi. Exactly what does anything he talk about have to do with women and gays theoretically being in combat arms?

komatoz
01-16-2011, 02:46 AM
If you want to know... Some one said about Russian female snipers. There was another female units as well, but it wasn't some propaganda or American politics. There literally was NO ANY MEN FOR THE JOB. End of story.

eskachig
01-16-2011, 04:22 AM
If you want to know... Some one said about Russian female snipers. There was another female units as well, but it wasn't some propaganda or American politics. There literally was NO ANY MEN FOR THE JOB. End of story.
The important thing is some of those female units did their job very, very well. The trick is, of course, choosing the right women - and combat arms units should be selective regardless of gender.

paluka
01-16-2011, 05:30 AM
Look the idiocy of this proposal will be reflected on when, after the next war, all surviving females go back home without any trace of an organ that would classify them as female because of all the rape and mutilation. War is very much a spectacle of hate, and once that hate bug has bitten you there is no more mercy. I do not think any female soldier having been POW'd would have survided in any camp by any army back in WW2 when even then by todays standards people had a higher sense of what is moral.

muck
01-16-2011, 08:00 AM
Present wars and those of the past have shown that if a party is willing to violate international rights and maltreat prisoners of war, this will happen to an extent that most repatriates return broken and mutiliated anyway.

This debate is mildly amusing.
Be it desireable or not, women will have secured the right to be eligible for any position in any brach eventually. It's annoying that the political correctness crowd thinks of gender equality as it was merely about equal rights, not equal duties let alone equal standards. Meh. It's going to happen anyway, though. Better get accustomed to it and try to advance a thinking of proper soldiering among women who sign up. Males who think of it only as a 'job' are pretty weakish, too. Having enjoyed the goods of conscription, I know how much devotion can tip the scales.

I'm with Hollis on this one. Open all assignments, try not to lower the standards and just accept the capable among the recruits regardless of their gender. And do it as quickly as possible so life can go on. Over here, it helped a lot that discussions were just cut off and all arms opened to recruits of both sexes. Instead of crying about it, the service would just figure out how to make the best out of it.

Seeing the debate that surrounds DADT, I come to think this might be a particularly American problem, though - no offence meant.

Regarding European "worthlessness"... We also have fewer access restrictions because our recruitment pool is considerably smaller. Some European nations have fewer inhabitants than the US of A military service members. Think about it for a second.

Dc5-driver
01-16-2011, 08:32 AM
[QUOTE=muck;5417037]
I'm with Hollis on this one. Open all assignments, try not to lower the standards and just accept the capable among the recruits regardless of their gender. And do it as quickly as possible so life can go on. Over here, it helped a lot that discussions were just cut off and all arms opened to recruits of both sexes. Instead of crying about it, the service would just figure out how to make the best out of it.

[QUOTE]

As I said before we allready have passed this stage..
It meant hardly a woman eventhough they where helped trough traing whit special woman classes and low standards and after 5y we have a huge quality drop and les then 1% woman occupation.
There is no way to keep high standards and get mixed units standards have to be lowerd..
The efects are very negative and the boys are not happy whit it in overall.

Ive served whit full male combat and mixed suport units and I cant wait to return to a full male unit...

The history thing is utter BS becuse there was not selection where 75% drops becuse ranks had to be filled.

You can read alot but it doesnt mean you know anything about the life whit a combat unit some of you doesnt understand. Serve first before saying things!

muck
01-16-2011, 08:35 AM
What "history thing"?

Dc5-driver
01-16-2011, 08:39 AM
What "history thing"?

About the Russian female snipers e.c. it wasnt meant to you. :)

IMTT
01-17-2011, 11:59 PM
Give it all to them, full bore no slack ladies shut the **** up and move out! Ok little Suzy pick up the ruck and move now. GIVE IT ALL TO THEM...

Internet Helicopter
01-18-2011, 10:04 AM
Give it all to them, full bore no slack ladies shut the **** up and move out! Ok little Suzy pick up the ruck and move now. GIVE IT ALL TO THEM...
Oh, I'm sure you'll find some women to take that challenge head on. They won't be your stereotypical women perhaps though...
Cross-country skier Marit Bjørgen for instance.
148460

IMTT
01-18-2011, 12:12 PM
Oh, I'm sure you'll find some women to take that challenge head on. They won't be your stereotypical women perhaps though...
Cross-country skier Marit Bjørgen for instance.
148460

Perfect, Exactly!

Dc5-driver
01-18-2011, 12:38 PM
And still then it means extra problems....

IMTT
01-18-2011, 05:06 PM
Does that mean that women will have to register with Selective Service?

It better, ****ing A skippy!

Pete031
01-18-2011, 07:10 PM
I agree with you Alfa. As one Marine puts it...


I wonder what our fellow Euro and Canuck brothers have to say about women serving in Line units.

You already know... From the last two closed threads on this topic.

IMTT
01-18-2011, 10:17 PM
O please here it goes down the slipper slope.

Pete031
01-18-2011, 10:37 PM
The question was asked, and answered.... We all have to put up with your nauseating rants.
Out to you.

Dragonscript
01-19-2011, 09:10 AM
Oh, I'm sure you'll find some women to take that challenge head on. They won't be your stereotypical women perhaps though...
Cross-country skier Marit Bjørgen for instance.
148460


Is she in the military? Per the wiki page on her, she is not. The females who join the military, as a rule, are not like this.



In the USMC, female 1371s are not allowed to serve with CEB & grunt units. As a test case, they could relax the rules to see how that works out.

LineDoggie
01-19-2011, 05:09 PM
The Military Leadership Diversity Commission.

It is made up of 22 members appointed by SecDef Gates and 2 members from DHS at the direction of the Duncan Hunter National Defense Appropriations Bill of 2009.
Thank Obama and the Democrats for this one.

It is chaired by an African American Air Force General with not only no combat experience, but no assignments OCONUS in his career.

Of the 24 members:
9 have served in a theater of war.
3 have served in Infantry combat.
1 has served in air combat.

The deputy chairman is an African American US Army LT GEN, Infantry officer, CIB second award ( Korea, Vietnam), Silver Starsw/OLC. He retired in 1978. He has never served with women in ground combat, nor have the other two CIB holders in the commission.


The 5 other "combat" vets served in support, logistics, staff, and deputy commands. For example one General served as deputy G3 for VII Corps artillery in Desert Storm.

The commission is made up of alot of submarine officers, missile squadron commanders, back bencher careerist types, civilian "diversity" experts and lawyers, the lady who implemented the Common Access Card, three actual combat vets and one bonafide Infantry combat hero.

On the panels web site

Decision #2 Branching. In the first paragraph of the decision the commission states that "Standardized tests are a structural barrier to minorities."
They're talking ASVAB, apptitude, service tests, and Physical Fitness.

They give the example that "if more white recruits score higher on the ASVAB, this opens more career fields for them than it would, say, black recruits."
(Paraphrasing slightly, but they do use the white/black example)
They then treat this as a flaw in the system, a malfunction resulting in injustice and something the tests and testing needs to address


get ready for women coming home in coffins in mass casualties during Infantry assaults all in the name of social progressiveism

Sheikh Al Stranghi
01-20-2011, 06:59 AM
Maybe not in the Guards Divisions as you say, but they did have female snipers, some of them racked up some very impressive records during the war. Lyudmila Pavlichenko for one.

The Soviets had female "sniper" platoons that were decimated as soon as the German Infantry closed in. Read "Im augen des jagers"

Flounder
01-20-2011, 12:13 PM
Pavlichenko fought for about a year, according to wikipedia from June '41 to May '42 when she was wounded by mortar fire. Credited with 309 kills including 36 enemy snipers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko

Roza Shanina fought from mid '43 to early '45 when she was killed in action. 54 confirmed kills including 12 enemy snipers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roza_Shanina

Those 2 at least certainly weren't decimated by the first German infantry they ran into.

Even if you cut their confirmed kills by half or down to a tenth they certainly seem to me to have been very competent fighting soldiers in my opinion. Were all female Soviet snipers in WW II this good? Obviously not.

Also according to wikipedia "women played a large part in most of the armed forces of the Second World War. In most countries though, women tended to serve mostly in administrative, medical and in auxiliary roles. But in the Soviet Union women fought in larger numbers in front line roles. Over 800,000 women served in the Soviet armed forces in World War II; nearly 200,000 of them were decorated and 89 of them eventually received the Soviet Union’s highest award, the Hero of the Soviet Union". Women in the Soviet military in WW II served as "pilots, snipers, machine gunners, tank crew members and partisans, as well as in auxiliary roles".

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_Russian_and_Soviet_military

Just sayin'. I don't think the Reds were handing out Hero of the Soviet Union medals like candy back in the Great Patriotic War. Again, even if you assume half or 90 % of those were phoney baloney propaganda awards that still means that a fair number of them were won by women performing the same heroic actions as their male counterparts.

As for a more contemporary example, Captain Nicola Goddard, 1st Reg't RCHA:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Nichola_Goddard

The wikipedia article on Capt. Goddard doesn't go into much detail of her military career but from other accounts I have read and watched about Capt. Goddard she was very highly regarded as a combat soldier by the other soldiers she served with and fought with.

*editted to add:
I'll see if I can find that book you recommended.

Lt-Col A. Tack
01-20-2011, 12:24 PM
Pavlichenko fought for about a year, according to wikipedia from June '41 to May '42 when she was wounded by mortar fire. Credited with 309 kills including 36 enemy snipers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko

Roza Shanina fought from mid '43 to early '45 when she was killed in action. 54 confirmed kills including 12 enemy snipers.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roza_Shanina

The women you've cited served at a different time, in a different place, and in different roles (snipers, versus infantry) than what is being considered here in the US.

Flounder
01-20-2011, 01:31 PM
Sure.

What about Capt. Goddard?

Anyone know if there were female combat soldiers in 3rd Battallion PPCLI when they were part of Task Force Rakkasan?

If there were then it sort of blows a hole in your argument about time, place and roles.

HollywoodMarine
01-20-2011, 01:40 PM
Flounder... besides the equipment/gear/kit officers carry, have you ever seen them carry anything else (radios, base plate, barrels, extra ammo, etc)? Officer do not, and we route step at their pace. Still leaves a lot for the gender argument.

Corrupt
01-20-2011, 01:47 PM
Flounder... besides the equipment/gear/kit officers carry, have you ever seen them carry anything else (radios, base plate, barrels, extra ammo, etc)? Officer do not, and we route step at their pace. Still leaves a lot for the gender argument.

I think the fitness standard question has been sufficiently answered. Aslong as the fitness/strength requirements are not dropped, noone can complain. Some women will make the grade, most will not. The question is them working alongside the blokes in the field, how men react when a woman is screaming, privacy issues etc

Flounder
01-20-2011, 01:56 PM
Me, I have never served in the military. Tried to join after high school. Medically unfit for military service. Thick glasses.

So you'll have to hope someone currently serving either with female combat soldiers or who happend to be a female combat soldier pops by to answer your question.

I honestly don't know if there were any female Canadians serving as infanteers with the 3rd Battallion PPCLI when there were part of TF Rakkassan/OP Anaconda/other actions.

There have been 3 female Canadian combat soldiers killed in action in Afghanistan. Cpt Nicola Goddard (artillery forward observer), Cpl Karine Blais (armoured reg't), M/Cpl Kristal Giesebrecht (medic)

Dc5-driver
01-20-2011, 01:56 PM
Sure.

What about Capt. Goddard?

Anyone know if there were female combat soldiers in 3rd Battallion PPCLI when they were part of Task Force Rakkasan?

If there were then it sort of blows a hole in your argument about time, place and roles.

And now in reality???


We have discused it over and over in many threads..why it`s not a good thing and the negative side efects e.c. The list is endless and even more endless..
And those few have little or no influence (whit all respect) in the outcome of war and things as quality,praticality and efectiveness are the things to focuse on and are the way to win a war.
This BS has nothing to do whit having and improving the capability to fight.

Flounder
01-20-2011, 01:58 PM
OK, I am done here.

muck
01-20-2011, 02:34 PM
We have discused it over and over in many threads..why it`s not a good thing and the negative side efects e.c.What? It's been discussed to death indeed but no discussion went beyond each party presenting their arguments and generally discarding the arguments of the other. That's not the same thing.

But as this is a government issue it's gonna be pushed through anyway, like all governmental issues if they wanna have them for good or evil.
The sooner the military gets accustomed to the idea, the sooner they can transform the few capable female recruits into useful troops. There are not gonna be many, but why turn away those who could do the job? The German army has only about 500 female troops in (ground) combat unit (out of 17,000 female troops), but our recruitment pool is so small we can't turn 500 useable recruits away.

Dc5-driver
01-20-2011, 04:09 PM
There are not gonna be many, but why turn away those who could do the job?

If they have a negative efects on the units/boys yes of course.
They have to fight as a unit and not by them selfs and there are many obstacles on the workingfloor.
Not to mention the story`s/quotes of many here....

Pete031
01-20-2011, 08:06 PM
Me, I have never served in the military. Tried to join after high school. Medically unfit for military service. Thick glasses.

So you'll have to hope someone currently serving either with female combat soldiers or who happend to be a female combat soldier pops by to answer your question.

I honestly don't know if there were any female Canadians serving as infanteers with the 3rd Battallion PPCLI when there were part of TF Rakkassan/OP Anaconda/other actions.

There have been 3 female Canadian combat soldiers killed in action in Afghanistan. Cpt Nicola Goddard (artillery forward observer), Cpl Karine Blais (armoured reg't), M/Cpl Kristal Giesebrecht (medic)


Like was stated Before, Females humped the Whales back with the Boys:
http://www.life.com/image/703318
http://www.life.com/image/703316

If they can do the job to the SAME STANDARDS, as the Males, who the **** are any of you to tell them no...

LineDoggie
01-20-2011, 08:45 PM
Ya know something, I've been polite about it, but who the fcuk are you to tell us how we should feel about females in US military Combat Arms units? who are you to say Our opinions arent valid? when did you serve in the US Military?

Ratamacue
01-20-2011, 08:49 PM
The sooner the military gets accustomed to the idea, the sooner they can transform the few capable female recruits into useful troops. There are not gonna be many, but why turn away those who could do the job? The German army has only about 500 female troops in (ground) combat unit (out of 17,000 female troops), but our recruitment pool is so small we can't turn 500 useable recruits away.The difference is, we can turn them away. At least in the USMC, the infantry field is always full-up, and new recruits are having to wait as long as a year between signing their contract and shipping to boot camp if they're contracted as infantry because so many want it. I would assume it's the same for the US Army.

Sheikh Al Stranghi
01-20-2011, 08:50 PM
female sniper etc Actually they were more like skirmishers with scoped rifles than real snipers, or sharpshooters even. Anyway there is way too much goofy communist propaganda floating around to really judge the performance of any soviet "hero".

Pete031
01-20-2011, 09:04 PM
Ya know something, I've been polite about it, but who the fcuk are you to tell us how we should feel about females in US military Combat Arms units? who are you to say Our opinions arent valid? when did you serve in the US Military?

Oh wow, well don't feel you have to be polite. And certainly don't do me any favours. I missed the part where this is a US only forum. Shucks, better tuck my tail between my legs and run. But on the other hand I couldn't give a sh1t what you think. You have no idea, what units I have served with, Or who I have been in combat with.
Thats all you got eh? Good arguement.
You know the Females from 3 PPCLI who Humped the Whales Back, Supporting the War on Terrorism, were made Honorary Rakkasans. They did their job and they did it well.
Why not PM the mods, and get yourself a US only portion fo the Forum. That way no foreigners can debate on an open freq what is posted there. And you can high five yourself a few times a day.
Love your title BTW.

muck
01-21-2011, 05:19 AM
The difference is, we can turn them away. At least in the USMC, the infantry field is always full-up, and new recruits are having to wait as long as a year between signing their contract and shipping to boot camp if they're contracted as infantry because so many want it. I would assume it's the same for the US Army.Well, I didn't consider the attractive reputation of the Marines. If you don't need the additional recruitment pool, you can of course turn them away. I guess it's different in continental Europe, except for a few renowned examples. The Fallschirmjägers can be extremely choosy as well with a lot of people wanting to join their ranks but other branches with less of an aura surrounding them aren't exactly overrun by recruits. I'm sure it's the same in other European countries.

I'd say this debate here is a little bit derailed. Maybe it should be exclusively about the prospect of females entering US combat units (or not). For the most part this can only be discussed by Americans and US service members.

This is no big deal elsewhere and although one can always run across a lame duck it's not working particularly bad in the other armies. But that doesn't mean it has to work in the US or that they have to do it. At least that's my point of view, and I shall leave it at that. This thing has been discussed to death and I won't repeat my usual Balkan-thread-mistake ;)

Dc5-driver
01-21-2011, 06:09 AM
Well, I didn't consider the attractive reputation of the Marines. If you don't need the additional recruitment pool, you can of course turn them away. I guess it's different in continental Europe, except for a few renowned examples. The Fallschirmjägers can be extremely choosy as well with a lot of people wanting to join their ranks but other branches with less of an aura surrounding them aren't exactly overrun by recruits. I'm sure it's the same in other European countries.

I'd say this debate here is a little bit derailed. Maybe it should be exclusively about the prospect of females entering US combat units (or not). For the most part this can only be discussed by Americans and US service members.

This is no big deal elsewhere and although one can always run across a lame duck it's not working particularly bad in the other armies. But that doesn't mean it has to work in the US or that they have to do it. At least that's my point of view, and I shall leave it at that. This thing has been discussed to death and I won't repeat my usual Balkan-thread-mistake ;)

Ehm our Marines don`t allow them and they maintain some serious standards whit the problem of a huge shortage of personal but they shoult be proud!woot

Our Army was open for a long time but standards are not even a shadow of what it used to be.. They have next to diffirent even lower standards and other classes during training...just perfect!! And still where are they in numbers let alone former standards? Woult it be diffirent whit the USMC?

Pete031: Those 1% or less make it more complicated and are causing more isues on group/squad level. Maybe there are a lot of morons ho coult not deal whit it but if there like 70% it`s done. And those proud cavemen behavior means a will to fight and compete a extra push to better yourselfs and the platoon. Lot`s of guys don`t fit in that little world to nothing strange. This is POLITICAL!

It`s useless to talk about a few induviduals...

LineDoggie
01-21-2011, 08:07 AM
Oh wow, well don't feel you have to be polite. And certainly don't do me any favours. I missed the part where this is a US only forum. Shucks, better tuck my tail between my legs and run. But on the other hand I couldn't give a sh1t what you think. You have no idea, what units I have served with, Or who I have been in combat with.
Thats all you got eh? Good arguement.
You know the Females from 3 PPCLI who Humped the Whales Back, Supporting the War on Terrorism, were made Honorary Rakkasans. They did their job and they did it well.
Why not PM the mods, and get yourself a US only portion fo the Forum. That way no foreigners can debate on an open freq what is posted there. And you can high five yourself a few times a day.
Love your title BTW.You have the right to run your man pleaser all you want, but you discount the experiences of those of us posters who have served in US forces over your few examples, as though no one But You has any right to have an opinion other than welcoming this. We've made valid points and you discount it out of hand, arrogant bastard.

gaijinsamurai
01-21-2011, 08:13 AM
What pisses me off are all the people who have never served in the military, much less combat arms, who are trying to dictate policy.

gaijinsamurai
01-21-2011, 08:17 AM
The difference is, we can turn them away. At least in the USMC, the infantry field is always full-up, and new recruits are having to wait as long as a year between signing their contract and shipping to boot camp if they're contracted as infantry because so many want it. I would assume it's the same for the US Army.

I can envision lawsuits, with stupid *****es like Gloria Alred taking the cases pro bono for the publicity. They'll lower the standards, or change them, to accomodate women, just like they did with the firefighters who wanted to get supervisory positions in that East Coast city (the one that Chief Justice Sotomayor involved herself with), so Blacks would get an edge over more qualified Whites.

Pete031
01-21-2011, 08:47 AM
You have the right to run your man pleaser all you want, but you discount the experiences of those of us posters who have served in US forces over your few examples, as though no one But You has any right to have an opinion other than welcoming this. We've made valid points and you discount it out of hand, arrogant bastard.

I don't discount your opinions, and I have agreed that, that unless standards are the same it won't work. What I disagree with is when people say, It will never work, without ever trying it. Or come up with facts that women aren't ,mentally or physically capable as a gender.
We wen't through the same ****. And yes, some of the Females that get in are Junk. They do their 1 contract, as a LAV driver or some **** like that, but there are chicks out there who can do the job, do it well, and should be allowed to.
When it happens, like it did to us, it doesn't really change much. The 1 or two females you will see in a Battalion either fit in or they don't. Just like some of the dudes.
Arrogant Bastard??? I'll take it. Those of us A types who join an organisation to fight for a living usually are.

muck
01-21-2011, 09:26 AM
What pisses me off are all the people who have never served in the military, much less combat arms, who are trying to dictate policy.Well, that's how politics works. People with no clue of the field they're supposed to work on are the ones who have the most power of decision.

LineDoggie
01-24-2011, 05:59 PM
Ya know what DW seems everyone entitled to opinions as long as they support this idea. if we dont we suddenly have no right to espouse our views even with being backed up by first hand experiences. How many females have YOU trained for basic Combat Skills? I trained over 4,000 soldiers in 18 months and My Opinion is based on those experiences seen first hand while moving with Platoons on lanes at Ft. Dix, Ft. Drum, Ft. Indiantowngap, Cp. Shelby, Cp. Smith. whats your view based on?

clean
01-24-2011, 06:14 PM
Ya know what DW seems everyone entitled to opinions as long as they support this idea. if we dont we suddenly have no right to espouse our views even with being backed up by first hand experiences. How many females have YOU trained for basic Combat Skills? I trained over 4,000 soldiers in 18 months and My Opinion is based on those experiences seen first hand while moving with Platoons on lanes at Ft. Dix, Ft. Drum, Ft. Indiantowngap, Cp. Shelby, Cp. Smith. whats your view based on?

Your grammar makes my head hurt.

But okay, let's get beyond that. You've train 4000 troops? How many were women? And out of those 4000 thousand, how many washed out?

Every troop that washes out is on you. It's because you didn't do your job. And if the women you trained aren't up to snuff, it's on you. Because you are too misogynistic to believe in their ability.

DeltaWhisky58
01-24-2011, 06:22 PM
Well aren't you the all American hero ... ... ... I have no personal experience whatsoever on the matter, but I'm not the one making a fool of myself shooting my mouth off over it - YOU ARE!

You just can't see the forest for the trees can you - you're so dim and narrow-minded that you can't see how you're annoying the **** out of people with your misogynist viewpoint ... ... ... this is 2011 not 1941!

I don't have any experience of training women for combat, but I do have a lot of life experiencing of working with both sexes, I don't have any experience in training mega-thousands of troops single handed for Uncle Sam like you have - 4,000 in 18 months - but I clearly have a broader outlook on life than you.

It obviously doesn't bother you that your extreme views make you look a ****head ... ... ... maybe even a mega ****head, but who cares, you're Uncle Sam's All American Training Mega ****head who doesn't like the ladies getting down and dirty in the army!

How do you manage to train all those soldier girls when you clearly hate them so much ... ... ... ?

You're an *******, a grade-A *******.

Wendigo
01-24-2011, 06:32 PM
Ya know what DW seems everyone entitled to opinions as long as they support this idea. if we dont we suddenly have no right to espouse our views even with being backed up by first hand experiences. How many females have YOU trained for basic Combat Skills? I trained over 4,000 soldiers in 18 months and My Opinion is based on those experiences seen first hand while moving with Platoons on lanes at Ft. Dix, Ft. Drum, Ft. Indiantowngap, Cp. Shelby, Cp. Smith. whats your view based on?

I've noticed this at MP net as well. Seems that often as long as someone shares the same opinion they are good to go. If they don't share the common dogma then they are RTFO and have no idea what's what




Every troop that washes out is on you. It's because you didn't do your job.
Is that like saying there are no stupid questions? or there are no bad soldiers, just bad leaders? lol

Can't agree with you on that one Clean. There are some people who are just not meant to be soldiers. What happens all too often is that men and women who should never pass basic training end up passing due to their peers carrying them through or stupid "Everyone passes, give them 5 chances then some more" directions from higher.


Well aren't you the all American hero ... ... ... I have no personal experience whatsoever on the matter, but I'm not the one making a fool of myself shooting my mouth off over it - YOU ARE!
I don't have any experience of training women for combat, but I do have a lot of life experiencing of working with both sexes

Do you mean training and fighting along side women in combat =/= working with women at futureshop?

Even *if* linedoggie is coming across as an ******* to some, his point of view is still a first hand account from personal experience. You may not agree but it's a pretty decent platform to stand on and base an opinion off of vice someone who's never been exposed to it.

DeltaWhisky58
01-24-2011, 06:34 PM
Do you mean training and fighting along side women in combat =/= working with women at futureshop?

Not at all - I'm just trying to get this cretin to appreciate how he comes across with his totally bigoted views.

clean
01-24-2011, 06:37 PM
If you are training troops, then you have one job, to make that man or woman into a soldier. If they don't make it, then it's on YOU.

If you do not want that responsibility, then sign up for infantry.

clean
01-24-2011, 06:43 PM
We have a pretty top notch military. The US, that is. We have solid soldiers, who give their all to the fight, miss their families, but fight a hard confusing war day in and day out. And the Marines do the same.

It scares me that someone like Linedoggie would have anything to do with their training. While I'm sure that he is more than capable at teaching them to stay alive, from his posts, I'm not sure he is able to teach them to stay alive and win a complicated war.

But he's pretty good at bullying you into thinking he's right.

LineDoggie
01-24-2011, 06:52 PM
Well aren't you the all American hero ... ... ... I have no personal experience whatsoever on the matter, but I'm not the one making a fool of myself shooting my mouth off over it - YOU ARE!

You just can't see the forest for the trees can you - you're so dim and narrow-minded that you can't see how you're annoying the **** out of people with your misogynist viewpoint ... ... ... this is 2011 not 1941!

I don't have any experience of training women for combat, but I do have a lot of life experiencing of working with both sexes, I don't have any experience in training mega-thousands of troops single handed for Uncle Sam like you have - 4,000 in 18 months - but I clearly have a broader outlook on life than you.

It obviously doesn't bother you that your extreme views make you look a ****head ... ... ... maybe even a mega ****head, but who cares, you're Uncle Sam's All American Training Mega ****head who doesn't like the ladies getting down and dirty in the army!

How do you manage to train all those soldier girls when you clearly hate them so much ... ... ... ?

You're an *******, a grade-A *******.
Praise from Caesar..............
I notice when you have no coherent reply or rebuttal it becomes a personal attack with you, and you get away with due to your former status here

Again My Points

If Females cannot throw a fragmentation hand grenade so that they are out of the blast radius, they will Kill/Injure themselves and anyone else in the vicinity. Own goal as it were.
If they cannot handle being a member of a crew served weapon in the dismounted role and cannot carry the gear, they let down the other members of the Squad/Platoon with possible fatal results.


If a Soldier is Overweight we discharge them as they can be a impediment to unit effectiveness
If a Soldier cannot pass a PT test we dischage them as they can be an impediment to unit effectiveness
But a female who cannot preform to Army standards is to be given special consideration, a pass on carrying the heavy gear, a pass on throwing a grenade so she doesnt kill herself and comrades, a don't worry about it with MOUT.

I dont want to see more KIA's coming home because we decided to be fashionably progressive and sent substandard people to fight. I'm Not against Females in the Military. I've seen them perform certain skills well, But infantry is different.

Wendigo
01-24-2011, 06:56 PM
Not at all - I'm just trying to get this cretin to appreciate how he comes across with his totally bigoted views.

Fair enough. I completely disagreed with his views on **********s in the forces. But I also accept that working with a ********** at mc****s or something is a lot different than spending 7 or 8 months in a small team environment where something as "silly and inconsiquensal" (no idea how to spell that) as someones orientation CAN change a working environment (even though i don't think it should)



If you are training troops, then you have one job, to make that man or woman into a soldier. If they don't make it, then it's on YOU.

If you do not want that responsibility, then sign up for infantry.

Are you saying that if you join the infantry then you won't be responsible for training soldiers? Sorry dude even us dumb infantry types start training soldiers the minute we become the senior man in a fire team.
Maybe you're refering to a drill instructor as a seperate entity or something though..

We had a kid make it through enrollment with a major learning disability. He could hardly read, he couldn't write his own name (had to print it) and about 90% of the staffs time was spend on this kid. He just wasn't smart enough to grasp even the basics of weapons handling, rank structure, drill. Endless retests. Without a hint of sarcasim, a monkey would have been easier to train (and I don't mean the ones they send to space, I'm talking about the **** throwers)
Sorry I just don't agree that it was a failure on the behalf of our staff that this kid washed out.
Example 2. A nice girl trying to get in the infantry. Very charasmatic and personalble. Everyone liked her and went out of their way to accomodate her, try to help her, bend the rules here and there.
I don't know how she passed the fitness test to join, she clearly couldn't do the 9 pushups required. She fell out of every run, webbing and ruck march. She couldn't **** the 249 or 250 and couldn't even **** the 9mm pistol.
She managed to squeek by out yearly battle fitness test with seconds to spare and a LOT of help along the way. Now if and when she deploys she will be a burden because she can't physically do battle, even thgough she passed "the standard".


It gets to a point where you are doing the individual AND the forces as a whole a great diservice by passing these types. You agree so it's just two dudes opinions.

LineDoggie
01-24-2011, 06:59 PM
If you are training troops, then you have one job, to make that man or woman into a soldier. If they don't make it, then it's on YOU.

If you do not want that responsibility, then sign up for infantry.So everyone who washes out of Marine Corps Bootcamp is a reflection on a substandard Drill Instructor?

Airborne school regularly drops hundreds of candidates every year for failures, are you saying the Blackhats are pathetic instructors

Are those who drop from Special Forces Assessment a reflection on the Special Forces Cadre?

Pete031
01-24-2011, 07:19 PM
Fair enough. I completely disagreed with his views on **********s in the forces. But I also accept that working with a ********** at mc****s or something is a lot different than spending 7 or 8 months in a small team environment where something as "silly and inconsiquensal" (no idea how to spell that) as someones orientation CAN change a working environment (even though i don't think it should)




Are you saying that if you join the infantry then you won't be responsible for training soldiers? Sorry dude even us dumb infantry types start training soldiers the minute we become the senior man in a fire team.
Maybe you're refering to a drill instructor as a seperate entity or something though..

We had a kid make it through enrollment with a major learning disability. He could hardly read, he couldn't write his own name (had to print it) and about 90% of the staffs time was spend on this kid. He just wasn't smart enough to grasp even the basics of weapons handling, rank structure, drill. Endless retests. Without a hint of sarcasim, a monkey would have been easier to train (and I don't mean the ones they send to space, I'm talking about the **** throwers)
Sorry I just don't agree that it was a failure on the behalf of our staff that this kid washed out.
Example 2. A nice girl trying to get in the infantry. Very charasmatic and personalble. Everyone liked her and went out of their way to accomodate her, try to help her, bend the rules here and there.
I don't know how she passed the fitness test to join, she clearly couldn't do the 9 pushups required. She fell out of every run, webbing and ruck march. She couldn't **** the 249 or 250 and couldn't even **** the 9mm pistol.
She managed to squeek by out yearly battle fitness test with seconds to spare and a LOT of help along the way. Now if and when she deploys she will be a burden because she can't physically do battle, even thgough she passed "the standard".


It gets to a point where you are doing the individual AND the forces as a whole a great diservice by passing these types. You agree so it's just two dudes opinions.

The point being, and I have said this from the start, that the standards have to be the same or else it won't work. PT standards have to remain the same, as do academic and field craft oriented assessments. You are talking about 1's and 2's that make it through, when they shouldn't have. Thats always going to happen. Nature of the beast. However they are soon weeded out in a Battalion and thrown into Transport platoons, or driver positions. Is it a perfect system? **** no, but if a chick can hack it, and make the same standard as the men, then they should have a shot.
I have seen it, Checked out women in the Infantry doing the job.
People say that seeing a woman torn up from enemy fire or an IED is more upsetting then a male, and that is simply not the case, as seeing any of your soldiers wounded or killed is a terrible thing. Can they **** the mortar Base plate? Or the SF kit for the GPMG? Not all of them, but some. Not all the males I see in some of the Rifle Companies could **** an 84mm, 6 rounds and all his kit up the mountains of A-Stan all day. Or get in the traces and break trail all day.
People say it is not worth changing the system for the 1 or 2 exceptions, But maybe those exceptions will be great soldiers.
I have heard that Male soldiers will rape the female soldiers as an arguement... Well, thats a leadership issue.
At the end of the day, This will most likely happen to the US Mil. I would spend more time argueing on how to make it work to is best ability then, sit around a pound your chests all day long. Adapt and Overcome.

DeltaWhisky58
01-24-2011, 07:22 PM
Well put Pete031.

digrar
01-24-2011, 08:55 PM
If you are training troops, then you have one job, to make that man or woman into a soldier. If they don't make it, then it's on YOU.

If you do not want that responsibility, then sign up for infantry.

The schools are just for the basics, the bulk of the quality training is done by the Infantry NCO in the units.

Not everyone is trainable, especially in the short time frames given during those courses. Some recruits suffer from a poor physiological design and they break, others can not function under stress, some have undisclosed mental illness, some people are uncordinated and take weeks and many thousands of rounds to learn how to shoot. Even a 5 star rock solid instructer with all the time in the world will struggle with some of these individuals.
It's hard to comprehend without seeing it, but you can't appreciate the human condition until you've seen it in under pressure in large numbers. I have no doubt LD has seen all sorts of cluster ****s that would struggle to tie their own shoes without a 40 minute ROTE lesson.

GtodeO
01-25-2011, 01:40 AM
I don't have anything against female wanting to go on combat or doubt their training and skills but WAR IS HELL.
It's already hard enough seeing dead and injured comrades but females? that's not good a sight to take it,
and I don't think that females should endured those hardships or in any country.
But if its approve then more power to them.

muck
01-25-2011, 05:10 AM
Because you are too misogynistic to believe in their ability.Whilst I agree with your general view and that certain comment on linedoggie, I wouldn't say it's misogyny that leads to the failure of some - if not many! - female recruits in basic training.

You'll find significantly fewer capable female recruits for physically demanding assignments, maybe even none when it comes to special forces.

Also, people need to be motivated by their instructors but many young folks are beyond good and evil nowadays and sign up under the most blatant misconceptions about their future, the majority of them being women.
I was drafted with no real choice whatsoever - doing civil service in the nursery never seemed like an option - and have seen all kinds of recruits, some motivated despite the mandatory nature of their service while some of the professionals were just there to earn money or getting the university paid.

You'll need good instructors, but also people who are mentally and physically able to live up to the requirements which is a process that runs between the ears. If it's not already there and running, instructors cannot always trigger it off and it's not always their fault.

Just as any man, a woman can really have these feeling about soldiering and if she does, she'll be able to perform well.

But these are only a few.

Now it's up to somebody to decide whether there needs to be an exception for them or not.

I've come to admit I cannot comment on the situation in the US military and if there should be such an exception. All I can say is while there are the usual bad examples it isn't working half bad in Europe and with a smaller recruitment pool we do also need them.
As for the combat worthiness of these militaries - don't mix up European militaries with European politics.

Wendigo
01-25-2011, 11:21 AM
Pete031, I mostly agree with what you're saying. you brought up a very good point I want to expand on.



However they are soon weeded out in a Battalion and thrown into Transport platoons, or driver positions. Is it a perfect system? **** no

According to the system, the Canadian Forces is what. 1000 members OVER in the Infantry? That means we have 1000 too many infantry soldiers...yet the battalions are still under strength. Why is that? (Where ARE these guys?)
It's because we send broken weak and unwanted infanteers to transport platoons. Driver positions. Place holder jobs. To work in the canteen for 5 years (I'm not kidding..).

There are young physically fit kids ready and willing to step in and do the job but they can't join because so and so has been running the canteen for 5 years or someone doesn't play well with others or can't **** a machinegun so their made OCs driver for years. We need to get rid of these people who are taking up spots that can be filled by dependable ass kickers who don't run to the MIR anytime an ex comes up.
We also need to weed them out during basic training and their trades course so that they don't infect the system and become a drain on us.




The point being, and I have said this from the start, that the standards have to be the same or else it won't work.
Agreed but the standards will never be the same.
Not to mention, just because someone can pass the BFT (our yearly fitness test) doesn't mean they can do the job of a combat arms soldier.


People say that seeing a woman torn up from enemy fire or an IED is more upsetting then a male, and that is simply not the case, as seeing any of your soldiers wounded or killed is a terrible thing.
totally agree, i laugh when i hear people saying "it will hurt our feelings more seeimg women killed!"


Can they **** the mortar Base plate? Or the SF kit for the GPMG? Not all of them, but some. Not all the males I see in some of the Rifle Companies could **** an 84mm, 6 rounds and all his kit up the mountains of A-Stan all day. Or get in the traces and break trail all day.
Totally agree and I've said that here. There are PLENTY of guys who can't fire a .50 from the shoulder or whatever people are *****ing about. Lots of smaller guys out there. In my experience there is a huge difference between how these smaller guys and women approach not being able to do the job and their attitude.



I have heard that Male soldiers will rape the female soldiers as an arguement... Well, thats a leadership issue.
And we both know Male-male rape happens more among our enemy not to mention it happens quite a bit among our allies.


At the end of the day, This will most likely happen to the US Adapt and Overcome.
Exactly. It's going to happen. Accept it, deal with it, try to make it positive or quit.

digrar
01-25-2011, 07:24 PM
Not to mention, just because someone can pass the BFT (our yearly fitness test) doesn't mean they can do the job of a combat arms soldier.

The BFT/CFA/what ever you call it needs to be Infantry specific. A weeks patrol, full battle load with night ambush every night.

h_rnzir
01-28-2011, 04:57 PM
my 002. cents coming in late ..

unless your'e either A. been in an combat unit or b. been in combat .... then you really shouldnt say anything based on your civillian street comparisons ... reading surveys and papers and tests does not qualify you too really have a decent grip on this issue... you are welcome to your opinion but dont get butthurt when someone with the first hand experience rips you too shreds (bravo Linedoggie)

military and civillians have 2 distinctly different trains and modes of thoughts when it comes to the issues that affect the real world especially issues like this of allowing women into combat units ....whilst military pers may have what you think is a medieval mindset to this issue in most cases it is warranted and seen first hand ..we simply cannot afford to be politically correct or equal opportunistic when the **** is hitting the fan ..

i have my personal opinions based on all of the above but i will hold off for the time being ..

its a argument that will go on for many moons to come with good and bad points

HollywoodMarine
01-28-2011, 11:54 PM
H_r... you are never too late, and well put.

11B101ABN
01-31-2011, 05:31 PM
If you are training troops, then you have one job, to make that man or woman into a soldier. If they don't make it, then it's on YOU.

If you do not want that responsibility, then sign up for infantry.

Bullshi*. Utter bullshi*.

11B101ABN
01-31-2011, 05:36 PM
In my experience...No, it will not work.

The physiology isn't there. I have never met the female that could carry the weight I and others carried, for the distances we covered. Probably never will. Are they out there? Sure. But not in any real quantity.


Civilians are self serving and ignorant about the reality here. Politicians even more so.

HollywoodMarine
01-31-2011, 06:53 PM
Civilians are self serving and ignorant about the reality here. Politicians even more so.
Most politicians are non-prior service, self serving, ignorant, civilians. General population who vote for them are just as bad.

clean
02-01-2011, 03:21 PM
No, don't propose that at all.

Listen, I get the fears, I get the practical applications. I say allow them through at the same standards that have created the finest military the world has ever seen. If they wash out, they wash out, if they don't? Then send them to do the job the want to do, and earned.

digrar
02-01-2011, 07:00 PM
The only fear I ever had was if they could keep up on their worst day, not when they're all fit and prepared over the duration of a short selection/training course, secondly and more importantly that they couldn't drag my **** and all of my heavy kit out of a contact. In my platoon and the sniper cell (30 blokes total), we had 10 blokes who were over 6'3" and 210lb, closer to 400lb (for some of us larger lads) with all of our kit and the other 20 blokes only being 50 or so pounds lighter. Anyone can pull a trigger and anyone can cruise around in webbing assaulting things, but that's a small part of Infantry soldiering, dragging 400lb out of a contact, or 150lb on your back day in day out while remaining alert is another story entirely.

Training money is tight, anyone doing a proper cost benefit analysis would **** can the idea of putting people with a very low percentage chance of being successful through the system. In our situation where some units have to borrow helmets from another unit to do HE range practices, it's not viable.
My thoughts are, if a government wants to run a social program that empowers women, go to a women's shelter and run it there.

LineDoggie
02-01-2011, 07:05 PM
The only fear I ever had was if they could keep up on their worst day, not when they're all fit and prepared over the duration of a short selection/training course, secondly and more importantly that they couldn't drag my **** and all of my heavy kit out of a contact. In my platoon and the sniper cell (30 blokes total), we had 10 blokes who were over 6'3" and 210lb, closer to 400lb (for some of us larger lads) with all of our kit and the other 20 blokes only being 50 or so pounds lighter. Anyone can pull a trigger and anyone can cruise around in webbing assaulting things, but that's a small part of Infantry soldiering, dragging 400lb out of a contact, or 150lb on your back day in day out while remaining alert is another story entirely.

Training money is tight, anyone doing a proper cost benefit analysis would **** can the idea of putting people with a very low percentage chance of being successful through the system. In our situation where some units have to borrow helmets from another unit to do HE range practices, it's not viable.
My thoughts are, if a government wants to run a social program that empowers women, go to a women's shelter and run it there.
Watch it Jefe, they'll be calling you a fascist cretin a-hole next for basing your comments on real life experiences, and commonsense.

Dc5-driver
02-01-2011, 07:06 PM
No, don't propose that at all.

Listen, I get the fears, I get the practical applications. I say allow them through at the same standards that have created the finest military the world has ever seen. If they wash out, they wash out, if they don't? Then send them to do the job the want to do, and earned.

You must see it from a other perspective the one from the unit and it`s objectives.
Not the one ho shoult have earned it and other BS you serve a unit not yourself..
Create the worldfinest military you say well what size shoult that military be?
All Army`s are working to be the best but there are units to fill.

It just does`nt work like that...no way.

clean
02-01-2011, 07:14 PM
No unit knows the objectives until they are told the objectives.

KEEPER0311
02-01-2011, 07:18 PM
No unit knows the objectives until they are told the objectives.

He's speaking in a broader sense. For example, that of the infantry. "To locate, close with and destroy the enemy. By fire and maneuver, and repeal the enemy assault by fire and close combat."

clean
02-01-2011, 07:21 PM
He's speaking in a broader sense. For example, that of the infantry. "To locate, close with and destroy the enemy. By fire and maneuver, and repeal the enemy assault by fire and close combat."

Yeah, I know. Why can't a woman do that?

KEEPER0311
02-01-2011, 07:27 PM
Yeah, I know. Why can't a woman do that?

I'm not going to reiterate what has already been covered by members fairly thoroughly. Although you don't agree with their opinions, that are based on first hand experience, I feel they are dead on. If there is a woman who can meet the same standards as males, then by all means. But the percentage of women who fit this criteria is quite small.

clean
02-01-2011, 08:15 PM
Nope. You're the ones whining. Deal. Find a way. The world does, why can't you?

You guys have one answer. And it's "no"

And we are losing. So find a new way.

Hollis
02-01-2011, 08:26 PM
Marines will always do what the Commandant of the Marine Corps says. They may whine, but they will do it with enthusiasm especially if the Gunny is watching.

digrar
02-01-2011, 08:29 PM
Losing what, I haven't heard of any Infantry unit getting towelled up in battle. If there is a wider problem with the way the war is being fought, fixing something that isn't broken isn't going to fix that.

clean
02-01-2011, 08:29 PM
Any idea of the harsh reality of a conflict zone? At that piont you have other things in mind. Political,civil or your idea`s may not fit in reality.
Thousands died and many lives more are in danger protecting your sorry *ss in recent years.
Stop thinking I care.

clean
02-01-2011, 08:31 PM
Stop thinking I care.

Because I do, and all of us do. But stop thinking whether we do or not. It's a time suck.

Hollis
02-01-2011, 08:32 PM
Any idea of the harsh reality of a conflict zone? At that piont you have other things in mind. Political,civil or your idea`s may not fit in reality.
Thousands died and many lives more are in danger protecting your sorry *ss in recent years.


Let's not get too carried away.

LineDoggie
02-01-2011, 08:49 PM
And we are losing. So find a new way.
So we are Losing in Afghanistan because we dont have Females in Infantry Squads?

clean
02-01-2011, 08:55 PM
So we are Losing in Afghanistan because we dont have Females in Infantry Squads?
If you are going to insist on making simple boring arguments, then go to another thread.

If you are actually interested in influencing policy when it comes to A-Stan, maybe work to move up.

The thing is, the thing I've always wondered? Is what, Linedoggie? What do you, aside from screaming louder and calling people names... what? What do you bring to the table?

digrar
02-01-2011, 08:59 PM
If you are going to insist on making simple boring arguments, then go to another thread.

That's the point I made, how does fixing the bit that isn't broken, ie the Infantry is not losing battles, fix the wider war effort? It's a valid question.

clean
02-01-2011, 09:20 PM
Clean... you have no military experience nor will you ever understand what life is like in the infantry. Current policy does not allow both genders to share the same living space, showers, restrooms, etc, which will be a determent to unit cohesion. You say a lot, yet you don't have any idea what you are talking about.

Fair enough. But I think you are wrong. But I also agree with what you are wrong about.

HollywoodMarine
02-01-2011, 09:31 PM
Where are we wrong? If a Grunt platoon (with one female) arrives to a staging area or FOB, the lone female will participate on her duties, but will be split from her platoon due to fraternization policy upon returning to quarters. She can either be an outsider or defy policy. However, defying policy will end her and other careers.

clean
02-01-2011, 09:40 PM
Where are we wrong? If a Grunt platoon (with one female) arrives to a staging area or FOB, the lone female will participate on her duties, but will be split from her platoon due to fraternization policy upon returning to quarters. She can either be an outsider or defy policy. However, defying policy will end her and other careers.
HollywoodMarine, answer me this. Do you follow orders?

LineDoggie
02-01-2011, 09:43 PM
If you are going to insist on making simple boring arguments, then go to another thread. YOU brought that up with your statement, dont run from it now.


If you are actually interested in influencing policy when it comes to A-Stan, maybe work to move up.

The thing is, the thing I've always wondered? Is what, Linedoggie? What do you, aside from screaming louder and calling people names... what? What do you bring to the table?

1. I'm not screaming or calling you an ******* Cretin, Bigot, Fascist, as I was called by your side and supporters. You made it personal on your first post to me.

2. What I bring is First Hand experience with both training and my observations over 27 years to include in combat. I never said Females should not be allowed to serve in the Military. There are many jobs they do well. Infantry is a different mindset and a different way of soldiering than being a finance clerk on a SAW in a convoy. Again I will ask you do- YOU really want to to have a female who can't throw a grenade far enough away from herself and you that you both are inside the blast radius just to be fashionably progressive?

Look up Appendix A FM 21-20 for the physical differences, ignore your bias against me for a few minutes and educate yourself.
http://library.enlisted.info/field-manuals/series-2/FM21_20/APPA.PDF

3. My Firm belief is that if we allow Females into the Infantry they will become the predominent casualties of those units.

As you stated in your PM I'm not allowed to ask what you bring to the Table, so Spare my life mister Ninja assassin, I stay awake nights in fear of you tough guy.

HollywoodMarine
02-01-2011, 09:46 PM
HollywoodMarine, answer me this. Do you follow orders?
Yes I do and No... I have defied orders. So what's your question.

clean
02-01-2011, 10:01 PM
Linedoggie, you are right.

Hollywood Marine? Nice job?

HollywoodMarine
02-01-2011, 10:12 PM
Long story short... I defied orders that turned into a Courts Martial, then dropped to a Letter of Reprimand. So good job. I know what I am saying, doing, and confident to lead by my knowledge and experience.

Hollis
02-01-2011, 10:16 PM
The Charge of the Light Brigade

Alfred, Lord Tennyson

1. Half a league, half a league,
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Half a league onward,
All in the valley of Death
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Rode the six hundred.
"Forward, the Light Brigade!
"Charge for the guns!" he said:
Into the valley of Death
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Rode the six hundred.

2. "Forward, the Light Brigade!"
Was there a man dismay'd?
Not tho' the soldier knew
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Someone had blunder'd:
Theirs not to make reply,
Theirs not to reason why,
Theirs but to do and die:
Into the valley of Death
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Rode the six hundred.

3. Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon in front of them
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Volley'd and thunder'd;
Storm'd at with shot and shell,
Boldly they rode and well,
Into the jaws of Death,
Into the mouth of Hell
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Rode the six hundred.

4. Flash'd all their sabres bare,
Flash'd as they turn'd in air,
Sabring the gunners there,
Charging an army, while
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif All the world wonder'd:
Plunged in the battery-smoke
Right thro' the line they broke;
Cossack and Russian
Reel'd from the sabre stroke
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Shatter'd and sunder'd.
Then they rode back, but not
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Not the six hundred.

5. Cannon to right of them,
Cannon to left of them,
Cannon behind them
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Volley'd and thunder'd;
Storm'd at with shot and shell,
While horse and hero fell,
They that had fought so well
Came thro' the jaws of Death
Back from the mouth of Hell,
All that was left of them,
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Left of six hundred.

6. When can their glory fade?
O the wild charge they made!
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif All the world wondered.
Honor the charge they made,
Honor the Light Brigade,
http://poetry.eserver.org/space.gif Noble six hundred.

Copied from Poems of Alfred Tennyson,
J. E. Tilton and Company, Boston, 1870



War plays no favorite, war recognizes no inequality, war merely destroys with out prejudice or recognition of a person's status.

clean
02-01-2011, 10:27 PM
Okay. Everyone happy?

clean
02-01-2011, 10:37 PM
Linedoggie, I see that you thought it was appropriate to reference my PM to you.

Fine. You want to go that route, then cut and paste my PM to you. Put it out here, on the forum, for all to see. Let everyone know what I said to you.

Otherwise, cut bait and run. You don't deserve a voice.

clean
02-01-2011, 10:39 PM
And if you have any balls, Linedoggie, cut and paste it now. Before you have a chance to edit my words to you.

clean
02-01-2011, 10:40 PM
Clock is ticking numb nuts.

Hollis
02-01-2011, 10:48 PM
I hope all the excitement waits tell I have chance to make some popcorn, wife comes back from the store with more wine.

Kind of like Showtime, I can feel the excitement.



After looking at a dead man's diary today with a photo of someone dear, I wonder what is all the excitement is about.

I wonder if she knows;

http://i89.photobucket.com/albums/k226/Hollis6475/scan0003dotjpg

Virus
02-01-2011, 10:54 PM
Meh, I'm against it personally....That is all.

LineDoggie
02-01-2011, 11:01 PM
And if you have any balls, Linedoggie, cut and paste it now. Before you have a chance to edit my words to you.
why would I edit anything you sent me as a PM? why would you tell me Not to dare ask what you bring to the table?

Are you on crack perhaps? or just normally a combative ******* stalker for no apparent reason?

If you wish to publish the 2 PM's you sent me feel free.

EDIT: Feel free to publish my response as well

muck
02-02-2011, 05:54 AM
Wow, this debate sure has feelings run high. Clean, why are you getting so angry about this?

It's a fact that


the percentage of capable female recruits is small even in non-combat assignments
their assignment will cause trouble with male squaddies
and quite a few lack the right fighting spirit.

Of course that means in reverse that there are some capable ladies out there and just as you do, I think they shouldn't be barred from serving exactly where their capabilities entitle them to serve. A responsible society should not do that.

That being said, it must be decided if the exception is worthy the costs. You know as well as I do that this decision is highly political. It could be overdue or still too soon.

For me the question is already answered when it comes to conflicts of low intensity where you need females to get into contact with the locals and non-combat troops are as easily becoming a target as infantry does as soon as they leave the camp.

In Europe, we have the additional problem of a smaller recruitment pool regardless of the gender. When you need X troops and only X-Y applicants are male, you'll fill the vacant positions with females if requirements are met. That's a specific thing, though and not relevant to American politics.

Last but not least, it's a societal matter in one line with DADT and whatnot. Such a change can't be initiated with a decree for good or bad. I won't further comment on that.

that they couldn't drag my **** and all of my heavy kit out of a contact. Good point. Then again, I've also met some skinny dudes who couldn't carry the hulks to safety if need be. To thoroughly maintain that ability, general physical standards are already too low in most militaries I guess.

clean
02-02-2011, 05:02 PM
why would I edit anything you sent me as a PM? why would you tell me Not to dare ask what you bring to the table?

Are you on crack perhaps? or just normally a combative ******* stalker for no apparent reason?

If you wish to publish the 2 PM's you sent me feel free.

EDIT: Feel free to publish my response as well

Okay, I can see why you would think when I said "And don't you dare ask me what I bring to the table" you would think I was Walting. I didn't mean it that way. I meant it more along the lines of "I have a voice, and it get's to be heard because I'm an American" blahblahblah. I didn't mean it in the I'm OMFG D3lta.

As far as the actual statement, don't ask me what I bring to the table thing? Yikes!! I sound like a rich AMG driving housewife. So... Sorry for that as well.

@Muck... I'm not actually mad. But I don't think an automatic "no" is the right response. There is room for discussion, and there is a way.

I apologize for being overly combatant. It is not the right way to go about an argument.

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 05:59 PM
It is a touchy subject for those of us who have BTDT, while others with no experience have no clue what we do are giving their .02 cents. Its cool clean. You're still on my Xmas list. ;)

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 06:03 PM
Better then coffee and keeps me awake on slow nights. p-)

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 06:08 PM
I was talking about work knucklehead! p-) Besides, I have the women thing is covered. ;)

clean
02-02-2011, 07:28 PM
For the record, the women in Minions avatar have no place in combat.



Or... Do they?

Aerosoul
02-02-2011, 07:36 PM
Pass the nacho's dude.

Nachos. NACHOS.


Anyway.
If the women can pass with the same standards...go ahead.
It shouldn't be done just for equality, though. Just have more able-bodied soldiers.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 07:54 PM
If we can not be civil and knock some of the BS off, the thread will at least get closed or.... additional action. Other words, try very hard to think before posting.

Aerosoul
02-02-2011, 07:56 PM
Hell, if an 18 year old female's APFT test bracket can be easier than say at mine at 39, **** NO.
I agree.
Intelligence and physical ability need to be paramount.

Lord Helmet
02-02-2011, 08:41 PM
Alright so being serious now... now that I look back we did have females in our patrol bases, we had 2 FED Marines attached to one of the platoons temporarily. They slept in the COC if I remember correctly, wich at that patrol base was nothing more than an abandoned house with one room for the BAS, one for the actual COC with the comm and stuff and another room where the staff NCOs and officers slept. Having females as organic members of a platoon would lead to having a separete tent for female Marines. Putting some thought into it I think it can be done but then again life at the patrol bases is REALLY simple with people crowded in the tents. Is just not practical to have females there all the time, it would require extra work into the patrol base itself. Plus theres the issued brought up before with what can they carry... I doubt the Guardian/Thor system is going to go on their backs as well. I've carried it in 120+ degree weather while clearing a road and its surrounding areas and while taking contact and it was a real pain. A female who's most likely to be smaller than your average male Marine will surely be having a harder time.

Plus those who know how life with the grunts work are aware of how guys are... having a female around 24/7 might be not the best, for her own sake.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 08:47 PM
Plus those who know how life with the grunts work are aware of how guys are... having a female around 24/7 might be not the best, for her own sake.


Good point and this has been mention previously. While we could chide a women for physical abilities not being to standard (or men) we can not hold them responsible for what some men would do. IMHO, that will be the most difficult obstacle to overcome. "The boy/girl thing".

Lord Helmet
02-02-2011, 08:56 PM
Yeah plus the everyday day conversation is based around ***, sh1tting, drunk stories, you know guy stuff that most of the time is not politically correct. When females are around you kinda try to behave yourself. But having a female around ALL THE TIME, life wouldn't just be the same.

Roy Batty
02-02-2011, 09:06 PM
Most women in the mil don't give a ***** about your political correctness..........and I have shared my tent with female troops on occasion and yet somehow managed to not rape them...nor even hit on them for that matter....

clean
02-02-2011, 09:08 PM
Most women in the mil don't give a ***** about your political correctness..........and I have shared my tent with female troops on occasion and yet somehow managed to not rape them...nor even hit on them for that matter....
But, you're old.

Roy Batty
02-02-2011, 09:09 PM
But, you're old.

Never that old.....


Once you let it happen it just seems to not matter anymore folks...Kind of like the DADT crap.....

clean
02-02-2011, 09:12 PM
Never that old.....


Once you let it happen it just seems to not matter anymore folks...Kind of like the DADT crap.....

Yeah, very true. The " new" becomes old very quick.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 09:27 PM
Yeah, very true. The " new" becomes old very quick.


especially when you hit 40........ :)

Lord Helmet
02-02-2011, 09:32 PM
In our AO like I said the females stayed in the COC, and in the FOB that was the main base in the area there was a Female tent where all females regardless of their rank and billet stayed in. No males allowed in. The only military chicks in the whole city were probably those FET Marines who worked in teams of 2 or 3, and the reporter chicks that would come for several weeks at a time.

I'm sure people can adjust to having females around all the time, but as far as operating... yeah no thanks.

Roy Batty
02-02-2011, 09:35 PM
Guess your inability to integrate other soldiers into your ops is the fault of your military then? or is it yours?

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 09:37 PM
Most women in the mil don't give a ***** about your political correctness..........and I have shared my tent with female troops on occasion and yet somehow managed to not rape them...nor even hit on them for that matter....
Roy... different countries, policies, lifestyles. I'm also surprised the women didn't man handle you. p-) All joking aside, were you with a Grunt unit or service support? What pouges do is not the same what we do in the Grunts, and that in itself is also a different lifestyle.

oswald
02-02-2011, 09:38 PM
Roy? A pogue? rofl

That's amusing. Ignorant, but amusing.

rofl

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 09:52 PM
Roy? A pogue? That's amusing. Ignorant, but amusing.
You gonna start name calling on here OSWALD, or do you want to retract your last flame? Up to you.

As for Roy... what is it that you do in the Canadian Armed Forces? I'm curious being that we aren't drinking buddies, shooting the sh1t ever weekend.

clean
02-02-2011, 09:53 PM
Roy's done his stuff. Stand down, Hollywood.

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 09:56 PM
Simple question from one warrior to the next, nothing more clean.

Roy Batty
02-02-2011, 09:56 PM
This is not a forum in which I can discuss my operational experiance, nor my unit, or employment.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 09:56 PM
Some how having sh**y coffee seems like a good thing. I wonder if the food is any good. Good food, is where it is at.

clean
02-02-2011, 09:57 PM
Simple question from one warrior to the next, nothing more clean.

Then take it off the public forum.

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 09:57 PM
Cool. Shoot me out a PM. It wont leave from there.

oswald
02-02-2011, 09:57 PM
You gonna start name calling on here OSWALD, or do you want to retract your last flame? Up to you.

As for Roy... what is it that you do in the Canadian Armed Forces? I'm curious being that we aren't drinking buddies, shooting the sh1t ever weekend.And what flame would that be? I called the idea of Roy being a pogue ignorant. "Unaware or uninformed". If you want to take on the personification of ignorance, go for it. HOLLYWOODMARINE.

Roy Batty
02-02-2011, 09:58 PM
Sufice to say that I have played in the sandbox more than once (more than twice in fact) and didn't spend much time on the boardwalk.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 10:00 PM
If it matters I will vouch for Roy,,,,,,,,,,,,, so let's move on, nothing to see here.

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 10:02 PM
Oswald. Calling someone "ignorant" has several meanings which is why I called you out. I'm feeling good today, so I am not going to go any further with that. Have a bottle beer on me. I'm moving on Hollis.

Roy Batty
02-02-2011, 10:02 PM
Thanks Hollis

clean
02-02-2011, 10:03 PM
Moving on.

This thread is wicked fun!

oswald
02-02-2011, 10:06 PM
Oswald. Calling someone "ignorant" has several meanings which is why I called you out. I'm feeling good today, so I am not going to go any further with that. Have a bottle beer on me. I'm moving on Hollis.I didn't intend to call you ignorant, and I apologize for coming across like that. But I've known Roy for many years here and I know that he's no pogue.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 10:09 PM
Thanks Hollis

No problem, Bumping heads is sort of our thing. As one gets older you worry less about bumping heads and more about the food. And Yes, I had dinner tonight, so I am GTG.

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 10:11 PM
I didn't intend to call you ignorant, and I apologize for coming across like that. But I've known Roy for many years here and I know that he's no pogue.
Thanks buddy. Let me get you a fresh beer. I spit in the other I got you. p-)

JUNKHO
02-02-2011, 10:18 PM
*hack* and I just grabbed a drink of it when you set it aside aaaaccckkk!

What is it with Marines and beer? :-)

oswald
02-02-2011, 10:18 PM
Too late. :|

HollywoodMarine
02-02-2011, 10:22 PM
**** it... we share water from canteens, and Camelbaks all the time. Give me a swig before Hollis decides to stick something in it. p-)

*hack* and I just grabbed a drink of it when you set it aside aaaaccckkk!

What is it with Marines and beer? :-)
The Vikings have Valhalla. The Muslims their 7 virgins. Marines beer.

Hollis
02-02-2011, 10:22 PM
*hack* and I just grabbed a drink of it when you set it aside aaaaccckkk!

What is it with Marines and beer? :-)


A Marine has a right to his own dreams. 120+ degrees, almost no water, no food and a Marine dreams of a cold can of beer, dripping with water condensing on the side of the can. Keeps you going. Also pity the fool who will try to keep that dream from becoming a reality.

rhino
02-02-2011, 10:30 PM
A Marine has a right to his own dreams. 120+ degrees, almost no water, no food and a Marine dreams of a cold can of beer, dripping with water condensing on the side of the can. Keeps you going. Also pity the fool who will try to keep that dream from becoming a reality.

ohhh, that would explain the fight we got into at Quantico after complainging about the quality of beer and lack of Molson :/

clean
02-02-2011, 10:32 PM
This thread was much more fun when it was only Americans.

oswald
02-02-2011, 10:34 PM
No it wasn't.

digrar
02-02-2011, 10:39 PM
Who are you calling American knackers?

clean
02-02-2011, 10:44 PM
Who are you calling American knackers?

It's cool you figured out a way to post while treading water.

rhino
02-02-2011, 11:35 PM
Minions, all the best to you in your future endevours, before i go though I got to say you are as much a turd as the RussiaStrong!!11 crew, 'My view is the right view and non other matters' not much room for discussion there, wonder what it is you fear so much, but it dont matter :/

clean
02-02-2011, 11:40 PM
With American knowledge and actual leadership serving now posting in it.

Would it kill them to teach you a smattering of grammar?

clean
02-02-2011, 11:45 PM
Or maybe a comma. A comma might be cool.

clean
02-02-2011, 11:51 PM
Sorry, I get excited when I type, still knuckledragging it and am too lazy to spellcheck.
Hmm, yeah. Me calling you out on that is a pot calling a kettle black. I'm the worst offender.