Women's Combat Role Draws Little Comment

[farmgirl]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=540&ncid=736&e=10&u=/ap/20040103/ap_on_re_mi_ea/iraq_military_women


By MATT KELLEY, Associated Press Writer

WASHINGTON - Female American troops in Iraq (news - web sites) have killed Iraqis with bombs and bullets. They've won medals for valor and Purple Hearts for combat wounds. They've been captured as prisoners of war, killed by enemy fire and buried as heroes in Arlington National Cemetery.

American women have participated more extensively in combat in Iraq than in any previous war in U.S. history. They've taken roles nearly inconceivable just a decade or two ago — flying fighter jets and attack helicopters, patrolling streets armed with machine guns and commanding units of mostly male soldiers. Seven have been killed in combat.

Yet all this has gone largely without much comment in Washington, despite the attention given to rescued POW Jessica Lynch.

Congress debated the issue of women in the military after the 1991 Gulf War (news - web sites), voting months later to loosen the 1948 ban on women in combat. The issue hasn't come up on Capitol Hill this year, however.

"It doesn't seem to be a big deal," said retired Navy Capt. Lory Manning, who tracks military issues for the Women's Research and Education Institute.

"We could not do what needs to be done over there without women. If there needs to be a body search of an Iraqi woman, there's no way an American male could do that."

Military women in Iraq say they are doing their jobs just like their male colleagues. Sgt. Erin Edwards, 23, often travels in armed convoys as part of her work as an aide to a commander of the 4th Infantry Division in Tikrit.

Edwards left her 3-year-old son and infant daughter with her in-laws to serve in Iraq because her husband serves in the Army in South Korea (news - web sites).

"I would love to be at home with my kids, but I'm doing this for them. I wouldn't want to do anything else," Edwards said recently.

Opponents of women in combat haven't resigned themselves to this turn of events. They're trying to pressure President Bush (news - web sites) to reinstate restrictions on women serving in support units that travel close to the front lines, such as Lynch's 507th Maintenance Company which was ambushed in Nasiriyah. That unit included the first American woman soldier killed in the Iraq war, Pfc. Lori Piestewa.

Six other female soldiers have died in Iraq since October: Pfc. Analaura Esperaza Gutierrez, Pfc. Rachel Bosveld, Pfc. Karina Lau, Spec. Frances Vega, Chief Warrant Officer Sharon T. Swartworth and Staff Sgt. Kimberly Voelz.

Elaine Donnelly, an opponent of women in combat who is spearheading a petition drive on the issue, said she believes it's important that women not be put in danger of being captured and raped. Medical records indicate Lynch was sodomized while in Iraqi captivity but she has said she does not remember it.

"If we are opposed to violence against women at the Air Force and other service academies, why all of a sudden if violence happens at the hands of the enemy, we say it doesn't matter?" said Donnelly, president of the Center for Military Readiness, which claims more than 20,000 signatures on the petition. "That's a step backward for civilization, not a step forward."

Pentagon (news - web sites) officials say they do not keep track of the number of women serving in Iraq. Overall, 15 percent of active-duty troops and 17 percent of National Guard and reserve forces are women.

Acting on the 1991 law allowing greater roles for women, the Pentagon loosened restrictions on women's military service in 1994. The new rules allow women to become combat pilots and take other jobs that previously were off-limits.

The military retained some restrictions: Army women still can't serve in front-line infantry, tank or artillery units, and Navy women can't serve on submarines or in the SEAL special forces units, for example.

But the conflict in Iraq, like other modern wars, has blurred the line between combat and non-combat units.

Women can serve as military police, which patrol Iraqi cities and often have been involved in fighting with Iraqi insurgents. Supply convoys and troop transports often include female soldiers and have been the targets of repeated attacks by anti-American forces.

Some examples:

_ Army Pvt. Teresa Broadwell, 20, won a Bronze Star for valor for laying down machine-gun fire while her military police unit was under attack in Karbala in mid-October.

_ Bosveld, 19, was killed days later in a mortar attack on the police station in Abu Ghraib, a Baghdad suburb home to one of Iraq's most notorious prisons.

Bosveld was one of seven women killed in combat in Iraq so far. Five women were killed by hostile fire in the 1991 Gulf War, including three killed when an Iraqi SCUD missile hit a U.S. base in Saudi Arabia.

"Women MPs in Iraq and Afghanistan (news - web sites) are as much on the front line as they can be," said Manning, the retired Navy officer. "I'd say if they have the mental and physical toughness to do that, they have the physical strength to be in the infantry."

Female soldiers, particularly MPs on patrol, have drawn curious crowds of Iraqis who marvel at the idea of women in uniform. Edwards, the Army sergeant in Tikrit, said Iraqi women are particularly interested.

"When women look at you, they just smile," Edwards said, her M-16 rifle slung over one shoulder. Others, however, "won't even look at you. It's like they're not allowed."

[papasmerf]

I wouldn't want to fight with a woman aside me, but I never been to combat so I'd like to hear some of the views about this from people who have, or from people whose friends have.

[Deuterium]

I just want the person next to me to ruck-up when necessary, shoot straight, stay calm, and be intelligent. If that person is a woman so be it. Does that mean I won't try to get into her pants if I'm attracted to her, who you kidding(speaking for men in general, I’m happily married). I also don't buy all that "I'll try to protect her because she's a woman" crap. Likewise I don't want to see any standards change just to see women in certain jobs. Don't discriminate, don't change the standards

[Tane Angle]

I'd really like to see a Stryker Brigade or MEU(SOC) put women in as equals, doing equal work. I think it'd be a good testbed, and I think if the military tests a little (as it did with racial integration), then society will change a little, and then the military can change some more, and it will eventually add to the equality, cyclically.

By the way, I've worked with women in the military and since retiring it, and they've all been just as capable as the men, given the training. There are some top notch female bodyguards out there. And women can do things men can't. Take the female bodyguards, they can confuse shooters a heck of a lot better than men can, when protecting a woman. And it's less intrusive for them to be with a female principal all the time. Have a good one, just some thoughts...

[papasmerf]

I'd really like to see a Stryker Brigade or MEU(SOC) put women in as equals, doing equal work. I think it'd be a good testbed, and I think if the military tests a little (as it did with racial integration), then society will change a little, and then the military can change some more, and it will eventually add to the equality, cyclically.

By the way, I've worked with women in the military and since retiring it, and they've all been just as capable as the men, given the training. There are some top notch female bodyguards out there. And women can do things men can't. Take the female bodyguards, they can confuse shooters a heck of a lot better than men can, when protecting a woman. And it's less intrusive for them to be with a female principal all the time. Have a good one, just some thoughts...

There won't be a complete equality, not in Spec Ops at least.

[Jack Mehoff]

I just want the person next to me to ruck-up when necessary, shoot straight, stay calm, and be intelligent. If that person is a woman so be it. Does that mean I won't try to get into her pants if I'm attracted to her, who you kidding(speaking for men in general, I’m happily married). I also don't buy all that "I'll try to protect her because she's a woman" crap. Likewise I don't want to see any standards change just to see women in certain jobs. Don't discriminate, don't change the standards

In addition, they also have to be able to handle indirect cursing, swearing, dirty talks from the males without screaming ****** harrasment. Did i mention Selective Service System for all 18 year old females?

[Deuterium]

I just want the person next to me to ruck-up when necessary, shoot straight, stay calm, and be intelligent. If that person is a woman so be it. Does that mean I won't try to get into her pants if I'm attracted to her, who you kidding(speaking for men in general, I’m happily married). I also don't buy all that "I'll try to protect her because she's a woman" crap. Likewise I don't want to see any standards change just to see women in certain jobs. Don't discriminate, don't change the standards

In addition, they also have to be able to handle indirect cursing, swearing, dirty talks from the males without screaming ****** harrasment. Did i mention Selective Service System for all 18 year old females?

Yup.... Add that too.

[Tane Angle]

Same requirements for women as for the men, including being able to hack it. But we must remember that most men can't hack it either.

As for women in special operations, if they can do it the same or better than men, I don't have a problem with it. I don't want to speak for Deuterium, but he doesn't seem to either.

I've said it before, the women of ISA were as brave, tough, and ruthless if necessary as anyone that I've ever heard of. And if they're not special operations, what is? They've been proving their worth for two decades.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[Jack Mehoff]

It's already hard enough for Special Forces to win the trust of the indigenous people. I believe not all society are like American society where women are being treated equal. Imagine an American female SF trying to teach Afghan men or montagnards, that's not going to work. I'm sure Deu has more experience on this issue.

[Deuterium]

It's already hard enough for Special Forces to win the trust of the indigenous people. I believe not all society are like American society where women are being treated equal. Imagine an American female SF trying to teach Afghan men or montagnards, that's not going to work. I'm sure Deu has more experience on this issue.

Nope you get the idea. But having women allows you to do other things. What brings more attention around the target area, two buff guys walking around with oakleys or a couple(man and wife/boyfriend-girlfriend) walking around.....

[Tane Angle]

You got it, Jack. And winning over the people is part of getting the job done. If they can't get that part of the job done, well that's pretty significant.

[FallenAngel]

Just my personal opinion, but I agree with Deut. If they can meet the same standards as the men and operate in a nearly all-male enviroment without special treatment- more power to them. If they can't, they should reconize that and not demand the system change in order to accomidate them. Some jobs women are just not cut out for.

Take combat pilots for example- women can handle more Gs, and can multi-task better than male pilots which makes them excellent canidates for flight school. However, some claim that females, in general, lack that aggressiveness that's necessary to win in a kill-or-be-killed engagement. (yes, I know dogfighting seems to be a thing of the past...but we thought that once and we were wrong- hence "Top Gun" ;) )

[James]

If women can do the job, good to go. It is a tough business.

My parents are both retired Army officers. Dad was in for 20, with 4 years enlisted time. Mom was commissioned in 1967 and retired in 1989. She was an LtCol., and dad was a Maj. My mom is a tough cookie. Dad was a spook during his enlisted time, and returned to the Army as a psychologist when I was a young pup. Mom was in the Medical Service Corps. She was in the field during Reforger 84. I thought it was cool because she brought MREs back to her 11 year old son. ;)

[Flagg]

My section had 2 women out of a total of 12 pers during last month's training....

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid97/p7eb51e8d7b0cb08fe4c30a906246c5f5/fa134e66.jpg

One woman is a Sig, the other is a Driver....and they both acquitted themselves better than a fair number of the male Infanteers.

http://www.imagestation.com/picture/sraid97/p9b6218beb20aa139401d1c094d2dac99/fa134e76.jpg

Our section won BOTH the Assault Course Challenge and the Land Navigation Race.

The males, on average, were about 80kg+/175lb+...the two women were tiny.....MAYBE 55kg/120lb....yet they rucked the same full pack, webbing, and rifle as the men...all up...approximately 30kg/65lb.

As a percentage of body weight the women had a more challenging job than the men, they didn't mention this...because it had nothing to do with accomplishing the job......they simply did it and kicked ass.

Also, on a lighter note, we had a big organized piss up(drinking session) on the last night on base before leaving......this included a dawn "chunder run" where the OC personally took us out to beast us until we puked..just for fun ;)

It included a long and fast run, press-ups/push-ups, shuttle runs, and carries(both fireman and cradle)......the girls did well on the fireman's carry, but didn't do so hot in the cradle carry.....nor did I as I got matched with a guy well over 110kg/240lb.....I dropped the fat SOB on his ass after the 3rd cradle carry :oops:

On a final note...there was a Selection Course (NZ SAS) being run at the time.....although I can't disclose the number of participants, the numbers shared with me add up to a failure rate of approximately 90%.

The reason why I mention this is that the Selection Course included it's first female participant....and I'm told she did quite well.

My opinion is...if the PERSON can really do the job, let him/her do it.

[Jack Mehoff]

What about the draft? You know, like the one we had for 'Nam. Should we extending the draft to include women too?

As for double standard in APFT, i never like that crap and i think they should get rid of it.

[ShotOver]

Yeah, i didnt think they would make a big deal about all the women in combat, because don't they just want to be counted as soldiers? and not doing it to be noticed... :|

[digrar]

I'm still to meet a female who could carry an opperational load pack and webbing.
15kg webbing, 50kg plus pack, 5kg kevlar vest/ helmet, 5kg (min) weapon. Add extra for MGs and anti armour weapons, radios, recon optics gear, mortar tubes/bombs ect.

I know some very good female, dedicated, fit soldiers, but I don't know any that could carry that load all day (and night these days) for months on end, remaining foccused and then being able to step up during a contact.

Having females in Infantry sections compromises that sections ability to cover distance and the duration that section can patrol for. If that section is limited to a 30kg pack then they are carrying less rations, water and ammunition. Frequent resupply to keep them in the field for the same time as a normal section eats up patrol time and increases the chance of compromise.

The main part of Infantry soldiering is "Seeking out and closing with the enemy" That is the hardest and the most time consuming job.
I have no doubt that a female soldier can make just as big a contribution sitting in a weapon pit in a defensive position, doing a half day patrol in webbing or mounted in a vehicle, or manning a VCP, but the month long fighting patrols in the bush are the Infantry soldiers stock trade and are beyond the capabilities of any woman who didn't participate in the East German shop put team.


"Women MPs in Iraq and Afghanistan (news - web sites) are as much on the front line as they can be," said Manning, the retired Navy officer. "I'd say if they have the mental and physical toughness to do that, they have the physical strength to be in the infantry."



Anyone who thinks a MP's job is comparable to an Infantryman's is a mental midget and deserves all the ridicule and scorn that he recieves. The fact that a Navy officer made the comment reinforces my fear of having Navy and Airforce personel in command of the Australian Defence Force when their turns come.

[ShotOver]

Yeah, right on man...

To be a **** and bring up the old argument... what about "That time of the month" that will for sure interupt their combat capabilities.

[fantassin]

During exercise Cambrian Patrol 2001, a 48 hours patrolling exercise held every year since 1959 in Wales a british army team led by a female 2Lt got a Silver medal, a considerable achievement when you know that during Cambrian Patrol 2002, the only two US teams (SETAF Brigade Recon Co and 2/3 Field Arty) gave in at the end of the first day.

[marktigger]

there is a woman in the British armed forces who won her commando beret but there is a lot o controvosy about the circumstances and wether she got it by her own merits or the selection team were ordered to pass her.

[ShotOver]

Or she did some extra-credit duties *cough* on her knees *cough*

Naaaaah, i'm just joking.

Sounds like that movie... G.I Jane, or somthin..

[oldsoak]

I've met some tough women in uniform - oddly enough, the hardest ones were Aussies and Kiwis - maybe they have a environment thats more keyed to getting stuck in alongside the blokes. I think quite a few blokes have a cultural problem with women especially in whats considered a "male" preserve . I've even had people wondering about separate toilet facilites in a platoon harbour area. :cantbeli: . If its to work, they have to be treated 100% the same - they get no favours, no slack or anything else that the blokes dont get period. Pointless cutting down on fitness requirements or that ****. As to the woman who got the commando beret, well, I hope for her sake she got it fair and square because the RM's are not a unit you can hide in plus they dont like bluffers. It will screw her in front of the blokes if she didnt. I must confess to a hangup of seeing them in frontline jobs but then I'm a product of the old days when women did the breeding and men did the feeding. We wore red coats as well :lol:

[JunglistSoldier]

I've been thru COUNTLESS debates about female personell in combat arms, and I always say: It's about putting the best person for that particular slot, if that person is a woman then so be it.

Some argue that men would take stupid risks etc. to save a woman, and that alot of men can't stand seeing women killed in combat. Thats bull**** imho even tho they have their points.

What makes more sense however... is America ready to see the bodies of women draged thru the streets of a hotspot?

[California Joe]

As usual on such subjects I defer to the men who've been shot at.

[Tane Angle]

I'm not so sure that they're ready to see men dragged through the streets either. After all, I don't think Clinton pulled out of Somalia for kicks; rather, he was under political pressure. Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[fantassin]

Last time I heard of her, the female who did the all-arms commando course was in a training regiment somewhere in the North of England; I don't think she spent a long time in any commando unit (I think she was going for Cdo Log Rgt).

[farmgirl]

Yeah, right on man...

To be a **** and bring up the old argument... what about "That time of the month" that will for sure interupt their combat capabilities.


okay... now that comment just made me laugh out loud.
I can handle the comments about percpetions in other countries causing problems. That's a fact.
I can handle the comments about being able to carry the loads day in and day out. On the whole, men are physically stronger than women. That's a fact.
However, women have been dealing with stress during "that time of the month" for years. Give me a f***king break. rofl I'm no more likely to have problems with combat capabilities... or any other capabilities because I'm having my period. Stick with the true arguements.

and Jack.... I think if women want equality in the military, they should be held to the same standards. I also believe that we should require registration with selective service at 18.

[farmgirl]

I'm not so sure that they're ready to see men dragged through the streets either. After all, I don't think Clinton pulled out of Somalia for kicks; rather, he was under political pressure. Have a good one, and just some thoughts...


I, for one, couldn't handle it Tane. Hell, I cover my eyes during the bloody parts of movies. I know I couldn't do it. I know that I probably couldn't kill someone unless they were directly threatening my children, but my hat is off to the men and women who are strong enough to handle those stresses.

[Jack Mehoff]

and Jack.... I think if women want equality in the military, they should be held to the same standards. I also believe that we should require registration with selective service at 18.

But how many of us here really want Americas daughters draft for front line fighting just because of a few ambitious military women. I'm sure Vietnam War bring a lot of flashbacks.

[farmgirl]

and Jack.... I think if women want equality in the military, they should be held to the same standards. I also believe that we should require registration with selective service at 18.

But how many of us here really want Americas daughters draft for front line fighting just because of a few ambitious military women. I'm sure Vietnam War bring a lot of flashbacks.

Registering for selective service doesn't mean that we are going to reinstitute the draft.
I wouldn't want to go to war. I just don't think that I have the mental fortitude for it, but there are men that feel the same way.
I think that women who want to scream about equal rights have to be ready to take everything that that entails.
There are some areas in which I don't care to be equal. If that makes me old fashioned. Then so be it.
I have a daughter, and I wouldn't want her to go to war, but if she decides that she wants to be a member of our armed forces. I'll support her with pride.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

It's a politically charged issue, so it's important to remember to use logic and reason & not emotion to assess it.

1. There is no shortage of qualified male applicants.
2. Females can be "tough" but they simply do not have the same physical capabilities as men.
3. Therefore, in order to "qualify" a meaningful number of females (i.e. a number sufficient to keep the feminists quiet), standards are lowered.
4. As a result, females in combat units are inherently less qualified than their male counterparts.

Either raise female qualification standards so that they're the same across the board, or get rid of them. They are creating operational deficiencies in the name of political correctness.

And the line about how females can be better fighter pilots because they "can take more G's" is not accurate - the better G tolerance is simply a function of height. Shorter people take Gs better. So men & women of the same height have the same G tolerance. You may want to ask the Navy's first female F-14 pilot about the issue. Oh wait, she's dead because they passed her along when she wasn't qualified. hmmmmm

[Jack Mehoff]

Women recruitment is going to take a big bite in the butt if U.S. military level all the playing field (same APFT, same buzz haircut, same shower, no special accommodations, etc.)

They want women to be equal by hurting women recruitment? that doesn't make any sense to me

[Tane Angle]

farmgirl brings up an interesting point. I suppose women did (or perhaps didn't do) something during that time of the month for the past hundreds of thousands of years. Kind of like how people got through the day without toilet paper. Bad mental image, sorry. :cantbeli:

[StarvingStudent47]

Anyone remember that A-10 pilot callsign "Killer Chick"? I was always peeved that Jessica Lynch got so much press for doing nothing besides being a "damsel in distress," and positive role models like KC were ignored by the press.

[FallenAngel]

And the line about how females can be better fighter pilots because they "can take more G's" is not accurate - the better G tolerance is simply a function of height. Shorter people take Gs better. So men & women of the same height have the same G tolerance. You may want to ask the Navy's first female F-14 pilot about the issue. Oh wait, she's dead because they passed her along when she wasn't qualified. hmmmmm

That was me- sorry :oops: I just remember hearing somewhere that women have stronger leg muscles or something along those lines that helps them keep the blood up in their upper body rather than draining towards their legs. I assume though, since you didn't mention it, that the multi-tasking thing is true?

[Tane Angle]

I was actually talking to someone about her today, StarvingStudent47. I was talking to someone who works for Lockheed designing aircraft, and I asked if there was going to be any improvements with the A10 or something replacing it in the next 10-20 years. From there we got into talking about that pilot. Dang good pilot. I've always liked CAS folks, they don't just put themselves in harm's way, they just into oncoming traffic, waving their arms with a "hit me!" sign on it, then crawl slowly. Now that's bravery.

[ogukuo72]

Same requirements for women as for the men, including being able to hack it. But we must remember that most men can't hack it either.

As for women in special operations, if they can do it the same or better than men, I don't have a problem with it. I don't want to speak for Deuterium, but he doesn't seem to either.

I've said it before, the women of ISA were as brave, tough, and ruthless if necessary as anyone that I've ever heard of. And if they're not special operations, what is? They've been proving their worth for two decades.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

And remember that famous quote of a GSG-9 instructor about female terrorists: "Shoot the woman first" ... because they are more dedicated and ruthless. If female terrorists are so deadly, why shouldn't female soldiers?

[Nawlins]

Yeah, right on man...

To be a **** and bring up the old argument... what about "That time of the month" that will for sure interupt their combat capabilities.


okay... now that comment just made me laugh out loud.
I can handle the comments about percpetions in other countries causing problems. That's a fact.
I can handle the comments about being able to carry the loads day in and day out. On the whole, men are physically stronger than women. That's a fact.
However, women have been dealing with stress during "that time of the month" for years. Give me a f***king break. rofl I'm no more likely to have problems with combat capabilities... or any other capabilities because I'm having my period. Stick with the true arguements.

and Jack.... I think if women want equality in the military, they should be held to the same standards. I also believe that we should require registration with selective service at 18.

Amen sister. I thought that comment was bull**** too.

I know I couldn't hack it in the military, but if there's a woman out there who can, I think would want her to have a chance to do so. I'm still not sure women in combat roles is a good idea... but I don't know much about combat. There are people here who know more, I'll let them argue for or against.

Selective services for women scares me a little. I wouldn't be drafted if it came to that, but what about my (future) daughters? Who knows.

[farmgirl]

Yeah, right on man...

To be a **** and bring up the old argument... what about "That time of the month" that will for sure interupt their combat capabilities.


okay... now that comment just made me laugh out loud.
I can handle the comments about percpetions in other countries causing problems. That's a fact.
I can handle the comments about being able to carry the loads day in and day out. On the whole, men are physically stronger than women. That's a fact.
However, women have been dealing with stress during "that time of the month" for years. Give me a f***king break. rofl I'm no more likely to have problems with combat capabilities... or any other capabilities because I'm having my period. Stick with the true arguements.

and Jack.... I think if women want equality in the military, they should be held to the same standards. I also believe that we should require registration with selective service at 18.

Amen sister. I thought that comment was bull**** too.

I know I couldn't hack it in the military, but if there's a woman out there who can, I think would want her to have a chance to do so. I'm still not sure women in combat roles is a good idea... but I don't know much about combat. There are people here who know more, I'll let them argue for or against.

Selective services for women scares me a little. I wouldn't be drafted if it came to that, but what about my (future) daughters? Who knows.


I'm with you, I won't argue about women in combat. I know I couldn't do it, and I'd be scared to death if my daughter were to do it, but I'm sure there are women would could handle it.
As for selective service. At this point... it's just a registering process. I honestly don't think we'll ever go back to a draft, but I could be wrong. (maybe Tane would have some insight on that one) I just don't think men should be required to register and women not be required to do so. I guess it's one of those things... as women, we've gotta take the good with the bad.
I'm not a big equal rights advocate. I believe that women should get equal pay for equal work, and I want to be treated as a valuable member of whatever team I'm on, however, I NEVER want to be promoted simply because I am a woman. Don't make me part of your quota.
Nothing makes me angrier than that.
There are some positions that I'm simply not cut out to fill. If that makes me old fashioned. Then I guess I'm old fashioned.
I like manly men too.... the "liberated" women can have the metro******s!

JMHO

[Ratamacue]

Well, feminists have been pushing for completely equal rights for some time now, but I don't think any of them have ever pushed for being required to register with selective service. Just some thoughts there...

[farmgirl]

Well, feminists have been pushing for completely equal rights for some time now, but I don't think any of them have ever pushed for being required to register with selective service. Just some thoughts there...


That's my point. Many of the feminists want only certain rights to be equal. In my opinion... that's bull****.


Be careful what you wish for.....

[Jack Mehoff]

farmgirl,
I'll watch your rear if we share a same foxhole ;) You can cook my MREs and wash my clothes in return :lol:

[tony6]

Interesting subject:)
I think I'm kinda old fashioned as for women in army.
In Polish Army there are less than one percent of women (about 0,3-0,4%) - I think we have the most male army in NATO:)
But it's a tradition not a discrimination.
There are few girls even in GROM.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

And the line about how females can be better fighter pilots because they "can take more G's" is not accurate - the better G tolerance is simply a function of height. Shorter people take Gs better. So men & women of the same height have the same G tolerance. You may want to ask the Navy's first female F-14 pilot about the issue. Oh wait, she's dead because they passed her along when she wasn't qualified. hmmmmm

That was me- sorry :oops: I just remember hearing somewhere that women have stronger leg muscles or something along those lines that helps them keep the blood up in their upper body rather than draining towards their legs. I assume though, since you didn't mention it, that the multi-tasking thing is true?

You know, I do remember seeing something about multi-tasking, but I can't remember exactly what it said. If I remember right, it suggested that females were better at multi-tasking, but males were more ****e to taking chances (i.e. agression etc.). I suppose the devil's in the details - it really makes a big difference exactly where you choose to multi-task (during a nighttime carrier landing is bad), or take chances (during a preflight is bad) etc.

[2Sheds_Jackson]

Interesting subject:)
I think I'm kinda old fashioned as for women in army.
In Polish Army there are less than one percent of women (about 0,3-0,4%) - I think we have the most male army in NATO:)
But it's a tradition not a discrimination.
There are few girls even in GROM.

I'm all for women in the military. Hell, I had myself quite a time with a number of 'em over the years :D

I just don't like to see them in combat roles. Not that some of them can't shoot straight & stay calm & focused. But taken as a whole, they are less suited to that job. I mean, if a guy washes out because he can't carry a 50lb pack, how come a female doesn't? Unfortunately, it's implemented as political issue, not a pragmatic one.

Most of the females I worked with were prolly smarter than me. But I doubt they would have faired as well in an old fashioned throw-down.

[farmgirl]

Interesting subject:)
I think I'm kinda old fashioned as for women in army.
In Polish Army there are less than one percent of women (about 0,3-0,4%) - I think we have the most male army in NATO:)
But it's a tradition not a discrimination.
There are few girls even in GROM.

I'm all for women in the military. Hell, I had myself quite a time with a number of 'em over the years :D

I just don't like to see them in combat roles. Not that some of them can't shoot straight & stay calm & focused. But taken as a whole, they are less suited to that job. I mean, if a guy washes out because he can't carry a 50lb pack, how come a female doesn't? Unfortunately, it's implemented as political issue, not a pragmatic one.

Most of the females I worked with were prolly smarter than me. But I doubt they would have faired as well in an old fashioned throw-down.


You make a good point. Women just aren't physically as strong as men. I'm strong for a woman, but there probably aren't a lot of men that I could overpower. Now... if my children were being threatened... I could kick some ass AND take some names, but that's a different story.
I would be far more suited for a "thinking" sort of job than a combat position.

[Tane Angle]

I honestly don't think we'll ever go back to a draft, but I could be wrong. (maybe Tane would have some insight on that one)

As requested, here's my attempt at insight. Remember though, by the time I got in, the draft was over, though the people I met who had been in Vietnam had a lot to say about it. The short of it is that draft=bad. A volunteer, highly-trained, long-term standing professional military is a much better option for the US. Quality not quantity, though we could use a lot more quality people in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also, if it's gotten to the point where deployments are so frequent and long, and benefits/pay so uncomparable with civilian life, that no one wants to join the military, than we're in a pretty bad spot. What I mean is, if the draft is necessary, I'd be a little concerned. We should increase benfits and pay so that it's a more attractive profession.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[ibstolidude]

I honestly don't think we'll ever go back to a draft, but I could be wrong. (maybe Tane would have some insight on that one)

As requested, here's my attempt at insight. Remember though, by the time I got in, the draft was over, though the people I met who had been in Vietnam had a lot to say about it. The short of it is that draft=bad. A volunteer, highly-trained, long-term standing professional military is a much better option for the US. Quality not quantity, though we could use a lot more quality people in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Also, if it's gotten to the point where deployments are so frequent and long, and benefits/pay so uncomparable with civilian life, that no one wants to join the military, than we're in a pretty bad spot. What I mean is, if the draft is necessary, I'd be a little concerned. We should increase benfits and pay so that it's a more attractive profession.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...
just offer free education opportunities..

no loan repayment, no GI, no horse****.

a specified amount of cash based on time/type of service and based on MOS/Job/Branch..cash handed to institute of choice.

[Tane Angle]

ibistolidude, congratulations. It would seem that with that post, you have shown yourself smarter than the combined wits of our current policy makers. How come they don't get what ibistolidude does?

Some other benefits would be nice too, like a little more help with housing or something. I was out on the Island a week or two ago, and apparently the USCG is being forced to privatize housing that it has for decades provided to USCG personnel. The station the friend I was visiting was telling me about is in a pretty affluent area, with great views and beach access, waterfront houses, all that. Most of the personnel at that station will now have to live at least 40 minutes if not more away. Way to treat them well.

Have a good one, and just some thoughts...

[StarvingStudent47]

You make a good point. Women just aren't physically as strong as men. I'm strong for a woman, but there probably aren't a lot of men that I could overpower. Now... if my children were being threatened... I could kick some ass AND take some names, but that's a different story.
I would be far more suited for a "thinking" sort of job than a combat position.

Well, on average women are smaller and weaker than men. But if that's the real problem, then it should be solved with strength and height requirements, not *** requirements. I've met six-foot-tall female firefighters who are pretty ripped. I, on the other hand, am 5'6", 130lbs (and I'm not putting on any more mass despite frequent exercise). I've got a problem with any policy that says those female firefighters can't join the military, but I can, "because soldiers need to be big and strong." Say what?

[farmgirl]

You make a good point. Women just aren't physically as strong as men. I'm strong for a woman, but there probably aren't a lot of men that I could overpower. Now... if my children were being threatened... I could kick some ass AND take some names, but that's a different story.
I would be far more suited for a "thinking" sort of job than a combat position.

Well, on average women are smaller and weaker than men. But if that's the real problem, then it should be solved with strength and height requirements, not *** requirements. I've met six-foot-tall female firefighters who are pretty ripped. I, on the other hand, am 5'6", 130lbs (and I'm not putting on any more mass despite frequent exercise). I've got a problem with any policy that says those female firefighters can't join the military, but I can, "because soldiers need to be big and strong." Say what?

my point exactly... there are exceptions, but for the most part, men are bigger and stronger than women.
Like I said... I'm strong. I grew up on a farm, and my dad didn't treat me differently than my brothers. I can buck bales as well as any guy, but my stamina probably was never as good.
I'm not a big woman. I couldn't fight most men and win. There are men out there that I could fight, but not too many I'm sure.
I don't think that physical requirements should be changed for women.

I also agree that we should pay our military people better.... there should be huge incentives to do what they do!

[oakes]

I think the biggest reason for females not on the front lines falls back on the same issue as gays in the military; a conflict of interest. Military members are not to develop ****** relationships with other members under or over them in their chain of command. It can create favoritism and an aire of special treatment which drastically affects morale and the ability to accomplish the mission. In a combat situation where lives are clearly at risk, what keeps a unit alive and effective is cold, unfeeling discipline. If there is overly personal, emotional or ******ly motivated relations amongst the chain of command that can affect decision-making, lives can be lost. Often, the discipline to stay impersonal can be the difference between one casualty and a whole squad. Women can seriously jeopardize command-and-control, not because they are women, but because men are men and no amount of social engineering is going to change that. Top that off with the fact that female POWs get THE worst, most degrading and vile treatment from our enemies and the fact that they are genetically predisposed to being physically weaker than men (let's face it, most are; so that equates to more money spent to sufficiently train a soldier. Drop-outs cost lots of money) you have a pretty unsavory combination.

Just my two cents. I, personally think that a woman can do anything that a man can, but I don't think that is the heart of this matter.

[basket of soft kittens]

i agreee with oakes besides their would be so many controvesies lawsuits and other mishaps plus think of the physoclogical effect it could have on the men seeing women ( which society has tought us men should protect) blow apart thats some heavy s*** :|

If woman were allowed in combat, there would be so much complications about every aspect. They just don't belong on the battlefield.

[Sixgun Symphony]

I'm still to meet a female who could carry an opperational load pack and webbing.
15kg webbing, 50kg plus pack, 5kg kevlar vest/ helmet, 5kg (min) weapon. Add extra for MGs and anti armour weapons, radios, recon optics gear, mortar tubes/bombs ect.


Ditto

[Sixgun Symphony]

Our section won BOTH the Assault Course Challenge and the Land Navigation Race.

The males, on average, were about 80kg+/175lb+...the two women were tiny.....MAYBE 55kg/120lb....yet they rucked the same full pack, webbing, and rifle as the men...all up...approximately 30kg/65lb.

As a percentage of body weight the women had a more challenging job than the men, they didn't mention this...because it had nothing to do with accomplishing the job......they simply did it and kicked ass.


A 120lb female packing a 65lb pack? What are the distances? Any climbs?

[Maverick77]

If you bitch about equal rights all the time

sure have them

But be prepared to equally die on the battlefield.

[bison]

i think women definitely have a place in combat, but not necessarily as infantry. I'll bet that there are jobs in tanks and the like where being short is an advantage and heavy lifting is not necessary. You should match soldiers to jobs.

[Sixgun Symphony]

i think women definitely have a place in combat, but not necessarily as infantry. I'll bet that there are jobs in tanks and the like where being short is an advantage and heavy lifting is not necessary. You should match soldiers to jobs.

Ok, you got a point there.

[Jack Mehoff]

Old thread revival eh?

Ouch!!

Medical records indicate Lynch was sodomized while in Iraqi captivity but she has said she does not remember it.

i think women definitely have a place in combat, but not necessarily as infantry. I'll bet that there are jobs in tanks and the like where being short is an advantage and heavy lifting is not necessary. You should match soldiers to jobs.

lol you dont think tankers lift heavy things haha

[ogukuo72]

I'm still to meet a female who could carry an opperational load pack and webbing.
15kg webbing, 50kg plus pack, 5kg kevlar vest/ helmet, 5kg (min) weapon. Add extra for MGs and anti armour weapons, radios, recon optics gear, mortar tubes/bombs ect.


Ditto

Are you sure you got it right? Why do American infantrymen carry such heavy loads? A 50kg backpack? 15kg webbing? What in the world are in them?

80 kg (160lbs) is a very heavy load for any soldier - even a Spec Ops soldier - to carry around for any distance and still fight effectively.

[A Soldier]

you never know what occaison might arise, gotta be ready

[ogukuo72]

you never know what occaison might arise, gotta be ready

For a 24 kilometre route march back in my Basic Military Training days, the full pack we carried weighed only 15kg, and this includes everything, including a pair of spare boots! Helmet (we still used the steel helmets back in those days), weapon, skeletal battle order (SBO - LBE in US parlance) made up another 10 kg, perhaps.

The modern Kevlar helmet and bullet proof vest combi weighs about 8 kg. Two contact rates of ammunition (roughly 270 rounds, two frag grenades, and one smoke) plus weapon adds about another 8kg. Anti-tank weapon (66mm Armbrust) adds another 6 kg. That's about 22 kg. Throw in one 81mm mortar bomb, and round the figure up to 25kg.

This well armed infantryman still carried only about 40 kg (25kg + 15kg) of weight around, half that of an American infantryman. In fact, a full load of ammo with helmet and vest combo (16kg) weighs as much as the basic belt kit of an American infantrymen!

I remembered that weight management was something that the instructors constantly drummed into us - carry only the essentials, and make do. (You don't need that Walkman in the jungle!)