Good or Bad Idea: WOMEN TO COMBAT FRONTLINES

Started by Turks, January 24, 2013, 04:17:26 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

taxed

Quote from: Hindes204 on January 25, 2013, 10:41:06 PM
All excellent points, I actually came in this thread to post about the same thing. I am Active Duty AF, and there are large differences in the fitness requirements between men and women. While this works in the AF due to lack of ground combat (excluding the spec ops units), it would absolutely not work for those on the front lines. I don't mind females being there, but they better be held to the exact fitness standards as the men. If a soldier goes down and a female is not able to drag him to safety because the physical standards were lowered for her.......absolutely unacceptable

Right on!!
#PureBlood #TrumpWon

keyboarder

Quote from: walkstall on January 25, 2013, 10:17:45 PM


Could you imagine if woman stopped working or even half of them.  What would happen to the tax base.  Not only would federal but state would be in deep doo doo.
Well Bingo!  I alluded to that but had done written enough.  What a mess it would be if women just banded together and stopped working outside the home if for no other reason than because of their claims that they weren't being treated equally?  I can just imagine all that would go down because of that tactict.  I'll bet you'd see some quick changes then.  Of course that might take a little fortitude on the part of women and i'll bet they'd cave to the establishment at the first sign of want.  They might even be reduced to making sure that their homes were cleaned, their children's homework done, that pile of sewing caught up or corner full of dirty clothes was washed, dried and/or ironed or folded.  Goodness knows that husbands and children would be on perhaps a better diet, might even settle for routine dining.  Noone would starve as long as she could keep enough cardboard rounded up for every member of her clan.  Cardboard is near the only thing I can think of that Moochelle might approve of anyway because of her attitude towards salt and sugar.
.If you want to lead the orchestra, you must turn your back to the crowd      Forbes

Solar

Quote from: keyboarder on January 25, 2013, 09:52:11 PM
Wow, y'all been having a great time with some of these threads and I'm having a great time trying to catch up on all the threads/replies.  This thread really hits me on my last nerve for several reasons, some of which I haven't seen mentioned so here goes.

I know that all of you have watched and experienced the turn of the tide in our public school systems for years.  The thing I'm talking about is how boys and girls are treated exactly the same as far as studies go.  There is no such thing as gender related activities-if you are a boy and want to sit with the little girls and color all day, fine.  If you are a girl, you are encouraged to participate in any sport.  That's public school for you.  I have to mention the media too with its bent on putting females in the macho role, rescuing men from something-heck anything.  What about the female doctor who tells the male nurse what he's doing wrong?  It hasn't been over ten years since I worked on my job in my place of business on the same crew with a lady electrician (she stayed hid most of the shift).  Well, I don't agree with any of these ideas.  Women started working outside of the home during war years to help the cause and got used to it as far as the money it added and the independance they thought it would bring.  Some how or other we started having more divorces and the fall of the traditional home.
Along with the breakup of the home, other measures had to be implemented to help these broken homes with children to be able to survive.  Enter the single parent with dependants laws.  Depending on whether the kids were under school age or not, spelled out the limits that you were "entitled to" under these laws.  Well, all I can see that this crop of new laws did was encourage more people to seek the way out of their situations.  What does all of this have to do with having women in the military?  I'm touching on the base but from there alot has trickeled its way into our society that has only served to bring us down to look weak and desensitized.

I don't think that any woman should just get up in the morning and decide, "I'm joining the military".  Rather, be thankful that they don't live in a country that expects its women to enter the military at a certain age.  Women in Israel know from an early age that they will be required to serve, but at least they would have had the proper time to train.  All of our women are being raised to occupy the male roles in life with little or no training.  It's too darned easy to put the guys into women's roles I reckon.  I forgot which poster replied that all kinds of cheating and lies about readiness would take place just so the women could have their rights, but he/she was spot on with this reply.  This putting women in the military defies all of God's admonishments to Christian men and women as to their roles in life.  The heck with what O'blamer thinks because he's an Islamist anyway.  We've got to get away from what he thinks or we're going down. 

I think solar was the one to say that we should pick one side and stick with it.  I agree and it is not a true conservative opinion that  favors women serving in the military.  If they are allowed in, it should be in some type of administrative position with no opportunity to rank.  She should have to serve locally so that she could be near her home and have working hours to go along with what most office workers have.  In other words, secretarial work. 

I'm really not in favor of women working outside of the home but let's face it.  As long as the government plays its silly games, women will no doubt still try to keep a job.  The government needs all able bodied citizens to work and pay taxes so they aren't going to do anything that would be negative towards women's rights to work.
Well said Keyboarder, you pointed out the communist infiltration of our country, they knew that breaking down social norms would begin the demise of our very way of life, remove Religion from schools, the main impediment to their plan.
The list reads like a training manual for young communists, yet it's all real, it really happened, were at the precipice now, we are the last generation to experience both worlds, one of freedom and happiness, while looking into the pit of man against man, because that's how the left wins battles, pitting it's enemy against itself, splitting it's allegiance and sitting back and waiting.
Insidious as it is, it still works, it's still up to us, the remaining generation to fight to the death to save this Nation, if we can't, then the kids deserve what they created.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!


Solar

Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

mdgiles

It occurs to me that the generals/admirals now running the services were the "checklist" officers of the Vietnam era. This was an era in which it was more important for an officer to have served in a number of billets, that to have demonstrated outstanding ability, as opposed to simple competence, in any of them. Officers were constantly being moved through assignments to get "their list checked". It was careerism as opposed to professionalism. Anyone who served during, or just after, Vietnam will recall the constant turnover in officers. Why would you expect a Chief of Staff who came up through such a system, to have any real concept of unit cohesion. Throughout their entire military career it's been all about him/her looking good to the higher ups. Right now, these people are in command of services that are often completely different from the ones they are familiar with. What sounds like a good idea to the careerist commanders at the top, sounds like disaster to the field and company grade officers, in services that are now all about unit cohesion.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

Solar

Quote from: mdgiles on January 28, 2013, 07:39:43 AM
It occurs to me that the generals/admirals now running the services were the "checklist" officers of the Vietnam era. This was an era in which it was more important for an officer to have served in a number of billets, that to have demonstrated outstanding ability, as opposed to simple competence, in any of them. Officers were constantly being moved through assignments to get "their list checked". It was careerism as opposed to professionalism. Anyone who served during, or just after, Vietnam will recall the constant turnover in officers. Why would you expect a Chief of Staff who came up through such a system, to have any real concept of unit cohesion. Throughout their entire military career it's been all about him/her looking good to the higher ups. Right now, these people are in command of services that are often completely different from the ones they are familiar with. What sounds like a good idea to the careerist commanders at the top, sounds like disaster to the field and company grade officers, in services that are now all about unit cohesion.
Excellent point Giles, I do remember the rotation, between 6 and 10 months is how I remember it in 73-74.
And if memory is correct, once they promoted above Butter Bar, they were transferred out.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

raptor5618

Quote from: mdgiles on January 25, 2013, 03:54:18 PM
Odd you should mention that. It's the one thing that has always irritated me about the otherwise great movie: "Saving Private Ryan". If I were the battalion commander, I could see myself asking for volunteers. No way I'm going to send men out to risk their lives for a "feel good" mission.

As for the subject of woman in the military; combat is enough to drive men mad. When the decision was announced the other day; I ran my mind back to when I was in Vietnam and some of the conditions I lived under. Most women I've known - including three sisters - take full ownership of the bathroom in the home. As a guy, you get to put your toothbrush and shaving gear in the room. I can't imagine any of them, not bathing for a month at a time - or as I once did, take your cloths off, grab a bar of soap and go outside in Monsoon rain.

As for how our enemies would treat captured POW's, will we start making war decisions on how our opponent might treat captured woman POW's? You should read about how the Japanese treated English, Australian, and Chinese Army nurses when they captured Hong Kong and Singapore. The Taliban, for example, throw battery acid in their OWN women's faces. GOD knows what would happen if the ever got their hands on an "infidel slut". To this day, I believe that everyone of the women captured by Arabs during the two Iragi wars was attacked - because that's the way Arabs are - and our government is keeping it under wraps because it would be a Public Relations disaster.

I will comment on your last part first. I do not think that any of our POW's were treated well. I do not like the idea of women treated wrong but do not like what they do to the guys either. 

As for your experience in Viet Nam.  I am just a few years younger than you probably and got out of high school just as it was ending.  Yesterday on H2 they had a 6 hour documentary on Viet Nam and they showed some things that I do not recall seeing before.  One of the things that really struck me was that they sent the guys out on 30 or 40 day patrols and once they were out they were out there.  Up until seeing that I kind of thought that they stayed at a base and went out on patrols for a day or two and then came back.  And they talked about being so dirty and smelly. 

It was a well done documentary that I think was not trying to present a biased view other than a view that waging a war that only has a body count objective is wrong. It seemed like time after time the soldiers were put in a precarious situation because the ability to be resupplied was not secure.  In one battle they were down to 10 shells each and were licking moisture off of their poncho's because they had no water. 

You were there so I apologize if my comments do not ring true but I think that even as far back as WW2 the top generals got there because they were the most adept at politics. So many decisions based on politics and not on battle strategy.  I hope the story I related happened a lot.  If you are going to ask a soldier to risk his life it better be for an objective that leads to a successful resolution of the war.  In that documentary, story after story was about taking some hill and after a long struggle succeeding only to pull everything out and give it right back.

I think the focus of the the whole show was a good one.  They talked a bit about how they say that the WW2 vets were this nations finest.  They said that the soldiers in V-N did all that was asked of and succeeded and because of that they were our nations finest as well.  I think that war was where this country first saw how awful war was and could not deal with it.   As I watched I wondered how any soldier could ever get their mind around what they did and saw.  Taking a location and then abandoning it makes no sense to me at all.  Sounds more like a football game than a war.  No sense of what victory would be and no attempt to keep what was won.   Sorry if I get carried away but I do hope that you have been blessed in life and have found peace in what ever you experienced over there and in coming home which might have been worse. 

I guess I strayed off topic but if this countries govt could be honest and only use women who are capable to perform the task I think they deserve the right to serve even on the front line.  Only a few would qualify just like a lot of men do not qualify.  However, I hope that when our countries decides to use these soldiers it is only when the proceed with bad intent against the enemy. 
"An armed man will kill an unarmed man with monotonous regularity."

Solar

#83
Quote from: raptor5618 on January 28, 2013, 11:42:10 AM
  As I watched I wondered how any soldier could ever get their mind around what they did and saw.  Taking a location and then abandoning it makes no sense to me at all.  Sounds more like a football game than a war.  No sense of what victory would be and no attempt to keep what was won.   Sorry if I get carried away but I do hope that you have been blessed in life and have found peace in what ever you experienced over there and in coming home which might have been worse. 


My brother used to say that all the time, as an off handed saying. "Didn't we just take this hill, weren't we just here" Dejavu and things to that effect..
They said it so often, it became part of the vocabulary.
Official Trump Cult Member

#WWG1WGA

Q PATRIOT!!!

mdgiles

Quote from: raptor5618 on January 28, 2013, 11:42:10 AM
I will comment on your last part first. I do not think that any of our POW's were treated well. I do not like the idea of women treated wrong but do not like what they do to the guys either. 

As for your experience in Viet Nam.  I am just a few years younger than you probably and got out of high school just as it was ending.  Yesterday on H2 they had a 6 hour documentary on Viet Nam and they showed some things that I do not recall seeing before.  One of the things that really struck me was that they sent the guys out on 30 or 40 day patrols and once they were out they were out there.  Up until seeing that I kind of thought that they stayed at a base and went out on patrols for a day or two and then came back.  And they talked about being so dirty and smelly. 

It was a well done documentary that I think was not trying to present a biased view other than a view that waging a war that only has a body count objective is wrong. It seemed like time after time the soldiers were put in a precarious situation because the ability to be resupplied was not secure.  In one battle they were down to 10 shells each and were licking moisture off of their poncho's because they had no water. 

You were there so I apologize if my comments do not ring true but I think that even as far back as WW2 the top generals got there because they were the most adept at politics. So many decisions based on politics and not on battle strategy.  I hope the story I related happened a lot.  If you are going to ask a soldier to risk his life it better be for an objective that leads to a successful resolution of the war.  In that documentary, story after story was about taking some hill and after a long struggle succeeding only to pull everything out and give it right back.

I think the focus of the the whole show was a good one.  They talked a bit about how they say that the WW2 vets were this nations finest.  They said that the soldiers in V-N did all that was asked of and succeeded and because of that they were our nations finest as well.  I think that war was where this country first saw how awful war was and could not deal with it.   As I watched I wondered how any soldier could ever get their mind around what they did and saw.  Taking a location and then abandoning it makes no sense to me at all.  Sounds more like a football game than a war.  No sense of what victory would be and no attempt to keep what was won.   Sorry if I get carried away but I do hope that you have been blessed in life and have found peace in what ever you experienced over there and in coming home which might have been worse. 

I guess I strayed off topic but if this countries govt could be honest and only use women who are capable to perform the task I think they deserve the right to serve even on the front line.  Only a few would qualify just like a lot of men do not qualify.  However, I hope that when our countries decides to use these soldiers it is only when the proceed with bad intent against the enemy.
You don't have to be on a long range patrol to be denied shower facilities; even if you are in a fire base, there is no guarantee that you'll have water for anything except drinking. Even something a primitive as a 55 gallon drum with holes in the bottom and a line run from a water buffalo, is an unobtainable luxury when you are constantly under artillery fire. Or even small arms fire. The enemy has snipers too, so you want to avoid unnecessary exposure. BTW, if I ever come into a possession of a time machine; I'd like to take the opportunity to travel into the past , and slap myself upside the head for the stupid soap/monsoon stunt.

The political generals/admirals of the early part of the second world war (see Kimmel and Short) were soon replaced by the competent generals/admirals. The area commanders were absolute ruthless with those that didn't measure up. Off course there were the exceptions, like General "Jesus Christ Himself" Lee; but he was a supply poagie.

Vietnam did resemble a bad sporting event - except people got killed. It was just the first example of a leftist elite, that saw themselves as for more intelligent than they actually were. And before we condemn the generals of Vietnam; we should always be aware of how many of the decisions were being made by someone other than the commander on the ground.
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

mdgiles

"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

mdgiles

BTW, has it occurred to any of our geniuses in Washington, that women are "programed" to be attracted to the most competent male. In small units, that would be the officers and the NCO's. It's not something that they would even consciously think about. Having rivalries develop among equals over a woman, would be bad. The idea that the officers and NCO's are "monopolizing" the women, would be far worse. 
"LIBERALS: their willful ignorance is rivaled only by their catastrophic stupidity"!

keyboarder

Giles, my "sheriff" was in VN when it first got started.  He doesn't talk about it much but he saw plenty.  He was dog trainer/handler and part of his job was going out on patrol and recon.  He kept a scrapbook of some of what his job was and it wasn't pretty.  He said the environment was hell on earth.  Baths were a luxury and there's items that he won't eat for no amount of money and one of them is rice, the other is frozen foods.  He said the fertilizing of the rice fields is one reason he would not eat rice and the frozen foods reminds him of the k rations.  Then there was this smell, unlike any he'd ever encountered but much like the smell of death.  He was of the opinion that the war was all about politics, no matter how many got killed.  He said that most of the killed was very young guys.  The worst thing to him was the reception from citizens when they came home.  He managed 20 years and got out without a scratch from any of the places he'd been.  I guess every one that served has a different story of time in the military.  From what I've heard, women just think they want to go thru  those things by entering the military.
.If you want to lead the orchestra, you must turn your back to the crowd      Forbes