Women in combat - thoughts?

[Jackel585]

If women qualify so what?

[xxxVALETUDOxxx]

I can see damn right well why you wouldn't want to have a woman in your smaller squadron while out doing crazy ass missions. I've never been under fire or in any crazy situation like that and I can only imagine it's got to be the most insane **** ever. I'd want someone as equally capable watching my back in case **** broke out.

[Straight_Crown]

No offense to any of your opinions, but unless you're military you really shouldn't have any say in this. Why? Because it won't affect anyone except for the people who work with/depend on them.

So police officers, SWAT, DEA, etc shouldn't have a say either? And what about those with family in the military? I'm sure they would want to be certain there are people watching the back of their loved ones who are 110% capable of doing just that. Say your brother was shot in combat and lay bleeding to death on ground. You wouldn't be pissed that his partner couldn't carry him to help because he weighed 225lbs and she could only lift 125, because that's all she needed to qualify? When if she could have carried him he would have survived?

Obviously that is all hypothetical, but I think it is a valid argument. At the very least, something that can be discussed.

[boboplata2.0]

they should be ban from elite squads. aside from that, they should just meet the physical requirements.

[Lord Garth]

If women qualify so what?

Not one in 100,000 can. Airborne school is easy as ****, and around 7/8 of the females couldn't meet the standards and were passed anyway

[CaveBear]

fuk women



wait, what??

[Lord Garth]

they should be ban from elite squads. aside from that, they should just meet the physical requirements.

Every infantry platoon is an elite squad.
Wanna know how women in an infantry unit affects their performance? It means they have no chance. Take the 1972 Dolphins and exchange just one of their players, doesnt matter which one, with the baddest ass woman you can find. Their record goes from 17-0 to 0-17, guaranteed. And not only do they lose every game but they get trucked over in every game. They go from unstoppable juggernaut to feeble pushover, just like Obama's handlers want for the American military.

This is only going to further weaken the US military, and that is the true goal of those behind it. They're not stupid. In ten years, on paper we will have x number of infantry units on paper, but that strength will be a mirage. This reminds me of the construction contractor building fortifications under Hitler, who was secretly a Soviet spy. His concrete mix contained 2x as much sand as was called for and 1/3 less cement. The result was that the bunkers he built APPEARED strong: 3-5 feet thick concrete, but a blast it was designed to absorb easily instead collapsed the whole thing, killing all inside.

"Allowing" women into combat roles now, means forcing them in later. Just like Airborne school used to be no women, then they allowed women, then they dropped the standards for women so that they could pass, then they dropped the standards for everyone. Result = in 1955 if you were a jump school graduate it meant you were elite. In 1995 it meant jack ****

[Lord Garth]

If women qualify so what?

They don't, they won't, but the military will be forced to put them in the position and pretend that they are performing equally well.

[Brian]

I agree with Garth's fear that even if it starts with equal qualifications, when a grand total of 2 women pass muster for combat duty, they'll lower the standards. Lowering the standards makes all our soldier's less safe. I can't support that.

[jamesod]

I don't trust a woman to buy concert tickets for me; I certainly wouldn't trust one to protect me in combat.



Kidding, of course.

Well, the first part is true.