Posted on 11/16/2012 12:37:32 PM PST by Reaganite Republican
Do her blue eyes disqualify her?
Who cares how old the photo is?
Do only super warriors qualify for this position?
Is there evidence that she’s not qualified?
Other than her being female, what do you think makes this photo special, so special that it is trotted out periodically to make a point, what point do you think it makes?
You’re the one who seems to think it makes a point. What is it?
What indeed, what makes her a celebrity? Is she such a super warrior, war hero that her more than 9 year old photograph, is worthy of all this attention.
What is it that she used to do that is special to her, unique to her, that is constantly resurrected, what point is being resurrected?
Other than her being female, what do you think makes this photo special, so special that it is trotted out periodically to make a point, what point do you think it makes?
Aren’t you retired military, you don’t have any input, no knowledge of such things?
The BELL CURVE.
My ten year-old daughter was shooting .38special, .357 magnum and light 10mm loads last weekend. The .38 special doesn’t have much more recoil than the 9mm. I stand by my statement about the adoption of the 9mm, it had everything to do with magazine capacity/firepower.
Exactly.
Women have skills and (I dare say it) INHERENT traits that suit them far better to some jobs. I accept that and known dozens of Army nurses through my career. EVERY ONE of them earned her place there and didn’t need any waivers or lowered standards to do their jobs.
Congratulations on marrying a fine woman.
Which infantry?
None in the US Armed Forces.
Israel tried it and it didn’t work out.
The Russians brag about their WWII females, but none of them served as actual infantry, which requires much more than shooting a rifle.
In training. They interviewed a woman captain who had destroyed her pelvis (angle of the femur)from marching with gear.
The whole issue regarding women on the frontlines is that some feminists think it’s unfair that so many men are generals. It’s an asset to have combat experience, hence the push to put women on the frontlines.
Agreed.
When I went to Airborne School in 1986, they’d just integrated the runs and everybody was basically crawling along just to keep the women in formation. The women were experiencing high incidents of stress fractures along the tibia (?), so any faster runs were prohibited for EVERYBODY.
I actually came out of the three week school in WORSE shape. It was like a vacation. It didn’t help that I turned 21 the night before my first jump ;)
The effectiveness of the fighting unit is a matter of life and death— and here we are playing dangerous political games. The Israelis found that having women on the front lines was a disaster for another reason: men are biologically wired to protect women. When the women got wounded, it caused even more casualties.
It’s definitely a mistake. When they show these women, they’re invariably behind a mounted machinegun or, in this case, minigun.
They don’t show them with 100lb rucksacks, humping mortar plates or rounds, etc. Looks great for the cameras, but the reality is much, much different.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.