Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions.
Associated Press ^ | January 23, 2013 | Staff

Posted on 01/23/2013 12:39:15 PM PST by AnAmericanAbroad

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-234 last
To: Brownie63

From boots on the ground to high heels.


201 posted on 01/24/2013 7:51:38 AM PST by billhilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad
I'm a simple enlisted aviation swabbie from 1975-1986 and never saw combat, but here's my point of view in no certain priority:

1. Women should have to register for the draft if they truly want to be equal;
2. Women can be as effective as men in aerial combat. They are very dextrous. So let them die in a dog-fight or an RPG hit the helo;
3. If they are to be assigned ground infantry, they should have NO special quarters nor other facilities. They want to be grunts, then they "shit, shower, and shave" the same place as men;
4. NO excuses for their menstrual cycles as in PMS;
5. Must be able to complete "basic training" within the same requirements of men if they want to be grunts;
6. If they get pregnant, then a "less than honorable discharge". No more re-assignment while the men take up the slack;
7. Train the men to deal with a woman dying/wounded in ground combat and Triage the worst wounded first. No exceptions;
8. Any woman who dies/wounded in combat gets the same honors as a man;
9. If in a fire fight and they can't carry a wounded man out when having the opportunity, they are to be discharged. No exceptions;
10. ANY sexual contact with either sex in a combat zone, they should be discharged. Same with men;
11. ABSOLUTELY NO women on submarines! Talk about pregnancy just waiting to happen;
12. Train them to stop being so sensitive about perceived sexual harassment;
13. Stop letting them in to our elite forces, only to "ring out", as the only 2 trainees just did in the Rangers, I believe.

Here's my experience with female sailors back around the early 1980's:
Our Frigate was tied up outside a tender (support ship) before women were allowed on combat vessels. While in line on the tender to await the liberty boats, a male sailor just happened to say how nice a female looked from the tender. Next thing I saw was him being pulled out of line by a female CPO for harassment. Not sure what happened to him, but it was indicative of things to come.

They want ground combat? Then assign them all or none. Political Correctness be damned.

Disclaimer: I adore women and think they are the better of our species in many ways. But if they can't hump 70lbs and deal with the rigors of ground combat (which most can't), the few hardy types aside, then ALL should not be there or ALL should be there. No more special treatment. They want to play with the boys, then make them play by the boy's rules;

Years back, I saw too many good careers go down at the Tailhook scandal simply because a couple of female aviators got swatted on the ass, just like the men were getting. Play on the same field or go back to support positions.

Again, all women of the same status of men should have to register with the Selective Service. They want to be equal then be equal.

Last thought: Israel tried putting women in ground combat units only for that experiment to fail. They stopped.

202 posted on 01/24/2013 7:54:13 AM PST by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: dead; wardaddy

No; I haven’t missed your point. I think women will be a hindrance in any form of combat more stresful than sitting in a truck and pushing buttons.

My point is more fundamental: I care about the damage to our culture. Looking at what we’ve become, the (in)effectiveness of women in combat is irrelevant when this country is no longer worth fighting for.


203 posted on 01/24/2013 8:07:56 AM PST by Romulus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

They can’t even fix the sexual assualt epedimic they are having now much less address anything you posted.

This is how I’ve heard it presented.

A guy is in the desert at night going to his tent.

He hears a woman screaming for help.

He says to himself, she’s a soldier like me so she should be able to defend herself.

He ignores the cries for help.

GI Jane files a sexual assault charge the next day.

Leadership beats up the males for not helping.


204 posted on 01/24/2013 8:09:32 AM PST by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

Simple Question: Do the women really want this? What is the real motivation behind this madness? Our current administration is good about dealing with fantasies but reality? No. There is no way I would want my daughter out in the trenches knowing that if she came face to face with a male soldier on the battlefield and her gun was inoperable or out of ammo that she would have to physically engage on those terms in the heat of battle. It’s an unfair fight from the gitgo (on the avg) no matter what fantasies the left have about females from watching Columbiana, Charlies Angels, or The Avengers. In real life people don’t jump 50 ft in the air land on their opponents shoulders and grip their heads and twist and break it then backwards somersault onto their feet to engage in more Kung Fu’ery with another enemy (yes I think some of the left probably believe this is real because they live in a fantasy bubble perpetrated by Hollywood and the MSM).

I agree, I think women make excellent pilots, are good at administration, and management but let’s give them some respect and honor and nt put them in the trenches. The reality would be a nightmare for many of he reasons you stated. It would be true great a distractor due to the human condition.


205 posted on 01/24/2013 8:14:45 AM PST by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

Simple Question: Do the women really want this? What is the real motivation behind this madness? Our current administration is good about dealing with fantasies but reality? No. There is no way I would want my daughter out in the trenches knowing that if she came face to face with a male soldier on the battlefield and her weapon jammed or out of ammo for some reason that she would have to physically engage on those terms in the heat of battle. It’s an unfair fight from the gitgo (on the avg) no matter what twisted fantasies the left have about females engaging in combat with males from watching Columbiana, Charlies Angels, or The Avengers. In real life people don’t jump 50 ft in the air land on their opponents shoulders and grip their heads and twist and break it then backwards somersault onto their feet to engage in more Kung Fu’ery with another enemy (yes I think some of the left probably believe this is real because they live in a fantasy bubble perpetrated by Hollywood and the MSM).

I agree, I think women make excellent pilots, are good at administration, and management but let’s give them some respect and honor and not put them in the trenches. The reality would be a nightmare for many of he reasons you stated. It would be true great a distractor due to the human condition.


206 posted on 01/24/2013 8:16:32 AM PST by jsanders2001
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]

To: All

I can no longer in good conscience advocate for my sons to enter the military service of this country.

Pains me to say this, as a 82nd ABN veteran, but with 4 more years of Obama and 8 years of Hillary coming, and now this, women to infantry and SpecOps units....

I can’t delude myself any longer, I don’t believe our Founders or their Minutemen would fight for this brand of America, but they would fight against it, to restore a Constitutional Republic.


207 posted on 01/24/2013 8:25:35 AM PST by rbmillerjr (We have No Opposition to Obama's Socialist Agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA
"I think it’ll ultimately be a wash, because few women will volunteer from infantry front-line duty. However... for those who do, not a single standard should be lowered in training to ease the path for them. Whatever their male counterparts must accomplish, so must they."

And they simply can not.

208 posted on 01/24/2013 8:27:13 AM PST by 444Flyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: ParityErr

SEMPER FI!


209 posted on 01/24/2013 8:29:27 AM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: fr_freak

The upcoming fights between men and women and gay women and gay men and....well its going to be a circus except with bullets and dead bodies. Viewership for NCIS will soar.


210 posted on 01/24/2013 8:32:18 AM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies]

To: Romulus

What we will see is true stats written by all these new girl hating gay clerks exposing just how many thousands of women in the military all of a sudden get pregnant. The media will get a hold of this and it will be a battle royal behind the newsmedia scenes between gay men producers and lesbian producers.


211 posted on 01/24/2013 8:37:54 AM PST by TomasUSMC ( FIGHT LIKE WW2, FINISH LIKE WW2. FIGHT LIKE NAM, FINISH LIKE NAM)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 84 | View Replies]

To: Saoirise
Watered down useless affirmative action military is no way to win wars. Of course, Obama has no plan on winning any wars..

that is, for America anyway.

212 posted on 01/24/2013 8:39:37 AM PST by 444Flyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 186 | View Replies]

To: ScottinVA
"... because few women will volunteer from infantry front-line duty."

And therein lies the inequality. Other than those who are guaranteed certain Army/Marine specialties upon enlistment, aren't all others assigned as the particular service demands?

Maybe things have changed since I served, but at the time, if not guaranteed an "A" school for a particular rating (MOS to Army/Marines), then you got assigned to whatever billet needed filled.

If that's still the case, then ALL non-specialty women should be assigned where ever, including ground combat units. Let's see how that works.

213 posted on 01/24/2013 8:45:06 AM PST by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 195 | View Replies]

To: jsanders2001
" Do the women really want this?"

I don't believe most do. I give them major kudos for serving, but just how many really want to be in a fire fight? Probably 1% or less.

As a side note: One of the best supervisors I served under was a female Chief Petty Officer (CPO), but that was during my short stint as a Naval Reserve Recruiter ashore. She was as butch as they come, but fair, competent, and gave me some my best evals ever. I respected her highly.

If I had joined the Marines (as I originally planned), she would have never made it through Marine "basic" because of her sleight stature. I decided on Navy because of a better fit growing up around the water and boats. Went to "basic" in San Diego and used to watch an ambulance follow the Marine runs just across the fence, while I had it easy in Navy "boot". Although it was tough for me since I joined at 25 - poor me...ha.

Again, no, I don't believe military women want to be combat ground grunts. But as I said above, if this is the position of DOD, then they get NO special considerations. It won't work and when the next war comes and we see our daughters come back in more body-bags and limbless, it will change back. The Israelis found out the hard way.

214 posted on 01/24/2013 9:24:55 AM PST by A Navy Vet (An Oath is Forever.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

For some specialties, you can get a contract for the MOS and for the unit guaranteed.

When I went in in 80, the recruiter at the Depot, tried to lie to me and tell me he got me the 101st for airborne.

I advised him that the 101 was no longer Airborne. He showed me the unit patch with the Airborne designation. I informed him that that was for purely historical purposes.

After telling me that that was the only slot available...I thanked him and told him I’d wait for a slot. He continued to lie and I thanked him for the trip to Pittsburgh told him to have a nice day.

I waited for 2 hours and the Recruiter mysteriously came back with an 82nd slot that just opened up.


Bottom line is that eventually they will lower standards to allow women to qualify for Infantry and Special Operations units.


215 posted on 01/24/2013 9:44:26 AM PST by rbmillerjr (We have No Opposition to Obama's Socialist Agenda)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

Among other problems, the issue of sending military women with small dependent children into combat.....part of the Dem war on children.


216 posted on 01/24/2013 11:10:15 AM PST by OldArmy52 (The question is not whether Obama ever lies, but whether he ever tells the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Migraine

“I kinda like the idea of a Battleaxe Battalion.”

Finally, a bit of levity on this topic.


217 posted on 01/24/2013 11:24:07 AM PST by billhilly
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: cunning_fish

There is a martial arts dojo. Two women are there pretty regularly, a young adult woman and a middle aged woman. The older woman is a black belt instructor. The younger is an advanced beginner. Commendable and welcome.

However, the black belt woman instructor though a superb teacher of martial arts technique, is not much of a fighter. The younger woman martial artist has great technique, but lacks the size and power to make her excellently done techniques effective against even beginner adult male students.

In the Army, I served under a female Captain who was a superb officer (peace time Army, CONUS). We did have female soldiers. The young men soldiers were happy to have the young females. Much effort was made to keep the two groups separate, but not always with success.

I can see in combat, some real problems....guy: “I’ll carry your pack if you....” or “I’ll protect you if you....”

And there are the minor issues of bathroom needs, bathing, housing, not to mention the issues involved when you are a big guy and your buddy is a small woman...and you get hurt and need your buddy to carry your out of harm’s way, etc.


218 posted on 01/24/2013 11:51:07 AM PST by OldArmy52 (The question is not whether Obama ever lies, but whether he ever tells the truth.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 149 | View Replies]

To: USAF80

Those who want it desire it for career advancement

Not something military should exist for actually

And yes i know as a rule women do not handle stress well...or as well
The damage to our culture and military is neverending

On the other what if everyone wantef to be spared combat?

Which is why we used women more rationally in WWII when it truly mattered


219 posted on 01/24/2013 1:49:38 PM PST by wardaddy (wanna know how my kin felt during Reconstruction in Mississippi, you fixin to find out firsthand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: USAF80

Those who want it desire it for career advancement

Not something military should exist for actually

And yes i know as a rule women do not handle stress well...or as well
The damage to our culture and military is neverending

On the other what if everyone wantef to be spared combat?

Which is why we used women more rationally in WWII when it truly mattered


220 posted on 01/24/2013 1:54:29 PM PST by wardaddy (wanna know how my kin felt during Reconstruction in Mississippi, you fixin to find out firsthand)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 194 | View Replies]

To: wardaddy

I’ll ask this question again. When did Congress lift the ban on woman in direct command roles, i.e., the infantry and special forces? Congress makes this call, not the marxist sec of defense. Faux News has barely mentioned the story. Like their counterparts, PMSNBC, they do not care.


221 posted on 01/24/2013 2:39:41 PM PST by NKP_Vet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 220 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Just because you can do something doesn’t always mean one should. A local Rep. here in WI brought up the effects of combat stress and that these women should consider that in regard to possibly becoming mothers in the future. As someone who is a Mom, and who suffers from PTSD myself, I don’t know why anyone would want to risk this obstacle to motherhood by choice. As the Mother of daughters, it worries me that they will be subject to a draft. All it takes is one more new problem and the Communists would thus have a way to conscript an ENTIRE generation.
Feminists hailing this as such a wonderful thing should be careful what they wish for.
I have so many concerns about this I could go on and on. Alas, my comp. is broken, and I’m typing this via our wii and it takes forever.


222 posted on 01/24/2013 9:23:27 PM PST by LibertyRocks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Robert Heinlein - 1973
Notebooks of Lazarus Long
from
“TIME ENOUGH FOR LOVE”

“All societies are based on rules to protect pregnant women and young children. All else is surplus age, excrescence, adornment, luxury or folly which can—and must—be dumped in emergency to preserve this prime function. As racial survival is the only universal morality, no other basic is possible. Attempts to formulate a “perfect society” on any foundation other than “women and children first!” is not only witless, it is automatically genocidal. Nevertheless, starry-eyed idealists (all of them male) have tried endlessly—and no doubt will keep on trying.”


223 posted on 01/24/2013 9:57:14 PM PST by servo1969
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OldArmy52
And there are the minor issues of bathroom needs, bathing, housing, not to mention the issues involved when you are a big guy and your buddy is a small woman...and you get hurt and need your buddy to carry your out of harm’s way, etc.

Saw this first hand at a deployed location. Female captain had to use the bathroom. She held it all the way from Iraq because she could not use the "honey bucket". On the C130 aircraft there is a "honey bucket" on the aft ramp. It has a screen but it only covers from shoulders down to about top of boot height if you are sitting. Your knees are facing the opposite side of the ramp and your right side is totally exposed but facing the closed ramp. If you are using the bucket everyone in the troop compartment can see what you are doing.

There is a urinal for the men behind the honey bucket.

224 posted on 01/25/2013 4:48:33 AM PST by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: littleharbour

I saw it first hand when me and a buddy volunteered after Desert Storm to stay and help load ships to return tanks and tracks back home. We were both in an infantry unit with no prior experience working with a unit with females. (some transportation unit)

We watched with incredulity at all the grabassing and guys and gals trying to impress one another and wondered if it was like this ‘back home’,too. We wondered how it was they ever got anything done. We later found out they had some attrition due to pregnancy.


225 posted on 01/25/2013 5:33:48 AM PST by TurboZamboni (Looting the future to bribe the present)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 192 | View Replies]

To: NKP_Vet
When did Congress lift the ban on woman in direct command roles, i.e., the infantry and special forces?

They never did. The argument being used to lift the exclusion is because in the current conflict there are no "front" lines. They are thinking that all future wars will be fought this way. They claim that women are exposed to hostile fire everyday anyway. This is true if you are on a secure base because you can get hit by mortars or RPGs and also true for the women who have to man the checkpoints.

It is offensive under islam for a man to touch a woman who is not his wife/family member. This is why we have our women doing the searches. To me it would have made more sense to get the locals to do it and just watch them. Keep our women out of harms way.

Pilots and crewmembers were exempt from the direct combat exclusion. Some were hurt and it was some of these women who filed a suit against the military. Some windbag retired general backed them up.

226 posted on 01/25/2013 7:29:14 AM PST by USAF80
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 221 | View Replies]

To: All; AnAmericanAbroad
How does the leftist mind reconcile the 'women are equal to men' premise underlying the push for women in combat requiring sacrifice of women to war with the 'women are weaker than men' premise underlying the "Violence Against Women Act" requiring protection of women by government?

It seems that in the leftist mind the men of our enemy will treat our women better than our own men and that women will fare better and be safer in a war zone than in American society.

227 posted on 01/25/2013 9:35:52 PM PST by DBeers (†)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

130 pound Amazons walking point


228 posted on 01/27/2013 7:15:00 AM PST by devolve ( ---- ---- ---- -CHEESEBURGER_CHEESEBURGER_CHEESEBURGER- ---- ---- ---- ---- John Belushi ---- ----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

Great idea!!!!! Let them get killed too!! And when we have a DRAFT AGAIN, which we will, the girls will be drafted also!!! YEAH!!!!! You stupid females just couldn’t STAND not being like the guys.....idiocy.


229 posted on 01/27/2013 12:47:20 PM PST by Ann Archy (ABORTION........the HUMAN sacrifice to the god of CONVENIENCE.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AnAmericanAbroad

I’m left wondering when women are going to be required to register for the draft.


230 posted on 01/27/2013 12:52:21 PM PST by CityCenter (Compromise is the welcome mat to deception.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apillar

More along the lines of wasting our defensive resources. Yes, women can be very capable of defense if needs be. Wasting them out on the frontlines first isn’t exactly the best idea.


231 posted on 01/30/2013 12:58:53 PM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

Exactly, let those who would gladly oppose whatever is good just separate themselves from the rest of us, form and army, and let God handle the rest of his promised business. Eventually, I see it coming to that, sadly enough.


232 posted on 01/30/2013 1:07:01 PM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: CodeToad

Exactly, let those who would gladly oppose whatever is good just separate themselves from the rest of us, form and army, and let God handle the rest of his promised business. Eventually, I see it coming to that, sadly enough.


233 posted on 01/30/2013 1:07:22 PM PST by Morpheus2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: A Navy Vet

“9. If in a fire fight and they can’t carry a wounded man out when having the opportunity, they are to be discharged. No exceptions; “

Too bad for that wounded now dead guy.


234 posted on 01/30/2013 1:26:11 PM PST by CodeToad (Liberals are bloodsucking ticks. We need to light the matchstick to burn them off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 202 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-234 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson