Posted on 05/01/2013 1:52:06 PM PDT by Tailgunner Joe
If women are equal to men on the front lines now just use women only. That seems fair, right?
Lets go fight the Russians or Chinese. And let them use all men while we use all women. Since it makes no difference ya know....
Oh, wait, Nobama will just institute compulsory abortions.
Technology will help to some extent. E.g. battlefield robots, and exoskeletons may soon enable female soldiers (or Marines) to pack as much gear as their male counterparts.
Considering they already do that just to avoid rear echelon deployments, probably quite a few. Commanders will attempt to implement policies to prevent them losing soldiers downrange from pregnancies, and will be attacked by the media.
The Russians experimented with using women in front-line positions, and quickly learned that it is a VERY VERY BAD IDEA.
Russian hard line troops against girls and panzies.
Not going to be a good fight for US.
As a Vietnam veteran with 2 PH..I can tell you this...there is not a woman on earth that would fit in on the front lines in combat. My wife was also a Marine and is confident, tough when needed, and she will tell you the exact same thing. I don’t give a rats a** what the Liberal box checkers say. BTW we both went through Parris Island.
Great, Million dollar wheel chairs welded to forklifts with little red wagons behind them for the gear instead of soldiers, great idea till the batteries run down.
I think I will bet on the Marines who will get the job done rain or shine, with or without support on Grit and Honor.
And Godless to boot. The end of the United States.
The women pushing for it are commie-lesbos who are devoid of common sense.
They also don't care how a policy they have endorsed will effect future women who will actually have to go and fight on the front line.
Unlike themselves who will spend the war in their air-conditioned offices stateside.
Who is taking odds, cause the bet is your familys lives.
Standards at PI have already been lowered. Expect them to be further lower so that women can succeed.
My $0.02 is that it's not a question of dedication, it's a question of ability. Doesn't particularly matter how much you want to do something...if you can't do it, then that's that.
For the moment, set aside social issues, sexism, chivalry, medical and hygiene issues, and anything else that I'm not sharp enough to think of at this moment. Any one of these issues would be enough to derail the entire experiment....but let's set them aside for now.
I'm sure that there are exceptions. However, in general, average women are not just slightly weaker, or less physically able than average men. They're catastrophically weaker, with less physical ability, size, muscle mass, and endurance.
Feminists can argue the issue all day. But, bluntly, you can't teach someone to be 5'10" tall and 180 pounds.
AFAIC, that's pretty much the end of the argument.
First, let me say I am the mother of a Special Forces soldier now in Afghanistan. He also was in the 82nd earlier. Please note this from the article. “Yes, shifting the role means shifting the training. And you can bet, the newest female recruits here are already feeling that victory where it hurts. For starters, there are more sit-ups, push-ups and pull-ups.”
It does not sound as if they are diluting the training at this time. Also, any woman who chooses to do this is not going to get pregnant to get out of combat. We women don’t invest major efforts in something just to wimp out. Remember, especially in earlier years, every time a woman had a baby, she risked death and a lot of pain.
Dempsey is evil.
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.