"Any claim that women are equal to men in combat settings is utterly irrational."

WND ^

[narses]

...

Riggs said one woman who spoke at yesterday's press conference, Charmaine Yoest, a national advisory board member with the Independent Women's Forum, relayed a recent example involving DACOWITS that illustrated the need for less military feminization.

"On Sept. 10 – the day before those awful terrorist attacks – DACOWITS was discussing lactation and the need for breast-feeding policies within the Army," Riggs said. "This, the day before so many people died" in New York City and at the Pentagon.

"This is no longer a power game where ambitious women can try to advance their careers," Rios said during her speech, "this is a matter of life and death. Any claim that women are equal to men in combat settings is utterly irrational."

Rios cited a recent Royal British Army study that found stark differences between men and women under combat conditions. In one phase of the study, men failed 20 percent of the time to carry 90 pounds of artillery shells over certain distances, she said, adding that women failed "90 percent of the time."

"In a mission simulating wartime conditions, male and female soldiers were asked to carry 60 pounds of equipment while marching 12.5 miles, completing the exercise with target practice. Seventeen percent of the men failed, [as did] 48 percent of the women," she said.

...

[farmfriend]

It wasn't me if that is what you are implying. Not my style.

[Lorianne]

What does "lower standards" really mean? I think there is a case to be made for adaptability. We need people of all kinds of talents in the military. Not just people who can do x number of situps and run 20 miles with a 60lb. pack. That's only part of the equation.

Let me ask you this, if the military wanted to sign up a male volunteer who was a brilliant computure code breaker who's talents they could use in intelligence work to find enemy communications .... would they be smart to turn him away if he couldn't do the required number of pushups? I really doubt that they ever have done that. (Look at the Radar O'Reilly type character in the military). There have always been all types of males, not just the Rambo-types in the military.

The military will have to adapt to attract the best and the brightest. How many chin-ups a person can do cannot be the only criteria or we will lose some serious talents. I seriously doubt if our military is so stupid that they would turn people away who could be useful. I pray we're not that stupid.

I don't think "standards" should be lowered but we should be careful about the kind of "standards" we want to attract. We have a volunteer military. We need lots of talents. I doubt all military personell (for example doctors and nurses) can meet the same physical "standards" as combat personnel.

[nopardons]

Thanky !

[nopardons]

Thanks ! I keep posting hard facts, and getting feminazi propaganda / drivel back, from two females, who give that sex a BAD name.

[wardaddy]

Young men, no matter HOW " civilized ", think about having sex, every 5 minutes

No, that's more like 45 year old men like yours truly...lol...back when I was a youngster...I thought about sex even between synapses.

[WorkingClassFilth]

I don't think you know yourself because you are doing just what I have said previously:

"...how do you tie your Old Testament values to the 21st century feminist tripe you currently peddle?"

Your hide would be fried if you lied like you do in Elisha's time.

Further, you evade direct questions.

You are certainly beneath the value of a ham and cheese omelette currently on the stove.

Good day, Sir, er, Ma'am, er, masculinist, er, whatever.

[nopardons]

You have IGNORED every single salient, factual point I have made, and YOU called me a B...itch, when posting to another person, which is not only cowardly , but spurious.

[farmfriend]

Your hide would be fried if you lied like you do in Elisha's time. Further, you evade direct questions.

If you don't wish to speak with me, that is fine but where have I lied and where have I evaded questions?

[nopardons]

You haven't " style ". You have a perminate case of PMS, and no ability to debate. ; ^ )

[WorkingClassFilth]

Lying is the practice of evasion as much as the practice of distortion. You practice the former as many posts here will attest.

I have an omelette to tend...friend.

[farmfriend]

You have IGNORED every single salient, factual point I have made

No I haven't and I saw no point in continuing a debate with someone who twists everything I say and calls me names.

[nopardons]

Radar O'Rielly and Rambo are F-I-C-T-I-O-N !

Code breakers were NOT in the military, during WW II.

Somehow, facts and history have passed you by.

[wardaddy]

I think the way women served in WWII was quite adequate and productive.

The military from bottom to top does not exist to provide women a "proving ground"

Lest you think I believe women are incapable of warrior mentality as well as warrior combat fighting, let me be the first to suggest that Maggie Thatcher would suit me fine as a war leader....Jeane Kirkpatrick as a wartime SOS would have been great too....there would have been no willy nilly groveling for the UN or French that's for sure.

My apologies to Happy Gal;>) on the Maggie accolades...but that's another argument.

[nopardons]

I was being a wee bit PC. LOL

Not being a man, I can only go by read stats; not personal experiences. :-)

[farmfriend]

Don't want to interrupt your omelete. I have not been evasive. You have made claim that I am somehow trying to combine theology and feminism. I keep telling you that I am not. I'm not a feminist. Asking the question more than once does not make me evasive. Where do you think I'm combining the two?

[Happygal]

Well if you can't handle people calling you names, you are in no position to argue the point of women in the battle field..

[wardaddy]

LOL...

I was just giving a subtle Tarzan holler and breast beating.

[wardaddy]

ouch!

[farmfriend]

I never said I couldn't handle it. We are not on a field of combat here.

[nopardons]

Yes, you have IGNORED the stated facts. Instead, you have whinged, whined, pouted, told the forum your cup size ( Geez, you must get horrid backaches from that load! ), called me a B ...itch, not to my face, but so all could see,called yourself one ( THAT'S NOW A COMPLIMENT ? ), and haven't managed to refute the " other " side; not once.

You can't just " ignore " me, because I've bested you, at every turn, dear. That's NOT a " debate " and NOT what FR is all about.