Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

To: TheProducer

Disparity of strength is not the primary issue, though it is a very important one.

The bigger problems are “distraction” and unit cohesiveness.

While most men are physically stronger than most women, men do come in a range of sizes & strengths. While at field radio operators school we learned that some of the radios we would be carrying weighed up to 96 lbs for the complete kit.

Looking around the classroom, I noticed that nearly everyone was my size, 5’ 8”, 155 lbs. I asked the instructor, “Hey, why don’t you get somebody BIG to carry these things?”

His reply? “Oh, you’re a smaller target!”

Strength disparities, distractions and unit cohesiveness are all major issues.

The biggest issue is the destruction of our society when we stoop so low as to send our wives, mothers & sisters into combat before we start running out of men.


31 posted on 04/02/2014 5:13:49 PM PDT by BwanaNdege
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: BwanaNdege

Screw all the hyperbole. What is Thelibertarian and why isnt the full article posted here?


33 posted on 04/02/2014 5:32:20 PM PDT by EQAndyBuzz ("Heck of a reset there, Hillary")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: BwanaNdege

I truly appreciate the cultural aspects of your argument as they have much import for the continuation of civillization and deserve all due consideration. But as a combat veteran my primary consideration in this matter is the enhancement of the armed forces to fight any enemies. Were someone to show me that this idiotic policy were to do so, than I would reluctantly yield to it. I KNOW that it does not from my first hand observation during my time in the National Guard.

I know that women have played a vital role during guerrilla, partisan warfare and sabatoge/espionage activity. But to deliberately employ them in ground combat units whose primary task is to close with, engage and destroy similar enemy units is the height of lunacy and madness given the effort required to identify the relative few who could qualify even if we ignore the potential detriments to morale and discipline.

This is sheer and utter madness akin to allowing open homosexuals to serve in the armed forces.


38 posted on 04/02/2014 6:08:12 PM PDT by DMZFrank
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

To: BwanaNdege
The biggest issue is the destruction of our society when we stoop so low as to send our wives, mothers & sisters into combat before we start running out of men.

70 years ago nearly 10% of the population of this country (mostly men) was in uniform. We were "scraping the bottom of the barrel", accepting men with bad eyes, bad ears, bad feet, and other conditions that were disqualifying a couple of years earlier.

Even in those conditions, we didn't send women to fight.

Any society that sends its women to fight before it sends the non-shaving boys and the cane-borne old men deserves to be destroyed.

44 posted on 04/02/2014 6:50:31 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article


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