For Female GI's, Combat is a Fact

Washington Post ^ | May 13, 2005 | Ann Scott Tyson

[metalcor]

MOSUL, Iraq -- Jennifer Guay went to war to be a grunt. And the 170-pound former bartender from Leeds, Maine, with cropped red hair and a penchant for the bench press, has come pretty close.

It was mid-February and Guay, 26, an Army specialist who was the first woman to be assigned as an infantry combat medic, was spending 10 hours a day on missions with the 82nd Airborne Division, dodging rockets and grenades in the crowded streets of Mosul.

"Break-break-break: U.S. soldier down!" a hard-edged voice came over the radio. A gun battle had just broken out.

In less than five minutes, Guay was at the scene. She dashed to Sgt. Christopher Pusateri, 21, who was lying on the ground, a bullet through his jaw. "I was in charge of this man's life," she recalled. Pusateri had "a massive trauma injury, and I had to get him off the middle of the street."

[metalcor]

My daughter is serving in the same company as the females quoted in this article. I was very much opposed to females serving in such positions, but after hearing from some of the men the are serving with, I am becoming more ambivilent. I expect some here will call it an abomination, but those doing the work seem to have a different view. Regardless, these women deserve thanks and respect.

[Mercat]

I've been okay with women in combat as long as they have the same training and meet the same physical standard (I know that they can meet the other standards) as the men. Other than that, I agree. Either take them out of Iraq all together or loosen the restrictions.

[zarf]

A friend of mine in the Army said this was all BS. Yes, some women are preforming well in SUPPORT units, but individually have never had to meet the standards of the combat infantry units.

He calls it pure PC hype. He said the Army is a pussified organization as it is and wants out.

[metalcor]

Well, several member of the 1-24 have told me they respect these females and if you don't know what they are about and what they are doing all day every day--read up--then tell me who I should listen to. These females, including my daughter, are medics serving the int 1-25th Stryker Brigade Support Battalion.

[Mr Ramsbotham]

Liberals have anecdotes. Conservatives have facts.

[metalcor]

That is so profound I am at a loss. The facts are what is the reality on the ground today in Iraq. You may not like it, I may not like it, but some females are filling positions and doing it well and are deserving of appreciation and respect...if you are opposed, get yourself, your son, your nephew, the neighbor kid and take HIM down to the recruiter's office. With recruiting shortfall's of 40%, women are going to be doing more out of neccessity.

[mmercier]

>>> I've been okay with women in combat as long as they have the same training and meet the same physical standard (I know that they can meet the other standards) as the men. Other than that, I agree. Either take them out of Iraq all together or loosen the restrictions.



I have never been "okay" with the idea of women in combat.
The fact that our forces outstanding performance in Iraq gives me pause, but only momentarily.

If females engaged in actual combat operations is a coming reality, then America must be willing to see a young female captive in the hands of these savages appearing beaten, raped and tortured on all msm appendages, pleading for her life.

The Israelis learned this lesson. This is a morale killer that will cause vast number of casualties as our male souldiers attempt (anticipated) irrational action to free them in combat situations.

America is not ready for this, and the left is counting on that as a mechanism by which they can further erode our military capability.

[zarf]

My friend has been in the thick of the fighting in Sadr City and elsewhere for a year and a half and recieved a purple heart.

He's been with women since basic training and said that the training requirements for women are a joke. The basic training of pro-active combat units are completely separate from the support units of which the performance requirements are much less stringent.

Until the training and physical requirements are exactly the same for men and women, all this clamoring for "women in combat" is PC BS.

The media seek out individual cases and shine a light on them, but in general this is pure hype.

[Blue_Ridge_Mtn_Geek]

A smaller proportion of women than men can meet combat performance standards, perhaps a much smaller proportion.

In a volunteer outfit, however, they should be eligible to test, and accepted if they meet these standards.

[zarf]

With recruiting shortfall's of 40%, women are going to be doing more out of neccessity.

I agree with you here. The Army needs bodies. The training standards and physical requirements need to be lowered to allow women in combat and I expect it will happen.

[Aetius]

Obviously some doing the work do have that view, but this piece is a textbook example of a media bias. They give the other side no time. It is a clear advocacy piece, and the writer clearly sought out people to provide quotes in favor of the position she sought to advance. I read a similar article last year where it interviewed a female in military police who had gunned down some insurgents. This solider said that while what she does is tough, it does not infact compare to the job of infantry soldiers, and that she doubts she could cut it in that more demanding specialty.

So I really doubt this writer would have had a hard time finding a dissenting voice had she cared to find one.

Not having served myself, I prefer to defer to the experts on this. From what I've read the nature of this war has indeed blurred the lines between combat and non-combat soldiers, and I don't doubt the stories of female soldiers performing bravely under fire. But does that mean we really want to radically alter the nature of the units that are charged with actually finding and engaging the enemy?

[AQGeiger]

While I realize that this article is not actually about Sgt. Pusateri, I'm going to link to a thread I posted some time ago following his death (since I am saddened again in reading about the incident that killed him). He was one of Sgt. AQGeiger's soldiers, so I knew him, and he had a bright future in the Army ahead of him.

Soldier From Upstate New York Killed in Second Iraq Tour of Duty

[elfman2]

I knew one or two of women Marines who I suspected would be better than most males in combat. I’d have followed them without hesitation.

They were exceptions. I don’t know how to get away with allowing the exceptions into combat without ruining the units with women who shouldn’t be there due to traits that are technically difficult to measure and politically difficult to administer.

[Balding_Eagle]

...if you are opposed, get yourself, your son, your nephew, the neighbor kid and take HIM down to the recruiter's office.

This is EXACTLY what the DUmmies post too.

[starfish923]

If women were such good warriors our history books would have had THEM in their historical armies. Alexander, Attila, the Roman Empire, the Vikings, etc., had no women warriors. Men are simply THAT much stronger than women. They really are. Their aggression level is also FAR different than men.

Lol. It's so amusing. Women libbers BASH the holy hell out of men's aggressive attitude, THEN try to explain that women make good warriors because they also have the needed aggression to be good soldiers. PURE, UNADULTERATED HYPOCRISY.
There is ALWAYS an exception or two, but they are just that, the rare exception. You simply DO NOT change the rules for that rare exception.

ANY 18-year-old trained G.I. male could, if he wanted to, cold-cock Jennifer Guay in a nanosecond. That's a fact, Jack.

In combat, the men would be thinking about her in a chivalrous way, worrying about HER safety. Thus, they would be endangering themselves, other male soldiers and their mission.

The women's libbers and other such FOOLS would have the military try to change the basic nature of men and attempt to get them to NOT worry about fellow WOMEN soldiers. Change the basic nature of men? How arrogant and stupid is that? Get the young men to treat the young women like "fellow soldiers"? Incredibly stupid of anyone to think that young men are going to change. Why should they? It's their NATURE to be that way. I think it's JUST FINE. Someone has to defend the cave....I would rather have G.I. Joe. G.I. Jane? Fantasy.
Putting women in the mix against men is like putting children against adults, old people against young people, lightweight boxers against heavyweight boxers. It's not only arrogant, it's just plain stupid.

Armies have tried it. The Russians created a DISASTER in their attempt. Fights broke out between the men....about the women.

It doesn't work; never has; never will.
G.I. Jane is a myth of Hollywood...all make-believe.

[MikefromOhio]

The problem in Iraq is that just about any road or bush or city can be a front line at any given time.

combat there is mostly shorter battles and firefights, whereas things like Operation Matador is a prolonged fight with a significant objective.

There is a different trust me. The shorter battles are more for survival than military objective. If they are joining the Army, they need to know how to defend themselves, otherwise, why bother deploying them at all...

Indy's daughter is over there right now...she may be able to give more light to this subject....

[Mercat]

I thought that they had already done that.

[Aetius]

If some women could meet the requirements of infantry/armor, etc, do you really think the standards would stand long?

Its easy to imagine a handful of female soldiers who can pass muster. Then lets say they perform, at a minimum, adequately. They will become a cause-celeb for the media and certain politicians. Then there will be pressure on the military to mint more of these women infantry. Attempts by the military to explain that there are only a few because inherent human biology only allows there to be a few -- the very definition of exceptions -- will fall on deaf ears to the likes of Hillary and Boxer. They will demand more. If the military stands firm and refuses to unofficially let the standards slide, then the standards themselves would probably be attacked. They would be accused of setting them artificially high, just to keep women out, and that they can safely be set lower w/o harming combat effectiveness. Then there will be some 'study' that shows that yes, in fact the standards are too high, and they can be lowered. Then we get into a bigger war against a foe who can field forces with the potential to actually win some tactical battles, and we go in with a politically correct force.

Maybe this is too pessmistic an outlook, but since its clear how the media feels, I don't think it unlikely.

[Thebaddog]

I suspect that the media hype builds up women as heroes when they are simply doing the same job performance as an equivalent male. But I saw an interview of a female A10 pilot and was quite impressed with her.

[starfish923]

I knew one or two of women Marines who I suspected would be better than most males in combat. I’d have followed them without hesitation.
They were exceptions. I don’t know how to get away with allowing the exceptions into combat without ruining the units with women who shouldn’t be there due to traits that are technically difficult to measure and politically difficult to administer.

There IS no way to allow women into male combat units. It WOULD be a disaster.

The military can find uses for these women. They find uses for MEN who are square pegs and don't fit into the round holes.
Those exceptional men are put into special forces, details, projects, etc. The exceptional women could be given the same treatment.

"traits that are technically difficult to measure and politically difficult to administer" can be handled very well without endangering the lives of male soldiers -- all for the purpose of satisfying a few sour grapes called women libbers. The lives of the many are more important than the ambitions, talents, politcal butthump and aspirations of a few "good women" and the other misguided, arrogant, stupid fools who would push for this incredibly stupid change.

Those Marine women you would follow wouldn't, for the life of them, want to endanger a single Marine for THEIR own empowerment, gratification or goals....not if they were REAL Marines.
Semper fi.