Skip to comments.
Men are too rough to train with, Army tells women
The Daily Mail (UK) ^
| November 6, 2005
| Andrew Wilks
Posted on 11/06/2005 5:53:18 PM PST by Plainsman
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-63 next last
1
posted on
11/06/2005 5:53:19 PM PST
by
Plainsman
To: Plainsman
2
posted on
11/06/2005 5:59:54 PM PST
by
madison10
To: Plainsman
This has always been the main problem with a mixed military IMO. If you train men and women together, one group will suffer. The real worry for me was that the men would have to dilute their training regimine so as not to make it impossible for women to train with them.
I wanted the men to be the best prepared they could possibly be, physically. This stands for the women too, but men and women are different and training different groups with differing abilities was problematic.
I should state that I have not been involved with the military and would appreciate the views of those who have been, with regard to whether my concerns were valid or not.
To: Plainsman
Something the Marines realized from the beginning. Good to see the Army is finally facing reality.
4
posted on
11/06/2005 6:00:29 PM PST
by
SubMareener
(Become a monthly donor! Free FreeRepublic.com from Quarterly FReepathons!)
To: Plainsman
Now wait just a minute. Didn't these people watch G.I. Jane. That woman could do everything that the men could do. Now that's a fact - cuz I saw it in a movie.
5
posted on
11/06/2005 6:01:36 PM PST
by
Mulch
(tm)
To: Plainsman
Maybe the armed forces should be like golf courses and have ladies rules for combat. Even better, have a ladies winner in warfare like they do in marathons.
6
posted on
11/06/2005 6:02:50 PM PST
by
satchmodog9
( Seventy million spent on the lefts Christmas present and all they got was a Scooter)
To: Plainsman
We wont have any of that. No sir. Equal treatment.
New name..."This ladies army"....Hehehehehe
7
posted on
11/06/2005 6:03:27 PM PST
by
cynicom
To: Plainsman
'sustainable and commensurate with their physical profile'. No kiddin' there's a different physical profile? What morons!
8
posted on
11/06/2005 6:04:33 PM PST
by
jimfree
(Freep and Ye shall find.)
To: Plainsman
Once more, in bold.
'Men are stronger and more robust and it's silly to pretend otherwise'
9
posted on
11/06/2005 6:04:41 PM PST
by
ShadowDancer
(I think I may have the Asian Bird Fru. I mean Flu. (Damn, it's starting already))
Comment #10 Removed by Moderator
To: Plainsman
Cool! Step 2 is to get an agreement from our enemies to go easier on the women.
11
posted on
11/06/2005 6:06:42 PM PST
by
strategofr
(The secret of happiness is freedom. And the secret of freedom is courage.---Thucydities)
To: SubMareener
Something the Marines realized from the beginning. Good to see the Army is finally facing reality. Well, actually, it's the British Army that's finally facing reality.
12
posted on
11/06/2005 6:09:40 PM PST
by
Polybius
To: SubMareener
"Something the Marines realized from the beginning. Good to see the Army is finally facing reality"
Unfortuneately, it's not our Army that is making this change, it't the Brits.
13
posted on
11/06/2005 6:11:33 PM PST
by
SAMS
(Nobody loves a soldier until the enemy is at the gate; Army Wife & Marine Mom)
To: SubMareener
Good to see political correctness being thrown out the window. Zut Alors! You mean women have different bodies than men do?
You betcha. Men need 20 mile hikes with packs on to strengthen legs, ankles, hips. Women are naturally stronger from the top of the hips down. They need to work on upper body conditioning and strength if they are gonna be warriors.
Ask Olga from Michigan!
14
posted on
11/06/2005 6:19:44 PM PST
by
Candor7
(Into Liberal Flatulence Goes the Hope of the West)
Comment #15 Removed by Moderator
To: Polybius
Well, actually, it's the British Army that's finally facing reality. This is the way I read the story as well. Yet I suspect the statistics apply anywhere some planner comes up with the same training regimen for both sexes unless the regimen is designed strictly for the lasses.
16
posted on
11/06/2005 6:31:00 PM PST
by
stevem
To: Candor7
This can't be true! A woman can do anything a man can do.
I know this because that's what the media has told me for the last 30 years! And, you know, everything reported in the newspaper and on television is correct.They can't lie
it's against the law. yeah right
To: Plainsman
Will the enemy only send other women to fight there women?
To: Plainsman
I've always had problems with homosexuals & women in the military. But I've resolved that by realizing that if we are ever invaded, I wont care what the gender or sexual preference is of the person next to me, firing at the enemy.
The military simply needs to figure out what women do better than men. Yes, I know that may sound heretical to some, but isn't it obvious that if men are better at some things than women, then women must be better at some things than men.
War is serious business, & I want the right people in the right jobs. Just as the guy with bottle thick glasses may not be the best sniper, a person with small, delicate hands may be the best bomb disposal person on the base.
19
posted on
11/06/2005 6:35:40 PM PST
by
Mister Da
(Nuke 'em til they glow!)
To: Plainsman
Marine Corps to Army: We told you so.
20
posted on
11/06/2005 6:37:47 PM PST
by
DocH
(Gun-grabbers, you can HAVE my guns... lead first.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-63 next 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson