I think women should be able to serve in the military but not on the front lines under pressure with the men.
Many women already work on sub tenders. They do a great job, but I know that the world on a sub tender and that on a sub are galaxy's apart.
We just don't operate like the surface navy.
Next thing ya know there will be mixed SEAL teams
The nitpicking about perceived sexism on this thread is just a tiny peek into what WILL happen if women get put on subs.
It is not the place for this kind of drama. There is no room for it in the mission.
Women have been serving in the U.S. military since WWII, haven't they? But it's fairly new where they're put "on the front lines," what I may be mistakenly describing as combat positions or with combat units.
You may disagree with me here, I don't know, but I just hate to see women on carriers for the sole reason that their being there ruins what should and would be a unique, valuable growing experience for young men who join the Navy. Four years of being in an all-male working/disciplined/military/macho environment would have to be very, very healthy and valuable to any young man entering adulthood, ESPECIALLY today when so many good, wonderful young men are confused because they were essentially raised by single moms in a situation where their father's authority as disciplinarian was either removed by the courts or never there to begin with (that's a whole 'nother talk show).
I had the privilege of getting a pretty in-depth tour of one of our U.S. Navy's nuclear carriers a few years ago, and met many of the co-ed crew on the tour. I felt so sad, so sorry, that those young men were being robbed of what should have been a very special experience, made common and dare I say, community-college-like, with the co-ed approach.
THAT is one major reason I really object to women on Navy ships. It's just a sh*tty thing to do to the boys who are struggling to become men among men. It robs them of that chance and puts them back in an adolescent environment.
But of course, the most crucial reason to object to women in any fighting capacity is because the dynamics that naturally go on between men and women will guarandamnteed make for a weaker fighting force; an all-male combat unit with similary weaponry will whip a co-ed combat unit's ass. Women by nature will do nothing but distract from the mission at hand, as you so eloquently put it. Personally, I see this move, along with the move to end the "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gays in the military (sorry, but Dick Cheney is ALL WRONG on this), as a deliberate attempt to sabotage our military's effectiveness on the part of traitors enabled by the Obama administration.