Posted on 12/07/2012 3:29:54 PM PST by neverdem
Recently The Post reported that four women serving in the Army, two with Purple Hearts, had filed a federal lawsuit seeking to overturn the militarys combat exclusion policy. Combat exclusion is code for being kept from serving in the close-combat arms of the Army, Marines and special forces. These units are made up of soldiers whose purpose is to kill the enemy directly. They also do virtually all of the militarys dying: Since the end of World War II, four out of five combat deaths suffered by men and women serving in the U.S. military have been in the infantry, which includes more than 6 percent of the active-duty military.
--snip--
Ive been studying the band of brothers effect for almost 40 years and have written extensively on the subject. We know that time together allows effective pairings or battle buddies, to use the common Army term. We know that four solid buddy pairings led by a sergeant compose a nine-man, battle-ready squad. The Marine squad is slightly larger. We know from watching Ranger and special forces training that buddy groups form often spontaneously. But the human formula that ensures successful buddy pairings is still a mystery, and thats the key stumbling block in the debate. Veteran SEALs, special forces, Rangers, tankers and line infantrymen will swear that the deliberate, premeditated and brutal act of intimate killing is a male-only occupation. But no one can prove it with data from empirical tests because no such data exist from the United States. They just know intuitively from battlefield experience that its true.
To be sure, women soldiers may be fit, they may be skilled and they may be able to hang. Many have proved with their lives that they are willing to make the ultimate sacrifice. But our senior ground-force leaders,...
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
I did a month with out a douche during TET, I had crotch rot to my knees, foot rot, very bad breath, and world class Dingle Berries. I also smelled bad.
Thank you for your service. Welcome to the club of those veterans who wound up serving for a lost cause thanks to the rats.
Make sure you use any educational benefits due you. Just because you were a grunt doesn’t mean you were a dumb grunt. I asked to be one, twice, 11B in 1969 and 11C in 1980. Chemistry was my major in college. I’m a licensed physician. There are loads of jobs begging in science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Good luck!
The Germans were shocked when they encountered female battalions in the Soviet interior. They mowed them down like blades of grass just the same.
“Haul this load from point A to point B...”
Marines and soldiers were involved in incredible battles in moving supplies from point A to point B at Guadalcanal, the beginning of WWII in the Pacific, and Sugar Loaf Hill in Okinawa, the end of WW II.
I appreciate that you brought it up about moving gear and ammo in a combat situation. Women should never be involved.
When they develop armored battle suits (battletech) then reopen the debate.
Women fire machine guns on ranges. That’s not combat, not even close.
I overheard a cashier, a very young girl maybe about 17, say she was going to be a marine and had signed up for the infantry. She was very respectful and, from her demeanor, I would guess she grew up in a military family. We were in her lane and asked her about her joining the marines and she, along with two of her close male friends, were going in after high school graduation.
While I am sure she wants it and would probably make it through training, I feel that women being in war zones is wrong. It is the male instinct to protect women and who knows what secrets they would give up if women were injured or captured and the men were forced to watch them being tortured or raped. It is nothing more than something else to weaken our military.
” It is nothing more than something else to weaken our military.”
Your female instinct is spot on, dear lady.
not now, not ever. won’t apologize for the truth. not sorry, they aren’t built for it. i’d say the same thing to idiot guys who believe they can have a baby- not now, not ever, you’re not built for it.
The IDF has in women combat roles. Everyone serves.
yes, many guys cannot. nobody cries foul or weeps for them. nobody changed the standards for them.
the enemy doesn’t either.
I would rather be in a fox hole with someone I would do over being in one with some guy that wants to do me.......
Not in the infantry. Check the little essay posted by hamboy in comment# 6. It's called, "Debunking the Israeli 'women in combat' myth."
Here's an excerpt:
Writes Edward Norton, a reservist in the Israel Defense Forces: Women have always played an important role in the Israeli military, but they rarely see combat; if they do, it is usually by accident. No one in Israel, including feminists, has any objection to this situation. The fact that the Persian Gulf War has produced calls to allow women on the front lines proves only how atypical that war was and how little Americans really understand combat.
I don’t know Edward Norton. So he’s a reservist. I think maybe he should go and read the history of Israeli women in combat. I guess they train and carry weapons to make them look good or something. As for Americans having a little understanding of combat does not even deserve a rebuttal to that idiotic statement.
Bully for them. It’s still a terrible idea.
Who will pay for their contraceptives?
Women have taken part in Israels military before and since the founding of the state in 1948, with women currently comprising 33% of all IDF soldiers and 51% of its officers, fulfilling various roles within the Ground, Navy and Air Forces. The 2000 Equality amendment to the Military Service law states that "The right of women to serve in any role in the IDF is equal to the right of men." As of now, 88% to 92% of all roles in the IDF are open to female candidates, while women can be found in 69% of all positions.
Few serious armies use women in combat roles. Israel, which drafts most of its young women and uses them in all kinds of military work, has learned from experience to take them out of combat zones. Tests show that few women have the upper-body strength required for combat tasks. Keeping combat forces all male would not be discriminatory, as were earlier racial segregation schemes in the military, because men and women are different both physically and psychologically, said the Feb. 5, 1990, National Review.If they see combat, it's by accident. They're in support units, not the combat arms: infantry, armor and artillery.
We’ve become a silly country. Wasting our time concerning silly things. Bad things happen to countries that have become silly. We will have deserved it.
All the world wants both Israel and Jews destroyed.
Of course I would expect a web site like World News Daily to come up with a story like that. I guess they also debunk the women in combat in the Red Army during WWII.
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.