Putting Women in Combat Is an Even Worse Idea Than You’d Think

National Review ^ | 07/15/2015 | by MIKE FREDENBURG

[BlackAdderess]

I didn’t say they’d like it better, just push come to shove if they do it there will on average be more of an aptitude. We had something similar in my family, in order to graduate in our family you had to be able to change a tire, do an oil change, do a tuneup, and you had to go through through a basic gun safety course.

[MrEdd]

Let’s start by correcting the focus from the equivocation in the title.

It’s not whether women belong in combat.

It is whether anyone for any reason belongs in a combat MOS if they can’t be deployed in combat.

And the answer is a resounding no.

A motor transport troop who can’t be sent into combat (whether female or some other reason) does not “free a troop to fight.” Instead they fill up billets in choice duty stations rendering those assignments unavailable to give combat troops a break between combat deployments.

So before we even get into crap about lowering physical standards for recruitment,training, or retention let us be honest about the true extent of the problem.

[MrEdd]

We alternated between MOPP3 and MOPP4 for three days during Desert Storm. Fortunately we had been issued lighter British suits rather than American suits so while we melted in our own body heat the weight was a little bit less.

[blueunicorn6]

Have you ever heard the Democrats scream about females having equality with males in being drafted for the military?

Not a peep.

Why?

Women see a news story about an inner city Mother and they are all for food stamps.

They think, “That could be me.”

Women see a news story about a Soldier in Afghanistan being blown up and they think, “I wonder if the Kardashians are on?”

They don’t care about military matters because they don’t have to.

[itsahoot]

OK, where would Serena Williams rank if she were to play in the MEN’s Tennis?

Serena probably is a man based on her physical attributes.

[Hulka]

You may be right. . .