US military to allow women in direct combat
- Thread starter Erttheking
- Start date
Simple fact: Women ARE in combat......
Case and point:
The woman in that photo is Tammy Duckworth, US Representative to Illinos 8th District.....
She was piloting a Blackhawk Helicopter in Iraq when it was hit with a rocket propelled granade and crashed....
Women are in combat.... all the "no women in combat" rule has done is block women from promotions in the military that require "recognized combat service" ( granted Tammy was promoted in 2012, but this was after she had left active duty)
In other words, it is a sexist hold over that makes the public happy because we still are not comfortable with the idea of our daughters coming home in body bags......
You know what? THEY ARE....... Let's at least give them the recognition they deserve when it does happen!
Case and point:
The woman in that photo is Tammy Duckworth, US Representative to Illinos 8th District.....
She was piloting a Blackhawk Helicopter in Iraq when it was hit with a rocket propelled granade and crashed....
Women are in combat.... all the "no women in combat" rule has done is block women from promotions in the military that require "recognized combat service" ( granted Tammy was promoted in 2012, but this was after she had left active duty)
In other words, it is a sexist hold over that makes the public happy because we still are not comfortable with the idea of our daughters coming home in body bags......
You know what? THEY ARE....... Let's at least give them the recognition they deserve when it does happen!
I'm talking about equality before the law and societal obligations vs. privileges. Historical wage disparities aren't relevant in that context, unless they have a basis in current Federal law.TaboriHK said:
Statistically, some of them would. I wouldn't know which ones beforehand, I might be tempted to deny it, on the basis that only people I don't personally know are rapists.Fuzzed said:
But odds are very certain that I know men who have, or will in the future, rape someone.
Women certainly are in combat, but at present they have not served in the roles whose primary purpose is armed ground combat with the enemy. Fighter pilots, MPs, truck drivers and all of the other specialties might find themselves in the thick of it but this is normally incidental to their "main" job. There is a difference between an MP who might engage in a firefight while escorting a convoy or conducting a law enforcement patrol, an an infantryman whose basic wartime function is to go find the enemy and kill them.MorganL4 said:
"Recognized military service" is legally defined as full-time service by a person in the armed forces during the national emergency or a state military emergency, if you're going by Section 18540.3. Anybody- irregardful of how many X chromosomes they have- who served a day on active duty post 9/11 qualifies for that distinction, whether they do it as a pararescueman or a chaplain's assistant.
I haven't read through the comments, but I will say that while some may argue the potential negative ramifications, this is nonetheless a victory for equal rights so I approve.
If there were any sorts of clear indicators for rapists and serial murders and other such criminals, I'm sure the US government would already be using them. But there aren't. There is no way to profile a rapist or serial killer and successfully predict their likelihood to commit the crime.Fuzzed said:
And plus, military life is radically different from civilian life. Whatever picture they had of the person's mental state before they went into the military would be useless as soon as training began.
I didn't mean military I meant combat.... I mistyped.RufusMcLaser said:
But are you really gonna tell the medic who gets into a fire fight while trying to save Private John Smith's life that they were "NOT" in a combat situation? If you have to kill a person to carry out your mission, you have to kill a person to carry out your mission, if that was the order that came from the CO.... Or just an unfortunate circumstance that occured when you were trying to save someone's life.... IT STILL HAPPENED.
"Main job" or not..... The women in uniform deserve credit for the work they do.
Until women are held to the same physical standards as men, they can go fuck themselves. To expect me to put my life into someones hands who I damn well know can't help me if I get hurt, all in the name of "equality", is absolute bullshit.
Fuck off and get on the damn pull up bars until you prove you can hang with the men.
Fuck off and get on the damn pull up bars until you prove you can hang with the men.
That's a pretty good point, which has tended to be overlooked so far, but I don't know how far you can run with it. There have been female fighter pilots in both the US Navy and the Air Force since at least the 1990s, and the USN has had women in command of surface combatants. I dare you to tell me that the USAF isn't run by fighter pilots, or that the CNO doesn't tend to be a naval aviator. (For that matter the US Army lets women fly attack helicopters.) None of these have quite the same cachet as being able to say "Yeah, I started out in a rifle platoon" but they're all careers which put a person right on that service's front line.Tenmar said:
I am in complete agreement with this statement. My intent was the clarify the difference between military occupations in which involvement in direct ground combat is incidental vs. the raison d'etre. I think we're cool on this oneMorganL4 said:
Because quite frankly your question has very little to do with the point you were trying to make. You first said, "Why does the military hire people that want to rape chicks?" Well the obvious answer is they don't want to. Even if there were some conspiracy to herd women into the military just so they can have big overseas rape factories, the goal of the military is a strategic one and rape factories don't win battles.Fuzzed said:
So they don't want these people, yet they still get in. And you have the same problem in law enforcement--we don't want rapists or serial killers running around on the streets, but they are there anyway. Huge parts of the government apart from the military are dedicated to finding these kinds of people, but they can't. Even with all the technology at their disposal, there is simply no way to profile people like that with any significant amount of success or certainty.
I don't know if my friends would rape anyone, and nor would the top psychologists and criminologists in the world if they interviewed my friends. So to answer your question on why the military hires people who rape chicks, it's because there's no way to separate them from the ones who don't want to rape chicks until they actually rape someone.
I've read a bit about how the IDF had a few issues with male soldiers when women were put into combat situations. I'll just copy paste a bit from a wiki.
IMO If a person wants to join the military and they're able to handle combat then put them where they're needed regardless of gender.
Women in the Israel Defense Forces had been officially prohibited from serving in close combat military operations since 1948. The reason for removing female soldiers from the front lines was due less to the performance of female soldiers, and more due to the behavior of the male infantrymen after witnessing a woman wounded. The IDF saw a complete loss of control over soldiers who apparently experienced an uncontrollable, protective, instinctual aggression, severely degrading the unit's combat effectiveness. In 2001 women did begin serving in IDF combat units on an experimental basis. There is now an all-female infantry battalion, the Caracal Battalion.
Australian soldiers have voiced similar concern saying these soldiers "are reluctant to take women on reconnaissance or special operations, as they fear that in the case of combat or discovery, their priority will be to save the women and not to complete the mission. Thus while men might be able to be programmed to kill, it is not as easy to program men to neglect women."
Australian soldiers have voiced similar concern saying these soldiers "are reluctant to take women on reconnaissance or special operations, as they fear that in the case of combat or discovery, their priority will be to save the women and not to complete the mission. Thus while men might be able to be programmed to kill, it is not as easy to program men to neglect women."
IMO If a person wants to join the military and they're able to handle combat then put them where they're needed regardless of gender.