# U.S. Military to allow females in combat



## ccheese (Jan 24, 2013)

The stateside newspapers are bally-hooing the news that the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other military big-wigs are about to rescind the "no females in combat" rule.

I think it's bad news. Now, not only do we lose our sons in combat, but our daughters too.

I know other nations have used women in combat, even back in WW-II, but that doesn't mean the U.S. has to do it.

I believe, right now, the U.S has more forces in "troubled areas around the world" than any other nation. A lot of 
people think the U.S. is the worlds police force.

This is suppose to open females to Special Forces, Seals, Rangers, Red and Green Berets and God knows what else.

Like I said, I think it's bad news.

Charles

Warning: Let's not let this get political or un-civil.


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 24, 2013)

They will not be allowed in any special forces units.


----------



## GrauGeist (Jan 24, 2013)

Personally, I don't think that women should be in harm's way. 

The U.S. is not short on manpower and certainly not in a dire enough condition to warrant it.

I know they provide outstanding service in current roles and it should be left at that...

Just my 2 cents worth (adjusted for inflation)


----------



## A4K (Jan 24, 2013)

With all - keep them away from the front line.

This is not condemning their abilities in any way, simply the thought of what would happen if they were taken prisoner...


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jan 24, 2013)

I'm assuming women in combat means they will be allowed in the three combat MOSs they are currently barred from.....

Infantry
Armor
Artillery

If this happens, one thing for sure. If the Draft is ever re-instated, and I'm not saying that it will be, there will be a huge outcry from parents whose daughters will be assigned to a combat MOS. 

And yes, going forward in the name of equality, women will be subject to Selective Service IMO.

For the record, though I don't have a problem with women pilots in combat (which is current policy), I don't want to see women in combat on the ground.

Pentagon announces decision to lift ban on women in combat roles | Fox News

Steve


----------



## Thorlifter (Jan 24, 2013)

Just another dumb political correctness bunch of crap. The rest will be self censored, but you get my drift......


----------



## N4521U (Jan 24, 2013)

US women are already in combat Zones, if I am not mistaken. But in non-front line roles?


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jan 24, 2013)

N4521U said:


> US women are already in combat Zones, if I am not mistaken. But in non-front line roles?



They are in combat zones as pilots, and in combat support roles on the ground. None in the three combat MOSs, but I guess that's gonna change.

Steve


----------



## ccheese (Jan 24, 2013)

Women have been flying choppers in Afghanistan for quite awhile. Other females are in combat support roles (driving trucks, etc). My big concern is what will happen if/when a female is taken prisoner by the Taliban. They think all women are dirt under their feet, anyway. Would rape be added to the torture ?

Charles


----------



## tyrodtom (Jan 24, 2013)

As long as they don't change the requirements for entry into these fields, I don't have a problem. But I can see them making the physical requirements just a little easier, so they don't get compaints with too many females getting turned away.
I wonder how many will actually join combat arm fields, knowing in the current world situation that there is a good chance they will see combat ?


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 24, 2013)

If they meet the standards required, I can't see any logical reason to prevent them from serving on the front line.

Its not about political correctness, its about a women's right to fight (and die) for her country.


----------



## meatloaf109 (Jan 24, 2013)

The male of our species is predisposed to protect the female. Not being sexist, that's just the way it is. I am afraid that it would add more stress to an already crappy situation.
Not to mention the extra interpersonal problems that will arise. It would give a whole new meaning to the term "fox hole" though.


----------



## gumbyk (Jan 24, 2013)

meatloaf109 said:


> The male of our species is predisposed to protect the female. Not being sexist, that's just the way it is. I am afraid that it would add more stress to an already crappy situation.
> Not to mention the extra interpersonal problems that will arise. It would give a whole new meaning to the term "fox hole" though.



And the female is predisposed to child-rearing?

Although a 'pre-disposition' will mean that it is true most of the time it won't be true every time.

Culture has a lot to say about gender roles, so I guess that is probably where we will differ.


----------



## ccheese (Jan 24, 2013)

FLYBOYJ said:


> They will not be allowed in any special forces units.



According to ABC news they will be... but they have to pass very rigid tests... especially for Seals.

Charles


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 25, 2013)

ccheese said:


> According to ABC news they will be... but they have to pass very rigid tests... especially for Seals.
> 
> Charles


CNN said otherwise, so it seems as usual, the media doesn't know.

Got this from Fox..

_"Some front-line military roles may open to women as soon as this year. Assessments for others, such as special operations forces, including Navy SEALS and the Army's Delta Force, may take longer." _

Military leaders lift ban on women in combat roles | Fox News

Personally, I could care less if the combat MOS' are voluntary and those women who are applying for those position understand what they could be in for.

Jessica Lynch - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The truth about Jessica | World news | The Guardian


----------



## evangilder (Jan 25, 2013)

I have mixed feeling about it. When I was in the USAF, we had a female SP (USAFs version of the Army, basically) who carried the M-60. There wasn't too many guys on that base that would dare tangle with her. There are some women that are tough as nails and others that are girly, don't want to break a nail. Having done some training with the Israelis may years ago, I can tell you that the women serving there are pretty badass. 

Front line combat roles are tough, for anyone. The people that sign up for those jobs know the risks. It is a volunteer military. What concerns me is if there is a draft because of a future conflict, there is the risk of women getting drafted into those combat roles that don't want to be there. That would be very dangerous. Women have boobs, and to a young man, those are powerful. Distraction will get you killed in a combat zone.


----------



## ToughOmbre (Jan 25, 2013)

On the issue of having women subject to the draft.

Decision to allow women in combat roles raises questions about draft | Fox News

I have always held that women should be subject to the draft. That's EQUALITY!

But I do not want to see them drafted into a combat MOS.

Steve


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 25, 2013)

ToughOmbre said:


> I do not want to see them drafted into a combat MOS.
> 
> Steve



Agree 100% I believe combat MOS' should be voluntary for females, with or without a draft.


----------



## ccheese (Jan 25, 2013)

According to ABC, the requirements to become a U.S. Navy Seal are:
Pass a stringent physical screening test that includes the following procedure: swim 500 yards in 12.5 minutes or less, followed by a 10-minute rest; do 42 push-ups in under two minutes, followed by a two-minute rest; do 50 sit-ups in under two minutes, followed by a two-minute rest; do six pull-ups, followed by a 10-minute rest; run 1.5 miles in boots and long pants in less than 11.5 minutes.

IMHO, not too many men can do this, let alone a woman !!

Charles


----------



## FLYBOYJ (Jan 25, 2013)

ccheese said:


> According to ABC, the requirements to become a U.S. Navy Seal are:
> Pass a stringent physical screening test that includes the following procedure: swim 500 yards in 12.5 minutes or less, followed by a 10-minute rest; do 42 push-ups in under two minutes, followed by a two-minute rest; do 50 sit-ups in under two minutes, followed by a two-minute rest; do six pull-ups, followed by a 10-minute rest; run 1.5 miles in boots and long pants in less than 11.5 minutes.
> 
> *IMHO, not too many men can do this, let alone a woman !!*
> Charles



And if a woman can't do this, she doesn't become a SEAL


----------



## DerAdlerIstGelandet (Jan 25, 2013)

I have no problem with them serving in combat roles, as long as they meet the same standards. 

People always say thst women can not meet the physical requirements. That is simply not true. There are plenty of women who can, just like there are plenty of men who can't. Most men serving could not drag or carry a 200 lb man with his gear. You use team work. Women can use team work as well. 

People site hygiene as a reason. Its a modern military. We are not living in trenches anymore.

All that should mattet is that a woman can shoot and make the physical requirements. This is a modern military, not 1916 France, 1944 Pacific Island, or 1969 Jungle of Vietnam.


----------



## tyrodtom (Jan 25, 2013)

ccheese said:


> According to ABC, the requirements to become a U.S. Navy Seal are:
> Pass a stringent physical screening test that includes the following procedure: swim 500 yards in 12.5 minutes or less, followed by a 10-minute rest; do 42 push-ups in under two minutes, followed by a two-minute rest; do 50 sit-ups in under two minutes, followed by a two-minute rest; do six pull-ups, followed by a 10-minute rest; run 1.5 miles in boots and long pants in less than 11.5 minutes.
> 
> IMHO, not too many men can do this, let alone a woman !!
> ...



I think those might be the minimum requirments to just be considered to ENTER seal training, not complete it. Just to graduate from Army AIT requires that you do 42 push ups in under 2 minutes, do 53 sit ups in under 2 minutes, and run 2 miles in under 15.54., if you fail in any one of those 3 you recycle, or don't graduate. Then Army AIT has different requirments for females and males over 22 years of age. 

I'm just talking about requirments to be a infantryman or infantryperson, ( how's that for PC) not Special forces or Seals.

Modern ground combat can get just as down and dirty as anything me and my brother encountered in Vietnam, or my dad in WW2. Not everybody is sitting behind a consol controlling a RPV.


----------



## ccheese (Jan 25, 2013)

An article, in today’s (Norfolk) Virginian Pilot says Defense Sec’y Panetta and Gen. Dempsey, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, signed an order allowing women to serve in combat. However, it says, “the repeal does not immediately effect the Navy’s special warfare command and the Army’s Delta Force.” The Navy’s 3,000 special warfare billets, which includes Seals and combatant crew members, _*will remain closed to women for now.*_

Joe TO Take note !

Charles


----------



## The Basket (Jan 25, 2013)

I say put women in combat zones. It used to torque my jaws that females get paid the same and yet have lowered fitness standards. 

They joined the military so they can take thier chances like any other guy.


----------

