Women to now be allowed in combat roles

The Right to Fight!

r-US-MILITARY-WOMEN-COMBAT-huge.jpg

152 women have died in the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars!

Petite but proven: Two women warriors pass elite Army training ...
 
Well, to be technical, no I wasn't in a combat arms unit. Those are infantry, tanks, and artillery only. Was I in combat though? Yeah, I was a machine gunner for convoys during the Surge.

Personally I think it's a bad idea so long as you have different standards from women and men (specifically, lower standards for women). I know both from history and personal experience that there are some women who are capable of doing the job just as fine as any man who has walked the Earth, but they're the exception, not the rule (in my experience). Additionally, you have a bunch of potential problems adding them to the mix. For example, my squad was the only one without a woman in it when I deployed and my squad was also the only one that never had someone down each month due to menstrual cycles.

It's going to be very challenging for combat roles to integrate women. Not that it cannot, or should not, be done, but it will be difficult in the extreme.

You know, some women handle their periods with no trouble!
 
My daughter is two weeks from being shipped out to Afghanistan good brother. It will be her 4th deployment .. now as a senior Noncom.

At her request, I cannot talk about her position on this issue or any issues because she fears her father is monitored and could negatively affect her career.

We never talk about politics although we know what is in each others head.

I have however, spoken to several female soldiers about the issue and the consensus is both ways. Some feel as if combat duty is the only way to advancement .. others speak of their fears.

As a father who often has nightmares when my daughter is in combat zones, I'm not looking forward to the implementation of this decision.

Very normal reaction.
 
Well, to be technical, no I wasn't in a combat arms unit. Those are infantry, tanks, and artillery only. Was I in combat though? Yeah, I was a machine gunner for convoys during the Surge.

Personally I think it's a bad idea so long as you have different standards from women and men (specifically, lower standards for women). I know both from history and personal experience that there are some women who are capable of doing the job just as fine as any man who has walked the Earth, but they're the exception, not the rule (in my experience). Additionally, you have a bunch of potential problems adding them to the mix. For example, my squad was the only one without a woman in it when I deployed and my squad was also the only one that never had someone down each month due to menstrual cycles.

It's going to be very challenging for combat roles to integrate women. Not that it cannot, or should not, be done, but it will be difficult in the extreme.

I am sure the good old boys are up to the challenge. They thought it would be the end of the world having "gays" in the military, so far, not too many problems that I have read about.
 
My daughter is two weeks from being shipped out to Afghanistan good brother. It will be her 4th deployment .. now as a senior Noncom.

At her request, I cannot talk about her position on this issue or any issues because she fears her father is monitored and could negatively affect her career.

We never talk about politics although we know what is in each others head.

I have however, spoken to several female soldiers about the issue and the consensus is both ways. Some feel as if combat duty is the only way to advancement .. others speak of their fears.

As a father who often has nightmares when my daughter is in combat zones, I'm not looking forward to the implementation of this decision.

Thank your daughter for her service. I am sorry she is being deployed, yet, again. My friend just returned from his fourth. Two in Iraq, two in Afghnistan. My nephew has been stateside or over a year. This war can't be over soon enough or me.
 
Last edited:
I am sure the good old boys are up to the challenge. They thought it would be the end of the world having "gays" in the military, so far, not too many problems that I have read about.

gay men aren't scientifically weaker on average, as opposed to women. As long as the testing standards are the same then there isn't an issue.
 
gay men aren't scientifically weaker on average, as opposed to women. As long as the testing standards are the same then there isn't an issue.

I agree, I have always agreed. If women want certain assignments, they should be qualified just like the guys. My reference to gays wasn't in regards to their strength.
 
Last edited:
I agree, I have always agreed. If women want certain assignments, they should be wulified just lie the guys. My reference to gays wasn't in regards to their strength.

They also don't require separate sleeping quarters and other facilities, other uniform items, and most importantly they cannot get pregnant.
 
I agree, I have always agreed. If women want certain assignments, they should be wulified just lie the guys. My reference to gays wasn't in regards to their strength.

i know but the opposition to gays was based on nothing really other than homophobia. If testing standards were different for women, there would be real merit to be against putting women in combat roles. My point was the two aren't really synonymous.
 
There's a reason they are called 'daddy's little girl'. Your reaction seems very normal to me. In fact we'd probably be better off as a society if more fathers have the love and caring you show for your child.

Thanks again.

A long walk with your dog does wonders for the soul.
 
Back
Top