combat roles to women?

You draft to win wars not lose them

 

True. You have to wonder about the politicians, especially those who try to social engineer the military, if they really understand this since so many of them have never put on a uniform much less served in the armed forces.

 

Most legislative and executive decisions made affecting the military are done with the consent and advice of the Joint Chiefs.

Like petty said earlier, this decision is just making official what's already happening in the military, women serving in combat roles.

It's no different IMO than rescinding Don't-ask-don't-tell. There have been gays serving in the military since the very beginning, you just can't 'out' someone anymore to get them kicked out.

 

I posted a story about the draft earlier.

 

I'm not sure I'm liking your assumption that the draft will NEED to come back versus IF the draft comes back.

LOL.

I just had to mention that.

 

I thought they were going to re-institute the draft for Iraq/Afghanistan tbh

i know there was some commotion in Washington about it...but with all these people in the military, shit got done regardless

Vietnam..on the other hand...

a war like that, you HAD to draft..because we couldnt voluntarily sustain attrition rates

58,000 dead, hundreds of thousands wounded....

punji sticks and force on force, battalion vs battalion battles...

Agent Orange...

people weren't signing up for that nutass bullshit :smt043

 

Listen Up, Ladies! Uncle Sam Might Want You Too

http://www.military.com/daily-news/...-uncle-sam-might-want-you-too.html?ESRC=eb.nl


WASHINGTON -- Tennnnnn-hut, ladies! The next time Uncle Sam comes calling, he's probably going to want you, too.

The Obama administration's recent decision to lift the ban on women in combat has opened the door for a change in the law that currently compels only men between age 18 and 25 to register for a military draft, according to legal experts and military historians.

Never before has the country drafted women into military service, and neither the administration nor Congress is in a hurry to make them register for a future call-up. But, legally, they may have no other choice.

It is constitutional to register only men for a draft, the Supreme Court ruled more than three decades ago, because the reason for registration is to create a pool of potential combat troops should a national emergency demand a rapid increase in the size of the military. Women were excluded from serving in battlefield jobs, so there was no reason to register them for possible conscription into the armed forces, the court held.

Now that front-line infantry, armor, artillery and special operations jobs are open to female volunteers who can meet the physical requirements, it will be difficult for anyone to make a persuasive argument that women should continue to be exempt from registration, said Diane Mazur, a law professor at the University of Florida and a former Air Force officer.
"They're going to have to show that excluding women from the draft actually improves military readiness," Mazur said. "I just don't see how you can make that argument."

Groups that backed the end of the ban on women in combat also support including women in draft registration as a matter of basic citizenship. Women should have the same civic obligations as men, said Greg Jacob, a former Marine Corps officer and policy director for the Service Women's Action Network. "We see registration as another step forward in terms of equality and fairness," Jacob said.

The chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., supports draft registration for women, according to his spokeswoman. Rep. Howard "Buck" McKeon, R-Calif., who heads the House Armed Services Committee, hasn't made up his mind. McKeon said through a spokesman that he's awaiting a Defense Department report due in the coming weeks that will assess the legal impact of lifting the ban women in combat on draft registration.

But if you're worried a draft notice is going to soon be in your mailbox, take a deep breath. There is no looming national crisis that makes a military draft likely.

A draft would be enormously unpopular; a new poll by Quinnipiac University found that American voters firmly oppose a return to conscription. Also, adding women to the mix just doesn't appear to be a high priority for a battle-weary nation nearing the end of more than a decade of war.

The U.S. military has been an all-volunteer force for the past 40 years and women have become an integral part of it. Nearly 15 percent of the 1.4 million troops on active duty are female. More than 280,000 women have served in Iraq, Afghanistan or other countries in support of the wars. There have been 152 women killed in the fighting.

Americans overwhelmingly support allowing female volunteers to serve in ground combat roles by a 75-25 margin, according to the Quinnipiac poll. But the survey of 1,772 registered voters found them conflicted over mandated military service for women.

On the question of re-establishing a military draft, male and female voters said they were opposed, 65-28, according to the poll. If a draft were called, however, men backed the conscription of women as well as men, by 59-36, the poll said. But 48 percent of the women surveyed said they did not want women to be drafted while 45 percent said they should be.
Maj. Mary Jennings Hegar, a California Air National Guard pilot who served three tours in Afghanistan, said excluding women from a draft reinforces a stereotype that they are less capable than men and need to be protected. Not every woman can handle a close combat job, she said, and neither can every man.

But they can contribute in other ways if a crisis demands their service, said Hegar, who received a Purple Heart for wounds she suffered when her Medevac helicopter was shot at during a mission near Kandahar, Afghanistan.

Hegar and three other female service members filed a lawsuit last year challenging the combat ban on the grounds that the policy unfairly blocked them from promotions and other advancements open to men. The suit did not address the question of draft registration for women.

"You can't pick and choose when equality should apply to you," Hegar said. "Making generalized statements like, `Women are capable of being in combat' or `Women are incapable of being in combat,' are equally ignorant. People are either competent or they're not competent."

For baby boomers in particular, talk of conscription stirs memories of the social and political upheaval of the late 1960s and early 1970s caused in large part by the unpopularity of the Vietnam war and the perceived unfairness of the draft. Research published in the late 1970s showed that men from low-income or disadvantaged backgrounds were more likely to fight in Vietnam than men from middle- and high-income families who could avoid being drafted by going to college or finding a slot in a stateside National Guard unit.

"The American people lost confidence in the draft as a means of raising an army when it ceased to require equal sacrifice from everyone that was eligible to serve," said Bernard Rostker, a former director of the Selective Service System and the author of "I Want You! The Evolution of the All-Volunteer Force."

Rep. Charles Rangel, D-N.Y., has made several attempts over the past decade to reinstitute the draft on the grounds that a small fraction of U.S. citizens are bearing a disproportionate burden in fighting the nation's wars. But his bills have gone nowhere.

That hasn't stopped him from trying. Just this month, Rangel introduced another bring-back-the-draft bill that also would require women to register.

No one has been conscripted into the U.S. military since 1973 when an apprentice plumber from California named Dwight Elliott Stone became the last draftee to be inducted. Stone, now 63 and living in San Francisco, didn't go happily. "I just wanted to do my two years and get the hell out," Stone said. He ended up serving about 17 months, and never had to go overseas.

The rules have been changed to make a future draft more equitable than it was during the Vietnam era. Being a college student is no longer an out; induction can only be postponed until the end of a semester.
Men who don't register with the Selective Service System, an independent federal agency that prepares for a draft, can be charged with a felony and fined up to $250,000. But the Justice Department hasn't prosecuted anyone for that offense since 1986.

There can be other consequences, though. Failing to register can mean the loss of financial aid for college, being refused employment with the federal government, and denied U.S. citizenship.

The Selective Service System maintains a database of nearly 17 million names of potential male draftees, yet the odds of a draft being called are remote, according to national security experts. Volunteers typically are more motivated, more disciplined and more physically fit than draftees. They're also more willing to re-enlist, which creates a more experienced force.

The Pentagon's top brass didn't push for a draft in 2005 when recruiting efforts slumped and they needed more troops for the expanding wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, according to Andrew Bacevich, a professor of international relations and history at Boston University. Instead, it hired contractors by the thousands, called up reservists, and used an arcane rule known as "stop-loss" to extend, involuntarily, by months the tours of active-duty troops, said Bacevich, a retired Army colonel.

With formation of the all-volunteer force under way, President Gerald Ford ended the peacetime draft registration process in 1975. But after the Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan a few years later, World War III suddenly seemed possible, and President Jimmy Carter ordered a return to registration as a show of resolve. Carter, ever the progressive politician, added a twist. He wanted young women, not just young men, to sign up.
But Congress and certainly the country weren't ready for such a seismic cultural shift, and lawmakers refused to allow the registration of women.

Elaine Eidson, a mother of three sons and a daughter from Haleyville, Ala., spoke for what she described as the country's "silent majority" in testimony she gave in March 1980 to a House subcommittee that quickly shelved Carter's proposal. "This I will not stand for, nor will the American people stand for it," said Eidson, a member of the conservative Eagle Forum, according to the hearing record. "You cannot draft our women."

 

Heavy Loads Could Burden Women's Infantry Role

http://www.military.com/daily-news/...d-burden-womens-infantry-role.html?ESRC=eb.nl


If and when women assume the role of infantry soldier, one of the biggest challenges they may face is the weight on their backs, according to an official at the Veterans Health Administration.

The average female will have trouble as infantry soldiers must carry a load often weighing more than 80 pounds for many hours at a time over rugged terrain in some cases, said Dr. David Cifu, national director of physical medicine and rehabilitation at the Veterans Health Administration.
“I’m certain the majority of women doing this won’t be physically able to do it as long as the men. It’s a matter of body size and body mechanics,” Cifu said.

Women already have shown they can overcome bias and sexism, as well as engage the enemy -- they’ve been doing it in Iraq and Afghanistan. But on average, they have less body weight and are weaker than men.
A signature injury of America’s latest wars has been musculoskeletal, cases of which exceed the number of wounds from firefights and improvised explosive devices.

One study found that between 2004 and 2007, about a third of medical evacuations from the Iraq and Afghan theaters were due to musculoskeletal, connective tissue and spinal injuries.

There is no first-hand data, since women are not yet serving as infantrymen, but Cifu said that if women carry the same loads as their male counterparts, they are at more risk of these kinds of injuries “given the ratio of their size and strength to the packs.”

The Army commission that first recommended a process to get women into tactical units noted there was no plan to lower its standards.
“Qualification standards for combat arms positions should remain in place,” the commission said.

Cifu said women in general have strong legs, but are typically weaker than men in the chest, arms and lower back.


Army reports already have shown that female soldiers, even in training, sustain injuries at a higher rate than men. A study cited in “Musculoskeletal Injuries in Military Women,” noted that cumulative injury incidence among women in basic combat training was 52 percent compared to 26 percent for men. In advanced individual training, it was 30 percent for women and 24 percent for men.


These standards designate strength requirements for infantry as “very heavy” -- meaning a soldier will occasionally have to lift more than 100 pounds, but frequently or constantly be capable of lifting more than 50 pounds. In reality, infantrymen carry anywhere from 60 to 120 pounds of gear in the field depending on their job, Army officials have said.

The Army has known for years that its troops are overloaded. In 2001, the Army Science Board concluded the weight carried by soldiers decreased mobility and increased fatigue and injury. But its recommendation -- that soldiers carry no more than 50 pounds for any length of time -- has not proven possible in the field.

The Army has spent a lot of time over the last decade of war to lighten the soldier’s load. The Asymmetric Warfare Group teamed up with Johns Hopkins University in 2009 to conduct a soldier load assessment to help ease the burden of infantrymen struggling in the mountainous terrain of Afghanistan.

The effort led to Program Executive Office Soldier fielding lighter gear, such as the new body armor plate carriers, a system that is significantly lighter than the standard Improved Outer Tactical Vest.

PEO Soldier also recently began fielding body armor sized specifically for a woman’s body shape. The overdue change will allow females to carry their load more efficiently, Army officials maintain.

Despite the improvements, there are some battlefield necessities -- such as water -- that the Army can’t make lighter. It’s not unusual for dismounted infantrymen to carry six to eight liters of water on a multiple-day patrol. That adds approximately 12 to 17 pounds to an individual’s load.

Ammo also packs on the weight. A 100-round box of 7.62mm machine gun ammo weighs about seven pounds. A two-man M240 machine gun team often has to carry 1,000 rounds, or 70 pounds, for a multi-day operation, Army officials said.

This means that equipment officials will likely have to work harder if the Army expects women to succeed in the infantry. But the net result could benefit all soldiers, Cifu said.

“You need someone nimble who can avoid blasts, but have enough protection to minimize the damage [when there is one],” he said. “You need to go leaner and meaner. Infantry is going to go high tech and it will cost money, but it’s not just a woman-thing -- they’ve got to do this for all of them.”
-- Matthew Cox contributed to this report.

 

Shocking.....

As I said before waaay earlier

Being in a firefight and actually being infantry are two different birds

 

yep, a gun fight at a gas station between the owner and pookie is very different than fight on a battle field between two sets of soldiers

the first is a matter of when the robber leaves or someone happens gets killed
the later is how many gets killed. one goes to jail and/or saves his life from the other in the other situation its a matter not just surviving but occupying the land.

in a street fight you may kill one and maybe called a murderer another you kills hundreds and you are called the nations hero

 

What praytell does this have to do with the article and POJ's comment? :smt017 Gas station robbery??

 

u know...i thought about responding back to him

..a few times

then i seen the name 'Pookie' and gas station

then i just said fuck it..it's goodlove

he's better off just letting him live the dream

 

Who cares about average? Let all Tothe like women do thos shit then. Let all the above 6ft women with wide backs shoulder the burden and be done with it. If they have a vag and can do the work who cares about what the average chick can do

 

i thought he was referring to a firefight (street fighting ..guns and or what ever) versus being in the infantry.....(you are actually being in a war.) different style of fighting. street "warriors" versus trained warriors (actual warriors)

 

this is coming from a dude who is dying over not getting enuff porn....LOL

 

Context, luv. Thread is about women in combat. He was comparing different types of combat soldiers might and do engage in. It's all Pookie good tho.

 

now you know how we do it. we can be talking about kittie cats and end up on elephants in the same thread....people would be like wtf. I just left the room 5 minute ago about cats ...how in the hell

 

you're a funny guy

being broader and taller than normal does not equate to infantry success

the average height for male infantry is below 6 feet and they aren't big and broad like some cartoon. a lot of these guys are lean and small (smaller than me or you) but internally they're fucking sturdy and have tremendous fortitude

it's what's inside them that counts...the stuff that goes beyond the naked eye

i cant explain it any much more

you get these big amazon chicks and they'll be washing out too

 

u aint lying on that shit. athletes are usually the first ones to wash out in basic training because they really cant handle the drill sergeant getting in that ass.... especially football players and weight lifters. its funny when they crack.

mofos be trying to hang themselves.

 

some succeed too

everyone calls them weak for doing it, but still.....

shit is no joke

im just saying tho...infantry are some hard ass mothafuckas

dont let their size fool you