combat roles to women?

Bliss said:
Interesting POV.

I heard a Commander called in to a show and recite about a female soldier who was "built like a bulldog" on his squad, but that in cases of crisis, some of his men still instinctively went out of their way to protect only HER, even endangering their life and their fellow male soldiers. He wasn't happy about it.
Click to expand...

From reading most of your posts, you seem like a female who "gets it". You aren't about a political agenda, you call it like it is.

None of my comments or some of the other posters comments is about women bashing as a few posters like to make them out to be. Basically it is the difference between the genders that we all must agree do exist.

Being a field operative myself, you can't look at things through rose colored glasses. To get REAL results, you have to be honest, sometimes brutally honest but honest none the less. The decisions you make not only affects you but others around you. Being an administrator and making decisions from your desk is very different than being in the field.

BOTH the administrator and the field operative can be right in their decisions based on the information they are given. But it boils down to the choices the field operative make that can make a mission successful or not.

For example, you have two squads on patrol in the field, squad A and squad B. They both approach a village that looks like its abandoned. The officer from squad A calls back to headquarters and asks is there any information about this village. Headquarters tells him that the village is secure, it was secured 4 hours ago. The officer calls again to confirm the last transmission. TWICE headquarters confirms that the village is secure. So the officer tells his men everything is ok so they ALL start walking toward the village.

The officer from squad B comes upon the same situation. He also calls headquarters and TWICE they told him the village was secured 4 hours ago. However, the officer realizes that 4 hours is a long time, since headquarters does not have any immediate information about the village, he tells his men to stand put. He tells 2 of his men to go and scout the village and for the rest to stay back and give them cover if need be.

Now, if there is an ambush waiting on them in the village, squad A could get wiped out before they even know what hit them. Squad B, on the other hand, may lose 2 guys but their unit is still there to fight back.

BOTH officers were correct in their decisions but war is unforgiving, you lose, you're dead. It can't get anymore brutally honest than that. In war, there are no second chances, none. The front lines is no place for MEN not to mention females.

The beautiful part about some females being mad and upset is they are ALIVE to be that way. When she is dead, she can't do any of that. The administrators back at their desks don't see that, the field operatives do.
 
Bliss said:
Huntress -

Your vile disgusting vile insult has been reported. Only you resort to gender based vulgarity when you are being creamed in a debate.

As to the rest of your nonsense post, the ACLU are the ones who filed suit. How do you think it came to be that standards were lowered for women?

Look at all your phoney excuses. "A woman doesn't have to do 40 push-ups' to do this to be this", blah blah blah Everything is "dont need to be, don't have to be" when it suits you. Well why the hell even have training to translate then? Where is your squawking for the men who want to be translators?

Don't you dare equate the discrimination towards Blacks to your pseudo military gender equality, that isn't really. The racism they encountered was because they were Black! No other reason. Not one BLACK EVER asked for special treatment, never got it and PROVED like hell they were equal as any other office. Not one.
Click to expand...

In the words of Jenna Marbles....

Pipe the fuck down.
 
199969d67c3d4d5c989990099c1e25a4.jpg


yall all need a chill pill, men and women both. i mean wtf...

either way it goes women want to be equal to men so bad its not even funny, but our bodies are different. can a woman lift as much as a man, probably so but like someone mentioned earlier... combat is not meant for anyone... man or woman. just throw some drones out there or nuke the bastards and be over with it.
 
blackbull1970 said:
CNN Headline News this morning report that the Marine Commandant is keeping combat jobs off limits until further review.
Click to expand...

Interesting read

Herr Kommandant even said they'd keep combat mos closed if only a small number of women passed

So basically now you need good numbers of women passing to keep the jobs open

Gotta love the marines....they always have a catch
 
pettyofficerj said:
Interesting read

Herr Kommandant even said they'd keep combat mos closed if only a small number of women passed

So basically now you need good numbers of women passing to keep the jobs open

Gotta love the marines....they always have a catch
Click to expand...

This is where they rush to be PC overrode their senses. The pc squawkers don't know shit about the military, which is why I'll take the word of those ON THE FRONT-LINES any day over armchair femi-brutes.
-
 
Last edited:
ArmyRanger said:
From reading most of your posts, you seem like a female who "gets it". You aren't about a political agenda, you call it like it is.

None of my comments or some of the other posters comments is about women bashing as a few posters like to make them out to be. Basically it is the difference between the genders that we all must agree do exist.

Being a field operative myself, you can't look at things through rose colored glasses. To get REAL results, you have to be honest, sometimes brutally honest but honest none the less. The decisions you make not only affects you but others around you. Being an administrator and making decisions from your desk is very different than being in the field.

BOTH the administrator and the field operative can be right in their decisions based on the information they are given. But it boils down to the choices the field operative make that can make a mission successful or not.

For example, you have two squads on patrol in the field, squad A and squad B. They both approach a village that looks like its abandoned. The officer from squad A calls back to headquarters and asks is there any information about this village. Headquarters tells him that the village is secure, it was secured 4 hours ago. The officer calls again to confirm the last transmission. TWICE headquarters confirms that the village is secure. So the officer tells his men everything is ok so they ALL start walking toward the village.

The officer from squad B comes upon the same situation. He also calls headquarters and TWICE they told him the village was secured 4 hours ago. However, the officer realizes that 4 hours is a long time, since headquarters does not have any immediate information about the village, he tells his men to stand put. He tells 2 of his men to go and scout the village and for the rest to stay back and give them cover if need be.

Now, if there is an ambush waiting on them in the village, squad A could get wiped out before they even know what hit them. Squad B, on the other hand, may lose 2 guys but their unit is still there to fight back.

BOTH officers were correct in their decisions but war is unforgiving, you lose, you're dead. It can't get anymore brutally honest than that. In war, there are no second chances, none. The front lines is no place for MEN not to mention females.

The beautiful part about some females being mad and upset is they are ALIVE to be that way. When she is dead, she can't do any of that. The administrators back at their desks don't see that, the field operatives do.
Click to expand...

Very absorbing post. (and you are correct, I refuse to allow disingenuous agendas sway my position).

If like it was inferred that the standard testing will simply change for all infantry cadets if not enough women pass, that is jeopardizing the lives of all our combat soldiers because the new soldiers - both men and women - will be none the wiser that their training has been watered down to accommodate the political agenda of gender equality quotas in the military.

I do not think this decision was something that most military women were cheering in the streets about because they know the truth of the combat front-lines. Which is why your examples of two squads is what it's really about when it all boils down to it. Only those out THERE truly know the mercilessness.
As it stands, if women want to go there fine, pass the current test, but the moment the test is altered, then the policy is null and void.

Thanks for the straight no chaser perspective.
 
Bliss said:
While top Military Brass agree, the non-military have now forced them to to see it differently. FAIR is the key word they want used. Unfortunately, fair is not equal. Yay for psuedo-equality so we can feel good about ourselves. Meanwhile Army Ranger tells it like it is.
Click to expand...

I don't think anyone is saying that ill-equipped, physically weak people should be put in combat situations, at least not in any report I have heard. But I do not believe that fitness for combat is carried in the gonads: but is a mix of factors including psychological ability to inflict violence/kill, keep calm under stressful situations, follow instructions, and endure physical stress/work. If a person can meet the qualifications they should be allowed to participate, both men and women. I have not been in the military, but the multiple family members I have who have served in combat all express support for a woman in combat if she has the physical and psychological capabilities necessary.
 
orejon4 said:
I don't think anyone is saying that ill-equipped, physically weak people should be put in combat situations, at least not in any report I have heard. But I do not believe that fitness for combat is carried in the gonads: but is a mix of factors including psychological ability to inflict violence/kill, keep calm under stressful situations, follow instructions, and endure physical stress/work. If a person can meet the qualifications they should be allowed to participate, both men and women. I have not been in the military, but the multiple family members I have who have served in combat all express support for a woman in combat if she has the physical and psychological capabilities necessary.
Click to expand...

This^^^.
I don't know if people opposed to this point of view are missing it because of their personal beliefs, or are afraid we're going to have all our military combat units overrun with bikini models.
198228821068601903_7TuCkuZE_222.jpg


I don't see why a woman fully capable of serving in a tactical role has to first demonstrate she's able to pass the fitness test for combat Marines.
 
andreboba said:
This^^^.
I don't know if people opposed to this point of view are missing it because of their personal beliefs, or are afraid we're going to have all our military combat units overrun with bikini models.
198228821068601903_7TuCkuZE_222.jpg


I don't see why a woman fully capable of serving in a tactical role has to first demonstrate she's able to pass the fitness test for combat Marines.
Click to expand...

I think people have these primitive gut reactions to the concept because of several millennia of male-dominated society or what. There are some genetic/biological differences between the sexes, but there are some women who approximate male standards, as well as some women who approximate female standards. I don't get what is the big deal.
 
Let me reiterate

there is a stark difference between 'combat,' which women already are seeing, and living the daily life of an infantryman

I'll let you people do your own research on finding out what that difference is
 
pettyofficerj said:
Let me reiterate

there is a stark difference between 'combat,' which women already are seeing, and living the daily life of an infantryman

I'll let you people do your own research on finding out what that difference is
Click to expand...

I agree. My statement applies to both. Tammy Duckworth was involved in combat, but was not an infantryman(woman). Abilities are the only thing that should determine eligibility, without arbitrary demarcations of who can or cannot that does not take account of the enormous amount of individual variation among humans.
 
orejon4 said:
I agree. My statement applies to both. Tammy Duckworth was involved in combat, but was not an infantryman(woman). Abilities are the only thing that should determine eligibility, without arbitrary demarcations of who can or cannot that does not take account of the enormous amount of individual variation among humans.
Click to expand...

if enough women expressed interest in infantry, i 'probably' would have formed all-female infantry squads or something and would have seen how that played out

you may see something like that in the future, or you may see them completely skip that idea and just place them in current formations

you probably wouldn't see the first idea take shape tho, as that would rob the females of experienced infantry veterans and veterans make a HUGE difference

a veteran is one thing you can't produce with any level of training you come up with
 
TheHuntress said:
I'm just going to come out and tell you that I reported this disgusting trash you posted.
Click to expand...

There is no point telling me this... even if that results in me not being liked on this site, banned or whatever you are looking to have done, your opinion and neighborhood watch attitude towards me will not protect the bitches who will die trying to be men. I didn't use such language personally to YOU, however YOU are on my sack trying to castrate me because you cant feel in control unless you eliminate anyone who makes YOU feel uncomfortable with how THEY express themselves. If you cant discern between a woman and a bitch, that means YOU think they are the same. I love women, but I do not love no bitch.
:drinkers:
 
genuineforce said:
There is no point telling me this... even if that results in me not being liked on this site, banned or whatever you are looking to have done, your opinion and neighborhood watch attitude towards me will not protect the bitches who will die trying to be men. I didn't use such language personally to YOU, however YOU are on my sack trying to castrate me because you cant feel in control unless you eliminate anyone who makes YOU feel uncomfortable with how THEY express themselves. If you cant discern between a woman and a bitch, that means YOU think they are the same. I love women, but I do not love no bitch.
:drinkers:
Click to expand...

6 years and 39 posts? Interesting fam
 
genuineforce said:
There is no point telling me this... even if that results in me not being liked on this site, banned or whatever you are looking to have done, your opinion and neighborhood watch attitude towards me will not protect the bitches who will die trying to be men. I didn't use such language personally to YOU, however YOU are on my sack trying to castrate me because you cant feel in control unless you eliminate anyone who makes YOU feel uncomfortable with how THEY express themselves. If you cant discern between a woman and a bitch, that means YOU think they are the same. I love women, but I do not love no bitch.
:drinkers:
Click to expand...

What's wrong, jealous that a woman can be more of a man than you will ever dream of being?

Must be lonely in your mom's basement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom