Women Open To Combat Roles

[nddons]

While a touching and graphic article, it does nothing to address the real question that comes at the end, would the unit have been less effective? I'm not seeing anything in that article that would lead me to believe that it would have been. I guess as a sailor I've met too many gals who could hang in the roughest of conditions while not whining and complaining like the guys did. IME, chicks buck up while guys turn to whiny *******.

Nice analogy, but off point as well.

I'm more interested in hearing from our combat veterans here as to what they think of this development.

 

[Alexb2000]

Then we as a nation should either buck up and accept the situation or think twice about getting involved in wars to protect our oil sources and switch to a different fuel. Our dependence on foreign oil and the profits it and the industry of war brings are what keeps us at war. We don't want our women and kids dying for Wall Street profits, change the game at the core of the issue.

Oil, is not a choice, it is simply the life blood of the modern world and there isn't (or won't be) enough to go around, hence wars.

Show me any bicycle riding, hemp wearing, raw food vegan, Greenpeace life member, working hard to protect the spotted owl and I will show you someone that couldn't do what they do without oil because they need a computer and a network. That computer requires roughly 10 gals of oil to produce.

 

[Henning]

First of all, let me preface this by saying that women have always served in the military honorably, and always will. But, I cannot even begin to describe how abhorrently I am opposed to putting women in combat roles. I say this with first hand experience having been a combat Infantryman, and having been in field assignments where women worked closely with men.

It doesn't work.

Here's the problem. Take a group of testosterone charged, pumped up, adrenalized, ninteen year old males with a kill em all/F em all attitude, put them in a field environment for days and weeks on end, and put women in their midst. Sleeping beside them, sharing foxholes with them, working with them, playing with them, joking with them, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week.

What do you THINK is going to happen?

Well, males will compete with other males for the females, removing their focus on their job tasks. Relationships will form. Fights will ensue. "Do NOT put PFC Sally on point, Corporal Jake will have your ass!" Morale will go down the tubes. This isn't like a office environment. Existance becomes tribal. Plus, a certain number of outright assaults are going to happen. One only needs to look at documentaries on military life in Iraq and Afghanistan support that.

I guess you could "seeensitize" your male soldiers and make them "neutral" to the females in your unit. Remove their drive. But by doing so you remove their drive to fight and kill too. You can't have it both ways. It doesn't work that way. Is that the kind of fighter you want? You want to send Justin Bieber in hand to hand combat with the Taliban?

When I went to NCO school, it was an all-branch training unit and my company was comprised of some combat arms, and other support groups. We had four females in a forty person platoon. We would rotate leadership positions but I spent the majority of the time in the program as the platoon leader. In the beginning, in admin mode, no real issues, things worked fine. As we moved in to a more intense close-in working mode, and field mode, things started rapidly degrading. The men, from day one, were all trying to vie for a position with the females. Making pairing assignments and duty rosters became difficult, because of the conflicts. There were fights. Threats. The cohesiveness of the unit dissolved. When it was all over with, I thought "This is not the group of people I want to go to war with."

If you haven't been in a combat situtation, you don't understand the mentality that is required to survive and fight effectively. You operate in another mode. You flip a switch. You become an elite killing machine. Along with that all the other urges are intensified and discretion is reduced. Kind of like alcohol. You can't civilly deal with women in that mode. When you get back, you flip the switch back and become a normal person again.

Simple answer, put the girls into platoons with the gay dudes....

 

[Ted]

Ted, you're sterotyping, would we ask a single father that same question?

I certainly would. As a married father, my response would be "NFW."

 

[Henning]

Oil, is not a choice, it is simply the life blood of the modern world and there isn't (or won't be) enough to go around, hence wars.

Show me any bicycle riding, hemp wearing, raw food vegan, Greenpeace life member, working hard to protect the spotted owl and I will show you someone that couldn't do what they do without oil because they need a computer and a network. That computer requires roughly 10 gals of oil to produce.

Oil is most definitely a choice and has been for several decades. The only reason we are still on it is because the infrastructure is still profitable and to switch would require more investment into nuclear energy. We should have been off the Oil tit in the mid 70s, instead we decided we would rather drive SUVs. Bad choices do not equal necessity. We developed all the technology to get off oil during WWII.

 

[JB1842]

Simple answer, put the girls into platoons with the gay dudes....

They would be too busy matching nail polish with their uniforms to be useful! I knew one female Marine who I would trust to have my back. That's out of dozens that I worked with. Been in the field with them (I was in a Comm unit) and they were all worthless.

 

[Alexb2000]

Oil is most definitely a choice and has been for several decades. The only reason we are still on it is because the infrastructure is still profitable and to switch would require more investment into nuclear energy. We should have been off the Oil tit in the mid 70s, instead we decided we would rather drive SUVs. Bad choices do not equal necessity. We developed all the technology to get off oil during WWII.

If you haven't already, read Power Hungry by Robert Bryce. Let's go back to topic and call this one a draw (for now).

 

[Geico266]

Should women now be required to register for the draft at age 18 like men?


BTW, I burned my draft card in a boot camp smoking room.
I showed them huh?

 

[Henning]

Should women now be required to register for the draft at age 18 like men?

I don't see why we bother with either, we have no conscription service...

 

[Velocity173]

Yeah unfortunately I agree with AFM. In a perfect world you would have a professional atmosphere and the guys would look at the girls as just another coworker. In real life the male species doesn't think like that. You'll have units just as he described playing favoritism to the women. It just going to happen. Ive seen it myself in aviation. I think close quarters with men and women can wothose a whole though. I'd like to believe our carrier force hasn't weakened after the integration of women.

I will say what AFM described is still a lack of leadership on the SNCOs and the commanders. They need to be involved, and when they see the boys are going goo goo gaga over the new girl, then they put their foot down and enforce discipline. If not they aren't involved, then you get a Abu Ghraib situation. It's all about maintaining discipline. Same reason why we don't have officers dating enlisted. It would be an absolute mess.

So, I believe these women can serve in these roles as long as its closely watched by the CoC. Give them a chance and see how it goes. If the experiment doesn't work, oh well, we go back to the way it was.

 

[Henning]

Yeah unfortunately I agree with AFM. In a perfect world you would have a professional atmosphere and the guys would look at the girls as just another coworker. In real life the male species doesn't think like that. You'll have units just as he described playing favoritism to the women. It just going to happen. Ive seen it myself in aviation. I think close quarters with men and women can wothose a whole though. I'd like to believe our carrier force hasn't weakened after the integration of women.

I will say what AFM described is still a lack of leadership on the SNCOs and the commanders. They need to be involved, and when they see the boys are going goo goo gaga over the new girl, then they put their foot down and enforce discipline. If not they aren't involved, then you get a Abu Ghraib situation. It's all about maintaining discipline. Same reason why we don't have officers dating enlisted. It would be an absolute mess.

So, I believe these women can serve in these roles as long as its closely watched by the CoC. Give them a chance and see how it goes. If the experiment doesn't work, oh well, we go back to the way it was.

Exactly, if there is a problem, it is with leadership.

 

[Everskyward]

My point was simply that while the women that volunteer for it know what they're getting into. Maybe we as a nation or at least those with a more traditional background might find it hard to see or hear about women, mothers, and daughters being killed, beaten, and/or raped in a war zone.

Is that a reason to withhold opportunity from women? Women are killed, beaten, and/or raped right here in this country.

 

[JB1842]

Is that a reason to withhold opportunity from women? Women are killed, beaten, and/or raped right here in this country.

How is it an opportunity when their presence has the potential to harm others and weaken a unit?

 

[Everskyward]

How is it an opportunity when their presence has the potential to harm others and weaken a unit?

That's what they said about blacks and, more recently, gays. Didn't turn out that way, did it?

 

[Sac Arrow]

That's what they said about blacks and, more recently, gays. Didn't turn out that way, did it?

That's not a good analogy. Black men and gay men still use the men's locker room. There is a reason why we have separate men's and women's locker room. Putting women in the midst of a combat unit is analogous to putting them in the same locker room with men. And I mean that more literally than figuratively.

 

[Everskyward]

That's not a good analogy. Black men and gay men still use the men's locker room. There is a reason why we have separate men's and women's locker room. Putting women in the midst of a combat unit is analogous to putting them in the same locker room with men. And I mean that more literally than figuratively.

Visit many dorms lately?

 

[JB1842]

That's what they said about blacks and, more recently, gays. Didn't turn out that way, did it?

The majority of women are physically weaker than men. There is no way a woman is going to be able to pick up a 200 pound person, and run with them on their backs for 100 yards. And 100 Marines, Soldiers, Sailoers, etc. aren't fighting for the attention of 1 woman. Have you aver served in the military? If you have, then you wouldn't be arguing over this. Women do provide great contributions to the military. Being out on foot patrol with 100 pounds of gear isn't one of them.

 

[Henning]

That's not a good analogy. Black men and gay men still use the men's locker room. There is a reason why we have separate men's and women's locker room. Putting women in the midst of a combat unit is analogous to putting them in the same locker room with men. And I mean that more literally than figuratively.

I thought the whole purpose to military training was to wipe out all these foibles and make soldiers who follow orders regardless of the normal human condition and predilections? If this is not happening, then the fault lies in the training and leadership. If the chicks can cut the physical end, they can cut it. If they can't, they should wash out. If the dudes can cut the mental end, they can cut it. If they can't, they should wash out. In fact, since women are breeders and we have far too many people, women should provide the primary cannon fodder rather than men.

 

[Everskyward]

The majority of women are physically weaker than men. There is no way a woman is going to be able to pick up a 200 pound person, and run with them on their backs for 100 yards. And 100 Marines, Soldiers, Sailoers, etc. aren't fighting for the attention of 1 woman. Have you aver served in the military? If you have, then you wouldn't be arguing over this. Women do provide great contributions to the military. Being out on foot patrol with 100 pounds of gear isn't one of them.

The average woman might be weaker than the average man but people should be judged as individuals. I can think of many male/female parings where the woman would be stronger.

 

[JB1842]

The average woman might be weaker than the average man but people should be judged as individuals. I can think of many male/female parings where the woman would be stronger.

I agree with that. But this social experiment has already failed. Both women who tried to undergo the Marine Infantry Officer's Course were out in a few weeks. Equality sounds good in a press release, but the real world doesn't care about it.

 

[Everskyward]

I agree with that. But this social experiment has already failed. Both women who tried to undergo the Marine Infantry Officer's Course were out in a few weeks. Equality sounds good in a press release, but the real world doesn't care about it.

You are judging the whole program on the failure of two women to pass? How many men have dropped out? Time will tell how it all works.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Visit many dorms lately?

Dorm people don't have to perform a common mission or be around each other 24 hours a day. The cliques that have formed, and the relationships that have ensued do not counteract anything other than maybe occasional awkwardness at the dorm room party. And yes, dorms have the same issues. I can choose to study on my own and stay out of dorm politics if I want because Y ****es me off because he's banging X. I can't choose to not support my squad during an assault mission because Corporal Y is banging PFC X and it's ****ing me off.

I thought the whole purpose to military training was to wipe out all these foibles and make soldiers who follow orders regardless of the normal human condition and predilections? If this is not happening, then the fault lies in the training and leadership. If the chicks can cut the physical end, they can cut it. If they can't, they should wash out. If the dudes can cut the mental end, they can cut it. If they can't, they should wash out. In fact, since women are breeders and we have far too many people, women should provide the primary cannon fodder rather than men.

From a training perspective, you're asking to undo hundreds of thousands of years of ingrained primal instincts, which have so far kept our species alive. Again, do you want Justin Bieber leading an assault charge, or John Rambo?

Leadership would have to change, yes. It would simply place more of a burden on leadership to police the individual members of the unit. You could control physical actions that way but not underlying thoughts and aggravations. Yeah, you could do it. There is a cost.

 

[Everskyward]

Dorm people don't have to perform a common mission or be around each other 24 hours a day. The cliques that have formed, and the relationships that have ensued do not counteract anything other than maybe occasional awkwardness at the dorm room party. And yes, dorms have the same issues. I can choose to study on my own and stay out of dorm politics if I want because Y ****es me off because he's banging X. I can't choose to not support my squad during an assault mission because Corporal Y is banging PFC X and it's ****ing me off.

Cliquish behavior happens even when everyone is the same gender.

 

[Alexb2000]

Is that a reason to withhold opportunity from women? Women are killed, beaten, and/or raped right here in this country.

Let's say this happens and some women volunteer knowing the risks and it becomes the norm.

Then we have a draft and because women are cleared for combat arms they are drafted, put in the infantry, and subjected to the conditions previously mentioned.

Now we as a nation are responsible for putting women in that situation against their will. Of course that could be handled by giving drafted women a combat arms exception if they are mothers, over a certain age, object to it, or.... BUT wouldn't that negate the whole point of the conversation, full and total equality?

 

[JB1842]

You are judging the whole program on the failure of two women to pass? How many men have dropped out? Time will tell how it all works.

I'm basing it on my personal observations while I was in the Marine Corps.

 

[Everskyward]

Let's say this happens and some women volunteer knowing the risks and it becomes the norm.

Then we have a draft and because women are cleared for combat arms they are drafted and put in the infantry and subjected to the conditions previously mentioned.

Now we as a nation are responsible for putting women in that situation against their will. Of course that could be handled by giving drafted women a combat arms exception if they are mothers, over a certain age, object to it, or.... BUT wouldn't that negate the whole point of the conversation, full and total equality?

First of all, I don't think that anyone should be drafted. However, if it is reinstituted both men and women should be assigned the positions for which the individual is most suited. Not all men are cut out for combat either. In addition, during Vietnam many men were able to avoid the draft by legal means. Unless they close some loopholes it would happen again.

 

[Henning]

From a training perspective, you're asking to undo hundreds of thousands of years of ingrained primal instincts, which have so far kept our species alive. Again, do you want Justin Bieber leading an assault charge, or John Rambo?

Leadership would have to change, yes. It would simply place more of a burden on leadership to police the individual members of the unit. You could control physical actions that way but not underlying thoughts and aggravations. Yeah, you could do it. There is a cost.

Right, which is what military training achieves with every class. Military training is about taking Justin Bieber and turning him into John Rambo. If the training fails, Bieber gets washed out. Everything has a cost, even the military as it is currently ordained. There are plenty of guys who can't cut combat either as is evidenced in what we now term as PTSD but which has been around as long as people have been required to kill for reasons not of their making. Men are every bit as fragile mentally as women if not more so in many cases.

 

[steingar]

Again, Israeli women have been doing this for decades, and they've had to hang in tougher fights with greater odds against more implacable foes. I still don't see the problem, unless we Americans want to admit we aren't made of the same high quality stuff as Israelis.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Some people just feel that total equality in every aspect of life is a requirement and do not acknowledge there are differences between us, and some don't. At some point the argument becomes pointless as it's not going to change the mind of either camp.

I think some people would like to see the world consist of one single, genderless race all performing the same societal and biological roles. Personally I think that would be boring.

 

[Henning]

Let's say this happens and some women volunteer knowing the risks and it becomes the norm.

Then we have a draft and because women are cleared for combat arms they are drafted, put in the infantry, and subjected to the conditions previously mentioned.

Now we as a nation are responsible for putting women in that situation against their will. Of course that could be handled by giving drafted women a combat arms exception if they are mothers, over a certain age, object to it, or.... BUT wouldn't that negate the whole point of the conversation, full and total equality?

How is that different from putting men (mostly boys actually) in that situation against their wills? The fact is girls are more emotionally mature at the average combat age of our last conscription than boys are and are more likely to be able to deal with the psychological stress and trauma of killing to protect their own.

 

[Everskyward]

I think some people would like to see the world consist of one single, genderless race all performing the same societal and biological roles. Personally I think that would be boring.

That's obvious having read some of your other posts.

 

[Sac Arrow]

Again, Israeli women have been doing this for decades, and they've had to hang in tougher fights with greater odds against more implacable foes. I still don't see the problem, unless we Americans want to admit we aren't made of the same high quality stuff as Israelis.

They do have the problems McFly and I have described, and the dynamics are also different. The IDF fights mainly in their own turf, and not far from their own home. It's more like a day job to them. I'm not saying it is a day job, I'm just saying it's closer to one than we generally experience. Don't get me wrong, I have a lot of respect for the IDF, but I don't think their model works for us.

 

[Henning]

Some people just feel that total equality in every aspect of life is a requirement and do not acknowledge there are differences between us, and some don't. At some point the argument becomes pointless as it's not going to change the mind of either camp.

I think some people would like to see the world consist of one single, genderless race all performing the same societal and biological roles. Personally I think that would be boring.

Nah, I just like the idea of having chick with my back who has proven they can cut it. IME, they have shown a greater tendency towards 'heroic effort' than many of the guys I've met.

 

[Alexb2000]

First of all, I don't think that anyone should be drafted. However, if it is reinstituted both men and women should be assigned the positions for which the individual is most suited. Not all men are cut out for combat either. In addition, during Vietnam many men were able to avoid the draft by legal means. Unless they close some loopholes it would happen again.

I also hope we never have another draft, but who knows what the future holds.

That said, being drafted and put into the infantry is required when a lot of people are dying and there are not enough volunteers to take their place and do the same. Desire and suitability are tertiary concerns, otherwise we'd have the largest force of drone pilots ever fielded, protecting a hand full of infantry from an air-conditioned trailer in Nevada.

BTW- You're making me feel dated in my thinking, maybe that's a healthy thing.

 

[roncachamp]

Should women now be required to register for the draft at age 18 like men?

No, we should eliminate draft registration completely.

 

[nddons]

Visit many dorms lately?

Yes. Colleges have been the petrie dishes of social experimentation for a long time.

We visited Williams College once, and during the tour, learned that every dorm was converted to co-ed suites, with 4 men and 4 women. The bathroom had 2 sinks 2 stalls, and 2 showers. A sign outside the door had an arrow that pointed to "men", "women", or "either."

When I asked about that, I was told that these are young adults, and we should treat them as adults.

I answered that in 25 years of business, I have yet have the opportunity to burn a mule while a woman was sitting in the stall next to me. My daughter was not pleased, and the admissions counsel was dismissive. But my premise is true. I don't see bathrooms becoming co-ed anytime soon.

 

[AuntPeggy]

They would be too busy matching nail polish with their uniforms to be useful! I knew one female Marine who I would trust to have my back. That's out of dozens that I worked with. Been in the field with them (I was in a Comm unit) and they were all worthless.

There you have the reason why it took so long.

 

[JB1842]

Again, Israeli women have been doing this for decades, and they've had to hang in tougher fights with greater odds against more implacable foes. I still don't see the problem, unless we Americans want to admit we aren't made of the same high quality stuff as Israelis.

By high quality stuff do you mean letting millions of their people being led to their slaughter while us Americans fought against Hitler' regime to stop it? I'll keep our quality thank you very much.

 

[Henning]

By high quality stuff do you mean letting millions of their people being led to their slaughter while us Americans fought against Hitler' regime to stop it? I'll keep our quality thank you very much.

We did? There's some revisionist history for you. We didn't get into WWII until after Japan bombed Pearl Harbor following which Hitler declared war on the US. The first place we went in the ETO was Africa to secure the Mid East oil fields. The PTO was over the Java oil fields and SE Asia rubber plantations and the Japanese bombed Pearl so our fleet couldn't defend our bankers' investments there. We gave a damned about the Jewish situation in Europe not until the soldiers came across the camps at the end of the war, not that we didn't know about it.

 

[Sac Arrow]

By high quality stuff do you mean letting millions of their people being led to their slaughter while us Americans fought against Hitler' regime to stop it? I'll keep our quality thank you very much.

Not taking sides here. But just as a historical clarification, Israel did not have a military (or even exist) during the period to which you refer.