0
Andy9o8

Should women serve in combat?

Recommended Posts

Quote

Quote

So women WILL serve there. We just need to keep them in "support" jobs.



So... Clay.. can you tell me what part of the job or any other combat role where a penis is an integral part of that job???



infantry. as an emergency bayonet.

;)

MB 3528, RB 1182

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Gee I never ran across one that was that rigid:P



try wiggling a bit more and licking your lips - he'll come around

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

>can you tell me what part of the job or any other combat role where a penis is an integral part of that job???

Well, the "rape and pillage" units would have a harder time if they were all women . . .



Having seen the pre-Christmas sales, they probably excel at pillage. ;)

"It's like a sale... but 100% off..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An interesting discussion! My initial thought was perhaps only people who have served in combat should really answer this.

Infantry fighting. In this case, I'd suspect their answer would generally be no.

It's not a sexist answer in the slightest.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
In todays climate?

I think they'd say no.

If on the other hand, my country was facing anihilation by Nazi's, then of course, I'd have everyone capable of handling a weapon if necessary.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's not a sexist answer in the slightest.



do you mean that:
1 - your claim (that people who have served in conflict would say "no") is not sexist?

2 - or just the answer "no" is not sexist?

If #1 - then what do YOU think? and, why do think you know their minds so well?

If #2 - 90% of this thread is about that answer. Enjoy the name calling you'll soon be getting.

I'm making some popcorn.

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Christ, I wrote an answer then you went and edited your original question!

What happened to the popcorn?;)

I'm going by experience in the sense that combat infantryman would say no to serving in full blown combat with women.

Specialist units do exist with females serving covertly(and armed to the teeth - to effectively break any enemy contact) in various hotspots around the world.

But lets not go there. Their covert for a reason.
Their not exactly going out in section strength fighting patrols to engage the enemy are they? Or doing house clearances in a built up environment?
*Cue endless list of possible infantry tasks.....*

Ultimately it's not sexist because in general women are physically less capable than men on average.

That's not sexist. It's a fact of life.

Anyway, I've yet to see a women pass the selection required of a British Paratrooper.
Not your All Arms P company either - the entire 6 months in the depot.
It's not all about fitness and stamina.
Still, a women is yet to pass either. Maybe one day - but not many ever will, as for the reasons mentioned earlier.

If I'm in brutal combat - I want a paratrooper next to me, not a lady.

Where is the argument in that?

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
>If I'm in brutal combat - I want a paratrooper next to me, not a lady.

Personally I'd prefer Lew, Kirsten or Kelly to Luigi if I were in combat (and especially if they needed to drag me out of there.)

As others have said - set the physical standards the same for both sexes and then see who passes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm neither arguing or agreeing with you, I just see your post as equivalent to GQ's and he gets slammed for honestly putting his opinion out there. I wonder if you will get the same treatment as you are 'historically' from a different philosophical camp as him on unrelated subjects.

"I want a paratrooper next to me, not a lady" - right if that paratrooper is a female, I don't want a "lady", I want a tough and qualified woman paratrooper........




I think you hit the point for my position -

you write "Anyway, I've yet to see a women pass the selection required of a British Paratrooper......Still, a women is yet to pass either. Maybe one day"

I have no issue with that as long as men and women have to pass the same criteria and criteria reflects the duty of the role and isn't arbitrarily too easy, nor too hard, for the real duties.

So if a woman does pass, she gets to serve in that role. Even if it's a rarity...


have a good weekend

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

It's not a sexist answer in the slightest.



However, it may be a sexist question.

If the question is posed as to qualifications, that is one type of question.

If the question is posed as the "protect the poor little women", I find it offensive that men are somehow not valued. Like it is ok for men to be maimed or die, but women deserve special protection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

I'm going by experience in the sense that combat infantryman would say no to serving in full blown combat with women.



I suspect you are sincere in your statements, but the fact that most troglodytes (thanks, nerdgirl) would agree does not impress anyone a bit further along the evolutionary scale.

It pretty much ranks up there with the troglodyte consensus on walking upright. :)
-----------------------
"O brave new world that has such people in it".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
At first, I thought that the Trogolodyte references were just an attempt to slam a poster by inference. "If you agree with this person, then you are ignorant" technique. No actual substantial argument, just name-calling personal attacks without statements.

However, now I realize why it is familiar. Clint Eastwood - Magnum Force. I love to quote Dirty Harry movies.
In the movie, they used Neanderthals. There may be a special difference.

Quote

"And I'd like to tell you the mayor's plan is to bring this department into the mainstream of
twentieth-century thought."

"How does he figure to do that?"

"For one thing His Honor intends to broaden participation for women in the police force. He also said something about winnowing the Neanderthals out of the department."

"You're trying to fail this candidate, aren't you?"

"If she fails there, she gets her ass blown off!"

"It's my ass!"

"Out there you'll have a partner. You get blown away, he does too! That's some price to pay
for being stylish!"



She gets shot and dies at the end of the movie.

She had to take her high heels off to run too.
I hate that, heels do so much for the look of the calves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

My initial thought was perhaps only people who have served in combat should really answer this.



So far it seems only 1 has...



I don't think serving in combat should be a determining factor in a persons qualifications to post their opinion. Everybody here is more than welcome to have one and for the most part everyone in this thread has made some good arguments, on both sides, the only thing actually spending time in combat does is give you a slightly different perspective on everything, and in my particular case being downrange actually greatly increased the amount of respect I have for women in the military.
History does not long entrust the care of freedom to the weak or the timid.
--Dwight D. Eisenhower

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

I'm going by experience in the sense that combat infantryman would say no to serving in full blown combat with women.



I suspect you are sincere in your statements, but the fact that most troglodytes (thanks, nerdgirl) would agree does not impress anyone a bit further along the evolutionary scale.

It pretty much ranks up there with the troglodyte consensus on walking upright. :)


I'm not exactly trying to impress - however, well done in recognising elementary evolution.

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Quote

My initial thought was perhaps only people who have served in combat should really answer this.



So far it seems only 1 has...



Wrong! :)

'for it's Tommy this, an' Tommy that, an' "chuck 'im out, the brute!" But it's "saviour of 'is country" when the guns begin to shoot.'

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0