Replies sorted oldest to newest
No way should standards be lowered, it will put lives in danger!!!
The army lowered standards for stretcher bearers a few years ago. Went from two persons per stretcher to four when women were approved for the job. One that concerned me was the test for the M-60 machine gun. In tests, all men could charge the MG from the prone position. However, no women passed the test. Never found out the final conclusion.
Every road march I experienced during my Army days that had women, there was always men carrying two rucks and two M-16's with a female carrying nothing walking along side them.
Women do NOT belong in combat units.
Jes sayin'
Soviet women in World War II
Snipers
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S...omen_in_World_War_II
Air Force Sniper
I am not an expert, but for the most part a sniper is not involved in hand to hand combat, or close quarters encounters. The physical standards should not be lowered, then we would wind up with a bunch of sissy men also.
I am not an expert, but for the most part a sniper is not involved in hand to hand combat, or close quarters encounters. The physical standards should not be lowered, then we would wind up with a bunch of sissy men also.
==================
You do know when the standards were "lowered" for police officers and firemen it enabled plenty of men of small stature to join the departments. I had no idea being smaller made a man a sissy. I always considered al gore a sissy or a, well fill in the blank. I guess you learn something new every day.
There are plenty of men of small stature that are strong. Sissy was a bad choice of words. The point is, if they lower the standards too much, the average couch potato could pass the test but not get the job done.
There are plenty of men of small stature that are strong. Sissy was a bad choice of words. The point is, if they lower the standards too much, the average couch potato could pass the test but not get the job done.
========================
Just made me think of al gore and how big he is, and what a sissy or if you will, ***** he is. Same with all demo men actually. No matter their size they're wimps.
Putting women in combat roles was a bad idea whose time never should have come. The U.S. military ought to have seen enough by now to regret and rescind its decision, but as in some other areas, the military is slow to catch on.
I am not an expert, but for the most part a sniper is not involved in hand to hand combat, or close quarters encounters. The physical standards should not be lowered, then we would wind up with a bunch of sissy men also.
+++
Old BCT joke.
DI: "And if your bayonet gets stuck in the enemy, the recoil of firing a shot will dislodge it."
Trainee: "Sarge, if I have a round in the chamber, there ain't gonna be no bayonet fighting."
Far as heavy lifting goes, those Soviet Mosin-Nagants fully loaded weigh around 12 pounds and will kill you just as dead as a 500 pound bomb as many Notsee's at Stalingrad will bear witness to.
And without lowering any size standards,
A 150 pound pilot can lift then drop a 2,000 pound bomb just as easily as a 220 pound pilot can.
Women have proved themselves in air combat roles. However, as I showed earlier, some of the ground combat roles, not so much.
Women have proved themselves in air combat roles. However, as I showed earlier, some of the ground combat roles, not so much.
+++
Just saying, my experience with all women incapable of operating an M60 does not duplicate yours. Far as 4 carrying a litter, in some of the intra-service challenges involving 5 man teams, I've done that. So did the Marines. But in some real world situations, you might have one hauling the best way he could and the other 3 laying down covering fire.
Ground combat forces consist of Armor, Artillery, and Infantry. Physically fit females are more than capable of driving a tank and fire direction control including operating systems such as MLRS. In fact, during Desert Storm, they "manned" a Patriot battery. Infantry is a tough push. No argument there.
My reservations regarding gender integration have more to do with the boy-girl thing. The Navy seems to be working it out as well as can be expected.
I'm sure one poster here will cry "rape," but I wonder, because I do not know, if sexual harassment is any greater in the military than in the civilian world where the sexes are in close proximity.
I have a zero tolerance for it, either way.
Women have proved themselves in air combat roles. However, as I showed earlier, some of the ground combat roles, not so much.
+++
Just saying, my experience with all women incapable of operating an M60 does not duplicate yours. Far as 4 carrying a litter, in some of the intra-service challenges involving 5 man teams, I've done that. So did the Marines. But in some real world situations, you might have one hauling the best way he could and the other 3 laying down covering fire.
Ground combat forces consist of Armor, Artillery, and Infantry. Physically fit females are more than capable of driving a tank and fire direction control including operating systems such as MLRS. In fact, during Desert Storm, they "manned" a Patriot battery. Infantry is a tough push. No argument there.
My reservations regarding gender integration have more to do with the boy-girl thing. The Navy seems to be working it out as well as can be expected.
I'm sure one poster here will cry "rape," but I wonder, because I do not know, if sexual harassment is any greater in the military than in the civilian world where the sexes are in close proximity.
I have a zero tolerance for it, either way.
___________________________________________________
As to the M-60 MG, I was referencing a rather large study by the army. Driving and other duties inside the tank, a woman can probably do. However, how about field repairs. I've seen most strain to even lift the tracked vehicle tool boxes and the massive pry bar used to replace track.
American Women have no business in ground combat roles.
PERIOD.
Somehow the thought of a Division of lady warriors with PMS led by a menopausal general terrifies me. That could be considered a war crime.
Somehow the thought of a Division of lady warriors with PMS led by a menopausal general terrifies me. That could be considered a war crime.
________________________________
One assumes they would just attack the enemy.
American Women have no business in ground combat roles.
PERIOD.
+++
The irony
Women in the Israel Defense Forces
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W...srael_Defense_Forces
Why Israeli women don't wear burkas
Shalom Aleichem, Harald.
Women have proved themselves in air combat roles. However, as I showed earlier, some of the ground combat roles, not so much.
+++
Just saying, my experience with all women incapable of operating an M60 does not duplicate yours. Far as 4 carrying a litter, in some of the intra-service challenges involving 5 man teams, I've done that. So did the Marines. But in some real world situations, you might have one hauling the best way he could and the other 3 laying down covering fire.
Ground combat forces consist of Armor, Artillery, and Infantry. Physically fit females are more than capable of driving a tank and fire direction control including operating systems such as MLRS. In fact, during Desert Storm, they "manned" a Patriot battery. Infantry is a tough push. No argument there.
My reservations regarding gender integration have more to do with the boy-girl thing. The Navy seems to be working it out as well as can be expected.
I'm sure one poster here will cry "rape," but I wonder, because I do not know, if sexual harassment is any greater in the military than in the civilian world where the sexes are in close proximity.
I have a zero tolerance for it, either way.
___________________________________________________
As to the M-60 MG, I was referencing a rather large study by the army. Driving and other duties inside the tank, a woman can probably do. However, how about field repairs. I've seen most strain to even lift the tracked vehicle tool boxes and the massive pry bar used to replace track.
+++
It's a new army since when we first served, Dire. Changing a track on an MiA Abrams is like NASCAR putting on a new tire.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zscvKPhdfZk
I know gals on a farm that can change a track on a D8 Cat.
Every road march I experienced during my Army days that had women, there was always men carrying two rucks and two M-16's with a female carrying nothing walking along side them.
Women do NOT belong in combat units.
+++
Question for you Hoop. What was the women's MOS? For "familiarization" jaunts with pencil pushers, just to keep the moral up, I've double-rucked for men and women. No big deal. Came time to fill out paperwork for deployment, those pencil pushers had me out the door in record time.
I use the term "pencil pushers" affectionately. We all had nicknames. The cooks prepared "box nasties" for us for the field and we all laughed about it. They were doing the best they could.
Second part of my question is more of a comment ... In the Army and even the Air Force, they teach the recruit how to operate and fire their mission assigned firearm. During my drag, it was the M16. Depending on your criticality you may fire often for qual or semi for familiarization. Bottom line, when the line failed and you were the last line of defense, you were infantry. And that is why, the purpose of integrated marches and range work, Team work.
They just can't take it Contendah, our leading military advocate pukes.
Link says what? Pressure grows on Marines to consider lowering combat standards for women
Sez "see more" See more ads?
And there's no story?
All the libs are doing by lowering the standards would be to kill more women.
In turn that will lessen the chances of the mans safety also when on the ground.