Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
Still Waters

US ends ban on women in frontline combat

98 posts in this topic

As long as they don't use a lower requirement for women then I'm for it. The standard should be the same for everybody not different because of gender.

Why? I would say it's okay to have different standards based on body size if what you want is cannon fodder -- which seems to be the way people here are thinking. Load each person to what is optimal for them and thereby get the best soldier you can in each case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan of weakening our military just to be politically correct. You lower the standards you increase the danger to our troops. If you can't carry all the standard equipment you are just lowering the bar and the rest of the unit will have to pick up that slack. For what some misguided sense of equality?

Then again I don't look at our soldiers as cannon fodder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's a great point. I wonder how daddy will feel when his little princess has to register for the draft ?

I read a few posts on here going on about a draft........ But I have also read that there hasn't been draft since Nixon.!!........So the US military no longer draft anyone . I read that when a male turns 18 he can get on to a list for future draft, IF there ever bringing them back again.. But for now no draft... Is this true or not?

Edited by Beckys_Mom
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a fan of weakening our military just to be politically correct. You lower the standards you increase the danger to our troops. If you can't carry all the standard equipment you are just lowering the bar and the rest of the unit will have to pick up that slack. For what some misguided sense of equality?

Then again I don't look at our soldiers as cannon fodder.

I never mentioned equality, but since you do, what is wrong with it? I referred to looking at soldiers as cannon fodder as something others were doing, so now you accuse me?.

As far as these things weakening the American military, I doubt it. It could, but it could also strengthen it. If nothing else it doubles the pool of talent they have to select from. It all depends on how it is handled -- as they say, the devil is in the details.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But for now no draft... Is this true or not?

As far as I know the US is the only major power in the world with an entirely volunteer military.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I read a few posts on here going on about a draft........ But I have also read that there hasn't been draft since Nixon.!!........So the US military no longer draft anyone . I read that when a male turns 18 he can get on to a list for future draft, IF there ever bringing them back again.. But for now no draft... Is this true or not?

That's true, they haven't really needed one because there are National Guard units to supply necessary troops to Iraq/Afghanistan. In a way though, I always thought that to be in the National Guard and actually get deployed is kind of like getting drafted because those people haven't really anticipated a career in the military, they just want to get money for college,etc in exchange for going to the army base one weekend a month, but they end up getting called for a long enlistment just by luck of the draw.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as I know the US is the only major power in the world with an entirely volunteer military.

The UK military is voluntary..

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's true, they haven't really needed one because there are National Guard units to supply necessary troops to Iraq/Afghanistan. In a way though, I always thought that to be in the National Guard and actually get deployed is kind of like getting drafted because those people haven't really anticipated a career in the military, they just want to get money for college,etc in exchange for going to the army base one weekend a month, but they end up getting called for a long enlistment just by luck of the draw.

Is it true that they still require 18 year old males to register for draft, in-case they are needed ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prove it.

Well its been over 20 years since they have been allowed, Canada was involved in sustained Combat Operations in the Heart of Taliban Country from 2006-2011. No issues.

As far as I know the US is the only major power in the world with an entirely volunteer military.

The Canadian Forces is voluntary, hell in the Reserves you have to volunteer for deployment.

~Thanato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it true that they still require 18 year old males to register for draft, in-case they are needed ?

Theoretically, but they don't really enforce it. They run public service ads that urge people to register for selective service. I guess it doesn't really matter, if they want you, they will find you, like the IRS. I of course registered first thing in the morning on the day I turned 18 :whistle:

Edited by Order66

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We have compulsory military service for all young men in Vietnam, provided you have finished high school, are not an only son, are not in college, don't have a job, don't have a criminal record, are physically fit, and don't have a brother who has already served, and you answer the door when they come to get you.

One gets the idea that at the moment they don't need very many.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone who has served in the military knows that women are the soft target.

Not because they aren't as capable and in many cases almost as strong, but because the men will always go in to save them or to defend them.

How do you screw around with the enemy when they have female combatants?

Go after the women.

Women should not be front line grunts. They put their male counterparts in an untenable position. No man worth his name is going to walk away and leave a woman behind. That's just the fact. And women can argue up and down and around but the basic fact is, they put the men they serve with in danger.

There are many service positions behind the lines that women can fill way better than men.

I have to agree a man may jeopardize his whole troop to save a women, more then he would a man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have to agree a man may jeopardize his whole troop to save a women, more then he would a man.

Do you have any proof? There are many occasions when other soldiers had to hold back a buddy in combat because he wanted to go save his friend who was gunned down.

~Thanato

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has lifted the military's ban on women serving in combat roles, potentially opening hundreds of thousands of frontline positions to women.

The ruling, officially announced on Thursday, overturns a 1994 rule barring women from small ground-combat units.

But the military will have until 2016 to argue for any specific posts they think should remain closed to women.

http://www.bbc.co.uk...canada-21172033

Is this how desperate the Pentagon is to wage the hoax known as the GWOT? The war is so unpopular that they have to put women into the "front line" troops?

What a sad comment for a once great country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Prove it.

It's already been proven by the many militarized of the world that already have women as front line soldiers. If you're telling be that they're a liability, you prove it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's already been proven by the many militarized of the world that already have women as front line soldiers. If you're telling be that they're a liability, you prove it.

It cannot be proved, except under fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It cannot be proved, except under fire.

And women have been under fire.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

why exactly do some of you think that women are so incapable of doing the same job as men? Do you really think that all males on the front lines are big strong men? that is laughable, there are criteria to meet and if they are you are in, that simple. Again if the men in the US military are unable to do their job because there are women around then they need to be better trained, it is THEIR problem not the womens.

And what was that about the average weight being 120...I want to know where you got that stat lol, maybe years ago but not now, they even have an alternate, heavier weight index because no one is thin anymore....But I will say this I am small and I weighed just over 100ibs and would routinely carry a baby in a car seat, diaper bag and purse, now that may not be 100 ibs, but it isn't light and that was with no training, no working out etc...women are capable of doing this if they choose to, and it really is upsetting that there are so many people on here who think so little of women, you don't love women you treat them like children who need a big strong man....uuugh

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And women have been under fire.

And have lead soldiers in battle.

~Thanato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If a woman wants to serve, let it be so. But we shouldn't lower the standards required for special ops, because lowering it will put lives in danger to be blunt. I am all for woman becoming part of our elite groups of warriors. I think most of the feelings come from the fact that woman are the life givers, the mothers of our children, they are the holy grail of the human race. It is because of them, we as a race is immortal.

Edited by Uncle Sam

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All this natter about not being able to physically perform (i.e. tote gear, deal with deployment conditions [which are gross, but livable], etc...) is bupkiss, dudes. What do you think female soldiers in the Army do now? The same crap the men do, and let me tell you, a lot of it is just that: Crap. I, personally, am not a soldier, as a bummed out ankle kept me from being able to enlist, but Mr. Draugr is, and even with no training I can carry his full pack of gear for a good long while. Not as long as he can, because I don't have the endurance training he does, but if I did, I'm pretty sure I could keep up.

A friend of ours in the Army made a point, and this is true for a lot of soldiers I know personally: There are no girls in the Army. There are soldiers who happen to be female. Except for pregnancy, they're kept to the same strict standards the dudes are. Overweight? Lose it. Can't pass a PT test? Lol, suck it up. Anyone under the impression women have it easier or that standards are lowered for them have obviously never had any contact with real military life. It's a tough one, dudes, for everyone involved, and it takes a special kind of person - male or female - to not wash out.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And women have been under fire.

That they have, and exactly how well one does under fire is, obviously, different in each individual.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That they have, and exactly how well one does under fire is, obviously, different in each individual.

Different in each individual, not each sex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, women shouldn't be anywhere near the enemy. I dated a girl who was raped. I didn't know at first but then I knew it was a nightmare that you cannot wake up from. It's horrible. I cant even listen to the news now. A woman being raped for months until it kills her? Is that what we want? I believe in Woman"s rights trust me. I guess I'm just asking, please, dont go to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No, women shouldn't be anywhere near the enemy. I dated a girl who was raped. I didn't know at first but then I knew it was a nightmare that you cannot wake up from. It's horrible. I cant even listen to the news now. A woman being raped for months until it kills her? Is that what we want? I believe in Woman"s rights trust me. I guess I'm just asking, please, dont go to it.

If you are captured, its not just the women who are raped. Especially in the areas we are fighting in now. Also thats just a possibility, women have been captured by the enemy in the past and have not been raped. Men have been captured and have been raped. Women are just as capable of killing the enemy as any man with today's tools of war.

~Thanato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.