Looks like it's going to happen. Maybe I'm too traditional, but this seems problematic to me.

I suppose if the women have to pass the same mental and physical tests as men, it may be okay. But will they? Or will the physical tests be scaled back? On average, women are obviously not as physically strong as men.

And even so, what happens when they are captured? Our enemies these days do not follow the international laws of war.

As I say, maybe I'm just old-fashioned and wrong, but this does not seem like a good idea to me.

Bad idea!

The biggest problem is the strength differential. Part of the combat training is how to basically heft or handle a wounded 180 pound man and 99.99% of women just can't do it. That doesn't make them worthless in combat, but their positions should be carefully chosen. It's not uncommon in combat to be carrying 100 pounds of gear, ammo, weapons, etc. Very few women can manage that.

I read this stat at least 25 years ago when this topic flared up as it does from time to time, so I can't source it but I'm sure it was/is correct.

A very fit 21 year old woman has the same physical abilities as a very fit 50 year old man.

Tank's burning and you're injured inside, if your commander is a woman on the turret, you're toast, literally.

There was a TV blurb relating to this when the topic first heated up a couple of months back. The Marines were running women through their OTC and using the same physical fitness requirements as men. None of them made it, most quit within 3 days.

All in all, I think the answer will cause more problems than the question.

How does the IDF handle it?

I think the biggest problem is some guys in combat are going to get killed trying to look after the gals to protect them.

And, despite assurances to the contrary they will allow some physically and mentally unfit gals in combat roles to fill out quotas or whatever. I actually met one once. On a scuba trip. She was too afraid to get in the ocean. And I was shocked and surprised when she said she had been a paratrooper.

A couple of the problems of woman in combat have been mentioned physical strength and as been pointed out "a guy trying getting killed trying to look after one of the gals."

The latter points out how cohesive are small units going to be when men in the fire team, squad, platoon have a different agendas with women in the unit. Those agendas can run from looking after them as a sister, to a one night stand to a relationship. How much tension will all of this cause in the unit.

I think there is a difference between how the American military deploys and the IDF. The IDF is in their border basically home. The American military deploys to foreign cultures and lands for months if not over a year at time.

The American deployment is probably a lot stressful than serving in ones own country and can get time off and go home to see family and friends.


Jim

It is just more ignorant,common sense be dammed, PC crap. The outcome will be standards lowered and a quota of females graduated in Delta force, Seals, SF, Rangers, all because of limp wristed Joint Chiefs of Staff and an unAmerican president .

Just put all women combat teams together,no men allowed.It will take care of males not getting killed trying to protect "sisters".

I think any woman that wants to be out in the mud and bugs is just plain weird and will probably be trouble.

This is a very problematic issue. Let's say it is a "done deal" and then we get in a terrible war in China, Korea or elsewhere and the US is forced to implement a draft. It could happen and has happened in the past. Then,all women would most likely be subject to drafting and being inserted in ground combat line companies. Then you have the issue of non-motivated inductees, probably not emotionally and physically capable being driven into what are significantly dangerous environments. I see the following issues as real risks. The first is a lack of physical capability such as an loader on a tank or an artillery unit unable to lift the ordinance in an acceptable and continued matter. What happens in hand-to-hand combat. I'm in my 60's and I believe that I could still outfight most women in their late teens and twenties, so what would happen in a bayonet attack. Another significant problem is personal hygiene and no access to certain sanitary requirements. Women have the brains but do they have the emotional stability to live a tense, violent and filthy environment for extended periods. Mens desire to protect is a real issue. Will male grunts have to pack more ammo and material to make up for smaller female capabilities? I contacted Senator McCaskills office regarding this poorly thought-out strategy and a young intern contacted me to discuss my comments. I tried to explain the essence of violence and could a female throw a 6'3" wounded male paratrooper over her shoulder in a firemans carry and hump the individual to a medevac station a 1/2 mile away. This intern denied that would be a problem. At this point I figured I was talking to a moron, a sheltered kid who had no comprehension of combat. I gave up and hung up.

Unfortunateley our congress critters aren't any smarter than the interns.

For me, it's the lack of physical strength and aggression that seem most problematic.

As the father of a U.S. Army soldier (18-Echo) I have a dog in this fight.

If a woman can measure up and hack it, then fine. Do the push-ups, carry the base plate, and take your turn at the point. And if a draft comes, then the parents of daughters should also offer up their loved ones and not complain.

But don't put my son (or other soldiers) at increased risk for the sake of some 'fairness-politically correct' bullshit. Ain't nothing fair or politically correct about getting shot at and people killed. And I got a feeling that those that champion this are going to bend the rules for getting women into these roles; they won't have to do all the push-ups, or carry the same size packs, or other special considerations.

And I say fuck that.

P.S. And I am not going to apologize for my frank feelings about it.

quote:

Originally posted by Matt Norman:

If a woman can measure up and hack it, then fine. Do the push-ups, carry the base plate, and take your turn at the point. And if a draft comes, then the parents of daughters should also offer up their loved ones and not complain.

I strongly disagree. Many people think it just comes down to things like that but it isn't that simple.

For example, at any given time about 10% of the females in the Army are pregnant. They are expected to perform their duties for a reasonable time and get a limited amount of time off in the later part of pregnancy. Then they get maternity time afterwards. I wonder how many woman would be ready and willing to leave their newborn and perform in a combat unit within 30, 60, or 90 days. What about the first six months? Consider what a pregnancy and new motherhood could do to unit readiness.

Then there are additional things to think about. Call it what you will but most young women are either experiencing regular menstrual periods or they are taking some sort of drug to prevent them. PMS is real. Cramps are real. Headaches are real. Consider what it would be like to be in a hide site when your female partner is going through her time of month, including the very real but unpleasant problem with cleanliness and sanitation when in the field. I once was running a rifle range for a group of medical personnel so they could meet their annual qualification requirements. Ninety percent of the personnel were females. I stood in the tower and watched one woman shooting from the prone position while a huge blood spot grew and grew, spreading from her crotch to way down her inner thigh. It is not a nice thing to talk about but imagine that woman stuck in a dirt hole for days or making a long foot movement without any means to bathe.

One must also consider what happens when men and women are alone for long times together. I will not defend any soldier's untoward actions toward another soldier, especially rape. However, the more you have men and women living together, eating together, and relaxing together in remote, isolated areas, the more problems are going to appear. Congress has forced the military to use women more and more in forward areas and then Congress goes crazy about all the rapes and abuse. Yet they fail to correlate one with the other -- Duh!

And not all women reject male companionship. There are many women in the military who welcome all the male attention they can get, including sex. I remember several notorious army females who were nothing short of nymphomaniacs. I remember one deployment where three female USAF lieutenants were sent home because they were running a prostitution operation. I'm all for people doing what they want for fun and games but imagine the disruption a woman like these would cause if stuck with a bunch of soldiers in a base camp.

And I will say it outright -- As a whole, women are just not as fit to fight as men. Yes, there is an exceptional woman here and there, but as a group they do not compare to men as a group when it comes to serious soldiering. Anyone who says different just doesn't know what he is talking about.

You don't build an army to be the most perfect and politically correct reflection of the US population. You build an army to go to war, follow orders, endure and thrive, use initiative in the face of adversity and hostility, and maintain the presence of mind to continue the mission. Any unit is only as good as its weakest or worst performing man. They must be AS FIT AS IS POSSIBLE and not held back by a group of persons that is less fit.

I remember Kathleen Wilder. She was admitted to the Special Forces Qualification Course by accident. It happened before the SF Assessment and Selection (SFAS) process existed. She remained in training while battles raged on how to get her out and who would be held accountable for kicking her out. She insisted on being graded by the female PT standards and was cut a lot of slack. Too many high ranking officers lacked the balls to take responsibility and face the legal challenges she and her lawyers promised. I spoke to friends working in the schools back then and later spoke to a couple of soldiers who were students through training with her. They reported things like getting men to help perform tasks for her and to carry her rucksack at times. She got caught caching her rucksack on the final big movement and retrieving it just before reporting into the endpoint. She was dropped from the course for that act but was later reinstated and received a certificate of completion because of the political firestorm she raised claiming sexual discrimination and misconduct. Special Forces made sure that would never happen again and Ms. Wilder never served in an SF line unit. Nevertheless, it remains an insult to anyone who went through Special Forces training and serves as a glittering example of what can occur when integrating females into elite training.

You just better hope we never get in a real war with this.

The ideological liberal political thinking is, they have no such intention of ever getting involved in any serious war, so they either don't care or think it doesn't matter.

In the meantime they get what they want. To make a statement. And to undermine America's ability to fight. As far as combat roles are concerned that's where the U.S. Left is coming from.

Incidentally, I recently had occasion to learn of a woman who did really well in the right role. I met her at a VA nursing home we're considering for my dad. She was a resident there. The only female. And she was in her 90s, but sharp as a tack mentally. During WWII she had been an Air Corps pilot in Alaska. She flew transport planes, and in some pretty stout conditions. I asked her, "now give me the low down on this place here, is it any good?". And she did.

Women also did have some interesting roles in that war as test pilots.

And then there was the most incredible female test pilot of them all. But, she flew for the other side. Not many women could say they piloted a V-1 flying bomb and earned an Iron Cross.

quote:

If a woman can measure up and hack it, then fine. Do the push-ups, carry the base plate, and take your turn at the point

The key word there is 'IF'. But they gotta do it to the standard of everybody else and carry their share of the load. There are indeed a few women that can do it fair and square. But it's the ones that talk the talk that can't really walk the walk that makes this a dumb idea that will result in people getting dead.

And if a draft comes, then the parents of daughters should also offer up their loved ones and not complain. This is the other side of this issue so those promoting this idea of women in combat best consider this. Be careful what you wish for...you want this 100% equal treatment stuff, well, here you go. The girls get the same amount of the downside stuff too.

I wish they'd leave it alone and realize this is not the place for social experimenting.

I think all raise some valid points. Except, Mr. Robinson -- you are concerned that women won't be aggressive and mean enough? I guess I should have been hanging out with the women you have, but with the exception of my lovely wife, I, like Kipling, believe the female of the species is the most deadly. Strength and stamina is another issue.

The real problem is LOGISTICS. I have a wife and two adult children -- a son and a daughter -- and we all live happily (or relatively so) under the same roof. Bottom line, women need a whole lot more crap to survive. The army shouldn't have to schlep that crap to the front line. JMHO

The issue, as I see it, and that based on serving in an Army Ranger Company in RVN for more than two years; is that female pows give their captors a free piece of ass anytime they want a little. Rape victims have an eternal trauma/ptsd that goes beyond the other issues.

They are now allowed into Australian front line units and I think they will start recruiting in 2014. We did have a fitness test based on sex and age but now we are moving to one based on job, the test for infantry will be harder than the one for a cook or clerk. So male or female if you pass the infantry test you are good to go. I still think women on the front line is a bad idea.

well chit guys - i can think of a couple of women officers that i wouldn't mind serving under

It all comes down to training/preparation for the job. I know several well trained, built and ripped ladies that would kick the ass of most that commented here....and right quick. The one significant advantage women have over men is the ability to endure hardship and pain. Perhaps where a man would stop dragging your wounded body after several miles...a woman would keep on dragging you until both are safe. Believe me...I know lots of males that would turn to mush when the going got tough, so lets not underestimate the true grit many women exhibit. As for other countries like China, there are many women prepared to serve their front lines. You think they are stupid? I bet not.