Skip to comments.The Reality That Awaits Women in Combat
Posted on 01/23/2013 5:09:15 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
America has been creeping closer and closer to allowing women in combat, so Wednesday's news that the decision has now been made is not a surprise. It appears that female soldiers will be allowed on the battlefield but not in the infantry. Yet it is a distinction without much difference: Infantry units serve side-by-side in combat with artillery, engineers, drivers, medics and others who will likely now include women. The Pentagon would do well to consider realities of life in combat as it pushes to mix men and women on the battlefield.
Many articles have been written regarding the relative strength of women and the possible effects on morale of introducing women into all-male units. Less attention has been paid to another aspect: the absolutely dreadful conditions under which grunts live during war.
Most people seem to believe that the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have merely involved driving out of a forward operating base, patrolling the streets, maybe getting in a quick firefight, and then returning to the forward operating base and its separate shower facilities and chow hall. The reality of modern infantry combat, at least the portion I saw, bore little resemblance to this sanitized view.
I served in the 2003 invasion of Iraq as a Marine infantry squad leader. We rode into war crammed in the back of amphibious assault vehicles. They are designed to hold roughly 15 Marines snugly; due to maintenance issues, by the end of the invasion we had as many as 25 men stuffed into the back. Marines were forced to sit, in full gear, on each other's laps and in contorted positions for hours on end. That was the least of our problems.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
What combat leader would not want to replace his man warriors with a shorter, lighter, weaker, sicklier, less aggressive, slower moving, more terrain limited, reduced distance traveling, hygienically vulnerable, smaller weight carrying, more prone to injury, version.
He would have to rewrite all the knowledge and experience, of what his troops are capable of and reduce all that accordingly, and simply eliminate some capabilities entirely, but a fair enemy would not seek to capitalize on those advantages of course.
In the meantime, I wonder if Americans have forgotten that if we lose in a major war, we disappear from the future, forever. It seems that many Americans are starting to see war as a sporting event, where you can win or lose, but it doesn’t really change anything.
We are sooooo screwed.
Finally why is this policy pushed through without any discussion whatsoever?
So does this mean women now have to sign up for selective service at 18?
Boy I hate this. I mean, I love the Patriotism but, well ... no.
I was recently at the Post Office and noted that men reaching the age of eighteen must sign up with the Selective Service System even though the draft isn’t currently in effect. Why aren’t women required to do it? Isn’t this a denial of the equal protection clause of the Fourteenth Amendment? If not, then why not? I’m sure some Democratic feminist can explain the metaphysical subtleties of the situation.
Every carton of “Feminine Protection” that is shipped to the front lines is a carton of food or ammo that cannot be.
Or will we require them to go without?
One of the most disgusting revelations of a post-constitutional, progressive America. I will sternly advise my sons and future grandsons not to join the military, because it has become a bastardized joke. Gay sex, bestiality, women being raped, tortured, murdered by Muslim savages on the front line!
Can an act of congress block this decision by that slimeball Panetta and his cronies? This is so serious, the House should threaten to suspend military funding until it is reversed. There would be no way out of that one.... oh, wait... EXECUTIVE ORDER! Ain’t having a king great?
Stupid, stupid, STUPID idea.
PMS on the battlefield could work to their advantage...
For the women dying to get on the battlefield, now’s your chance!!
The only consideration for this decision should have been:
Does it make the US military a better fighting force?
A LOT of American fighting people are going to die just so that we can have a female Chairperson of the joint chiefs.
It is no longer about being the best. Politics rules ahead of any other consideration.
Reminds me of the movie, ‘An Officer and A Gentleman’:
So, you wanna fly jets Mayo? My mama wants to fly jets.
But just moments ago I heard ABC radio news report that "women", with no qualifiers and therefore meaning all of womandom, are "celebrating" the announcement. So clearly you must be mistaken.
“PMS on the battlefield could work to their advantage...”
Yea, right, now they will just fire in every direction!
In my opinion, there is nothing is more beautiful than a strong-willed Christian woman who stands by her man (instead of trying to replace him).
This will only escalate on the battlefield, in my opinion. Not only that, the focus of the men will be distracted by the women, there will be female "issues", pregnancies, false claims of assault as well as real ones i.e. a clusterf*ck. On top of that the demoralization as female soldiers are captured, tortured, raped, and killed.
Not to mention most women are not as capable. Sorry, they're not. And don't tell me about your 230 pound shot-putting daughter who is more manly than the Incredible Hulk. MOST women are not physically equipped for being warriors.