Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Reality That Awaits Women in Combat
The Wall Street Journal ^ | January 23, 2013 | RYAN SMITH

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 ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bhodod; militaryreadiness; women; womenincombat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100 next last

1 posted on 01/23/2013 5:09:18 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

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.


2 posted on 01/23/2013 5:19:55 PM PST by ansel12 (Cruz said "conservatives trust Sarah Palin that if she says this guy is a conservative, that he is")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

We are sooooo screwed.


3 posted on 01/23/2013 5:20:03 PM PST by x1stcav (Man up! We're all going to have to become Samuel Whittemores.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Other than hardcore feminists, I can't imagine any woman thinking this is a good thing. The day will come when we need a return to the draft, especially given that the boob in the WH is hollowing out our military and inviting an attack. What will the public think as their daughters are drafted? When the first woman gives birth to a baby with birth defects, or has a miscarriage after being involved in combat, will the lawsuits start flying?

Finally why is this policy pushed through without any discussion whatsoever?

4 posted on 01/23/2013 5:21:01 PM PST by YankeeReb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
regular yeast and urinary tract infections???
5 posted on 01/23/2013 5:21:13 PM PST by Chode (Stand UP and Be Counted, or line up and be numbered - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #6 Removed by Moderator

To: MinorityRepublican

So does this mean women now have to sign up for selective service at 18?


7 posted on 01/23/2013 5:21:19 PM PST by Michael Barnes (Obamaa+ Downgrade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Boy I hate this. I mean, I love the Patriotism but, well ... no.


8 posted on 01/23/2013 5:23:51 PM PST by RIghtwardHo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

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.


9 posted on 01/23/2013 5:27:31 PM PST by donaldo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

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?


10 posted on 01/23/2013 5:28:33 PM PST by Jotmo (Whoever said, "The pen is mightier than the sword." has clearly never been stabbed to death.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

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?


11 posted on 01/23/2013 5:29:16 PM PST by Viennacon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Stupid, stupid, STUPID idea.


12 posted on 01/23/2013 5:30:57 PM PST by thoolou ("I may have invented it, but Bill made it famous." - David Bradley, inventor of Ctrl-Alt-Del)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12

PMS on the battlefield could work to their advantage...


13 posted on 01/23/2013 5:32:44 PM PST by broken_arrow1 (I regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale "Patriot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

For the women dying to get on the battlefield, now’s your chance!!


14 posted on 01/23/2013 5:35:25 PM PST by BipolarBob (Happy Hunger Games! May the odds be ever in your favor.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donaldo

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.


15 posted on 01/23/2013 5:35:45 PM PST by Delta Dawn (at)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: YankeeReb
Other than hardcore feminists, I can't imagine any woman thinking this is a good thing.

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.

16 posted on 01/23/2013 5:35:53 PM PST by Yardstick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
There is one and only one reason to make changes to the tip of the spear is to add to it's effectiveness. A force multiplier for instance.
This change is about one thing, female promotion possibilities.
This is gonna get people killed, either by guys trying to protect the females, or the lack of abilities on the part of females.
Israel found this out the hard way
17 posted on 01/23/2013 5:36:41 PM PST by Robe (Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: broken_arrow1

“PMS on the battlefield could work to their advantage...”

Yea, right, now they will just fire in every direction!


18 posted on 01/23/2013 5:38:43 PM PST by BwanaNdege ("To learn who rules over you simply find out who you are not allowed to criticize"- Voltaire)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

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).


19 posted on 01/23/2013 5:44:46 PM PST by mlizzy (If people spent an hour a week in Eucharistic adoration, abortion would be ended. --Mother Teresa)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Sexual assaults and rapes are going on in the military right now by American soldiers against American soldiers. The brass cannot or will not stop it.

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.

20 posted on 01/23/2013 5:48:22 PM PST by Lizavetta (You get what you tolerate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Robe

The Army is so egalitarian these days that you know leaders are living in close quarters with their Soldiers as well. Especially squad leaders and platoon leaders. Now throw the gender mix into the chain of command as described in the article.


21 posted on 01/23/2013 5:48:54 PM PST by Dr. Pritchett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: donaldo

I researched this for my daughter when she turned 18. She told me that she thought women should have to register also. I agreed but upon doing the research I found that it is illegal for a woman to try to register.


22 posted on 01/23/2013 5:51:55 PM PST by rfreedom4u (I have a copy of the Constitution! And I'm not afraid to use it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Be careful what you ask for.....fools

And the men who on the battlefield will be the ones who will pay for this stupidity.


23 posted on 01/23/2013 5:52:59 PM PST by CatherineofAragon (Support Christian white males---the architects of the jewel known as Western Civilization)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
of all the reasons I would not women in combat, the fact that its "uncomfortable" and unpleasant is the the most lame I've heard...

men should try carrying a 8# pound baby inside, pressing on their spine, their bladder and their intestines, and then have your pelvic bones actually thin out and expand while the baby makes it's way to the outside world.......there's a reason why women carry babies, and not men....

24 posted on 01/23/2013 5:59:09 PM PST by cherry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican
Only infantry excluded? Does that mean women will be in tanks?

I'd like to see a woman who could fix a thrown track.

25 posted on 01/23/2013 6:04:21 PM PST by colorado tanker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Yet another decision by a p***y in power who never served a day in the military.

I have/had 3 sons serving. If this was then....I’d have steered them all away from military service...and I’m a veteran and come from a family of veterans.

I don’t know what country I live in any more.


26 posted on 01/23/2013 6:04:36 PM PST by RightOnline (I am Andrew Breitbart!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
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.

What combat leader would not want to replace his man warriors with 11-year-old boys?

27 posted on 01/23/2013 6:06:48 PM PST by thecodont
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Dr. Pritchett
Yup, I know first hand, my son is a infantry platoon leader. It's bad enough that he has female engagement team (FET)attached to his unit.
They don't co-habitate, but live at brigade HQ.They get driven up in a Humvee,prior to the patrol
They try to keep up, but never the less slow his troops down.
He tells me he is afraid of what will happen if they get in to a real s$it slinging firefight.
28 posted on 01/23/2013 6:09:24 PM PST by Robe (Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: ansel12
Here is an incredible article from The Atlantic Monthly. Published in August '89, it made such an impression on me that I never forgot it. It tells the truth about the realities of combat.

The Real War

And they want to send women into this?

29 posted on 01/23/2013 6:13:09 PM PST by THX 1138 ("Harry, I have a gift.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Women in the conditions described in this article would surely have debilitating urinary and yeast infections. In case the idiots in Washington have forgotten there are anatomical differences between men and women Managing a menstrual period under combat conditions would also be problematic and supplies of tampons or pads would have to be shipped to the front lines too. In combat would a case tampons have to replace a case of ammunition being shipped to the front???


30 posted on 01/23/2013 6:14:06 PM PST by The Great RJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Reality has been abolished by the ‘rats.

/sarc


31 posted on 01/23/2013 6:16:09 PM PST by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightOnline

My sentiments exactly. In just 4 short years we have seen the near dismantlement of the military chaplaincy, allowing of homosexuals to openly serve, Islamists setting policy and doctrine and now females serving in combat arms roles. This isn’t the same military I served 25 years in. Hell, it’s not even the same military my son joined in 2005.


32 posted on 01/23/2013 6:17:20 PM PST by TADSLOS ( "I ask sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people except for a few politicians."-George Mason)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Michael Medved told a story on his show about ten years ago. His family was driving down the road and they saw a dead possum on the side of the road. For some reason they stopped (I guess they thought it might still be alive or something).

Anyway, his very young son and daughter both saw it and acted as all boys vs girls would. The daughter said, “eeew! Gross!”

And his son said “Cool! Can we take it home?!”

And in that story is why women will respond differently than men in combat. Movies notwithstanding.


33 posted on 01/23/2013 6:21:02 PM PST by cuban leaf (Were doomed! Details at eleven.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Yet another step towards the destruction of our defenses. To all the jerks who voted for Obama.as well as those who helped him by not voting at all: hope you’re learning Chinese.


34 posted on 01/23/2013 6:23:53 PM PST by Chainmail (A simple rule of life: if you can be blamed, you're responsible.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

The only advantage I can see to having women in combat areas is that when they get wounded, it will only take 2 guys to carry their stretcher instead of 4.


35 posted on 01/23/2013 6:26:37 PM PST by spodefly (This is my tag line. There are many like it, but this one is mine.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cherry
of all the reasons I would not women in combat, the fact that its "uncomfortable" and unpleasant is the the most lame I've heard... men should try carrying a 8# pound baby inside, pressing on their spine, their bladder and their intestines, and then have your pelvic bones actually thin out and expand while the baby makes it's way to the outside world.......there's a reason why women carry babies, and not men....

We are not talking about "uncomfortable and unpleasant." The topic is a level of deprivation and physical suffering that requires great physical strength and toughness, and an aggressiveness that principally comes from high levels of male hormones.

I've had babies. It's tough for 18 hours or so. We all do it; our bodies are made to do it. It's natural. You don't have to be big, strong, and tough to give birth. You don't even have to be healthy. But warfare is something very different from a blessed, natural process, and equating them is simply silly.

36 posted on 01/23/2013 6:46:56 PM PST by ottbmare (The OTTB Mare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: spodefly

Waiting to see the sign in the motorpool:

If this Bradley’s rockin’, don’t come a knockin’

On 2d thought, I guess this has been possible ever since DADT went away....


37 posted on 01/23/2013 6:48:34 PM PST by redlegplanner ( No Representation without Taxation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: THX 1138

Thanks, that is a great link.


38 posted on 01/23/2013 6:49:32 PM PST by Defiant (If there are infinite parallel universes, why Lord, am I living in the one with Obama as President?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

The left is clearly insane. They want to protect women from ‘violence’ and then demand they be put on the front lines of combat. Women are not warriors at heart (sorry folks they just aren’t). They will protect their own ferociously (think Mama Grizzly) but to seek out hunt down and kill the enemy???? Nah women just aren’t good at that no matter what hollyweird or the WH says


39 posted on 01/23/2013 6:55:26 PM PST by Nifster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: YankeeReb

also note the hardcore feminists are home here writing articles behind a desk, going home to their cats and the latest lean cuisine microwave meal. they aren’t putting their money where their mouths are.


40 posted on 01/23/2013 7:05:05 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Michael Barnes

only the butch lesbians.


41 posted on 01/23/2013 7:06:00 PM PST by Secret Agent Man (I can neither confirm or deny that; even if I could, I couldn't - it's classified.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: THX 1138

That was quite an article, I hope others read it.


42 posted on 01/23/2013 7:08:17 PM PST by ansel12 (Cruz said "conservatives trust Sarah Palin that if she says this guy is a conservative, that he is")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Conscription/compulsion is around the corner.


43 posted on 01/23/2013 7:10:04 PM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

More cannon fodder for our Saudi Defense Forces.

Makes me sick.


44 posted on 01/23/2013 7:11:17 PM PST by gotribe (obama = the Great Divider)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

I am an enemy soldier, I havent seen my wife or girlfriend in 6 months, along comes this woman trying to kill me, I capture her . Now what am I going to do with her?

Pass her around to the guys after I am through or take her to the Capt. so he can give her to the officers?

Women do not belong in combat. In fact they do not belong in the same military as men. They should be serving as WACS, WAVES or some separate entity from men.


45 posted on 01/23/2013 7:11:37 PM PST by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Talk of your “war on women”


46 posted on 01/23/2013 7:12:10 PM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

Deployed women will be forced to take birth control. The first forced abortions in America will be on women in combat units.


47 posted on 01/23/2013 7:14:58 PM PST by Theophilus (Not merely prolife, but prolific)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Chainmail

Romney has been anti-military as a politician for longer than Obama, Romney was calling for, campaigning on, full homosexualization of the military, 20 years ago. Romney was against Clinton compromising with DADT because he wanted to open it up entirely.


48 posted on 01/23/2013 7:15:29 PM PST by ansel12 (Cruz said "conservatives trust Sarah Palin that if she says this guy is a conservative, that he is")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: MinorityRepublican

My comparison ... OK, because we are so touchy feely today, we take NFL cheerleaders (all female to this point) and introduce them to the reality of pre-season training camp. Some, although obviously coming up short in every respect, must pass thru and make the team roster. NFL football appeal, the same could be said for college ball, would be gone within three years. Reality is reality ... women don’t belong in front line combat. Only liberal idiots like Pinetta (with no military experience), likewise BHO and Clinton earlier would think otherwise. Granted the liberals can always thrust forward a few ass kissing generals who are where they are because they excel at ass kissing ... to endorse the treachery ... but experienced combat officers shudder at the thought of females on the front lines.


49 posted on 01/23/2013 7:15:50 PM PST by BluH2o
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Greater sacrifices will be made to maintain net levels of effectiveness.

What remains on the Left’s agenda?


50 posted on 01/23/2013 7:16:38 PM PST by Gene Eric
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson