Skip to comments.AP Exclusive: Few Army women want combat jobs
Posted on 02/25/2014 7:35:58 AM PST by ConservativeStatement
FORT EUSTIS, Va. Only a small fraction of Army women say they'd like to move into one of the newly opening combat jobs, but those few who do say they want a job that takes them right into the heart of battle, according to preliminary results from a survey of the service's nearly 170,000 women.
That survey and others across the Army, publicly disclosed for the first time to The Associated Press, also revealed that soldiers of both genders are nervous about women entering combat jobs but say they are determined to do it fairly. Men are worried about losing their jobs to women; women are worried they will be seen as getting jobs because of their gender and not their qualifications. Both are emphatic that the Army must not lower standards to accommodate women.
(Excerpt) Read more at bostonherald.com ...
Weight training — and lots of it.
What an odd comment to add to this story.
If they give them jobs being the boss, they can have the grunts do the hard stuff.
Weight training involving trips to the chow hall?
Why not have one section of the Army for men and another one for women. We could call the women's the Women's Army Corps--WACs for short!
I'll bet nobody's thought of that!
Okay, we'll call the men's the MACs.
Maybe we could set up a third section: the GACs. HACs? QACs?
In 1979 I was in the very first co-ed training platoon at Ft. Jackson, SC.
It REALLY got old dragging those boys along with us gals every d@mn day. ;)
Sounds like half a dozen....which makes it more likely that they’re libbers and happy people. You can define happy.
“Both are emphatic that the Army must not lower standards to accommodate women.”
If you are lower standards you are putting lives in danger!!!
If whatever social engineering du jour doesn’t make the military a fiercer fighting force then it is just simply liberal BS!!!
That is just this Chief’s two cents.
Form battalions of gays and women who want combat as front line shock troops.
Those few that do want to get bloody need a good psyche eval, most if not all ought to be disQual’d. Unstable.
They may think they want to get bloody, but they don’t know what they want.
My opinion is they ought to be raising babies that will g row up to be men to fight the nation’s battles, and yes, my knuckles kinda drag on the ground most days.
Is anyone surprised???
The women are not stupid.
They’ve seen what happens in combat first hand and don’t want to return home without arms or legs like the male soldiers.
I wonder what percentage of homosexuals aspire to combat?
“I wonder what percentage of homosexuals aspire to combat?”
Naw...more like a good game of butt darts.
mostly dykes on bikes, I believe.
That could be viewed as a suicide wish, making one unfit for service in the military.
Why can’t the DoD and President look around and ask why the NFL, MLB and NBA have no women on the field/court? But wait, you have to understand that the mission of these hard core radicals is to destroy the fabric and structure of the military that they have hated since Vietnam. When you understand that, you will understand what they are trying to do. And with the cuts Hagel wants, there wont be any military to work with anyway.
Liberal elites who NEVER in a million years would bother to defend this country want women soldiers mangled, killed and destroyed. It proves something for them... something so evil and base I can’t figure out what it is...
I can see someone wanting to do their duty come what may, but I don’t see any normal person specifically wanting to be in the ‘heart of the battle’. Probably just the writer being overly dramatic.
I think most men who have been in combat don’t want to be in it again. WWII vets, for example, often seem to not even want to talk about it. I agree. Someone who actually wanted to “get bloody” shouldn’t be in the military in the first place.
The reason we carry the proverbial big stick is so we are (hopefully) never required to use it. That lesson seems lost on many in government today who seem to want to throw the military at virtually every problem.
Are you saying that the reporter resorted to hyperbole to help sensationalize his story? I would be shocked!
Conversely, my father served in WWII. He never talked about it. Never.
Well, let me see.... We could start with (a) like Satan, they are working for the destruction of the family, (b) they believe that the United States is evil and must be prevented from ever again having an influence on the rest of the world, thus making the U.S. irrelevant on the world stage, (c) they belive that any woman who would join the miliitary must be mentally ill and therefore deserve whatever fate she might face, (d) ......
The comment was added because the article said that the few women who did want to have combat jobs all overwhelmingly eager to volunteer to be crews for the night stalkers spec ops helo unit.
But regular infantry, armor, or paratrooper work doesn’t interest them much. Ill refrain from further analysis.
Liberal elites are worse than you think... you’re giving them waaaay too much credit.
Its the writer’s way of warning us not to read anything into these poll results because there are salty, hardbody lady warriors out there who can slam shots & kick ass with the toughest of guys out there. /s
Only if it’s sword fights.
Few Army women want combat jobs
No sane woman - or man - WANTS to go into combat.
The comment that men are afraid of losing their job to women is the most stupid comment I’ve ever seen about women going into combat roles...
As a Vietnam veteran, I would say what bothers men more than anything is the lack of support from a woman’s fear and the basic instinct males have to “protect” females. The male is concerned that he may spend valuable time looking out for female counterpart instead of applying all his energy into combat operations.
I’m in a generous frame of mind today.
Those who do will regret it.
Have them do pull-ups and to paint “El Riesgo Siempre Vive” on their body armor.
More to the point imagine the US Army in any prolonged high intensity conflict after the Obama cuts are put in place. Just like before Korea the so-called defense leadership has convinced themselves that because the budget levels have to be held down the army should absorb the biggest hit as air power and technology can handle any likely challenge. The threat perimeters were defined to meet the shrunken defense budget the Prez Truman and Congress (both parties) were happy with. A war like the Korean War was simply not supposed to occur. Read Joe Collins memoir ‘War in Peacetime’ carefully and you will see that is what he is admitting to. As CSA he was complicit in keeping the broken state of the Army out of the news and was complicit in what happened after 25 June 1950. The current set of pukes will never fess up even to the degree ‘Lightning Joe’ did. When the feces hits the fan here is the bottom line on the ‘women in combat’ sh-t. Lots of female pseudo soldiers in the Combat Support and Service Support Military occupation Specialties will be introduced to a new term ‘Crossleveling’ and they will find their derrieres being pushed through(if they are lucky) a short ‘familiarization course’ in being infantry and then be shipped to a ‘field replacement center’ in the theater of operations and from there sent as ‘fillers’ to combat arms units depleted from battlefield losses. The garbage in both parties that have promoted the elimination of the ban on females in combat arms postions merit being sent to the lowest circles of perdition for what they have done.
Few women want combat. That is a surprise that ranks up there with the Sun will rise in the East tomorrow.