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

To: AAABEST
Hey I'm not the one brandishing this woman's picture in a disgusting effort to prove my non-existent point.

Now back to points. Since women in hazardious zones started in WWII do you think Patton was a PC moron?

And here's the saddest part. The woman captured WASN'T in a front line unit, she was in a backup maintentance unit. Asd for leftist idiot policy, my view on women in combat zones comes straight from my mother, a Viet Nam era Marine whom I garauntee can STILL outshoot you, out pummel you, and out drink you. People that have the will and the skill should be on the frontline. As has been pointed out, the gang rapes in Iraq aren't reserved for female prisoners, if we're gonna keep people out of the frontline because somebody might rape them then I guess we need to pull out of Iraq entirely, I'll let you explain to the Iraqi people why we're abandoning them... again.

Les didn't ask why anything. He was just gunning for sensationalistic headlines trying to increase his career by waving around tragic incidents. Not unlike yourself, which I guess is why you support him.
59 posted on 03/25/2003 6:24:25 PM PST by discostu (I have not yet begun to drink)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies ]


To: discostu
You are certainly entitled to your opinion on the role of women in the military, but don't let the facts get in your way...

Now back to points. Since women in hazardious zones started in WWII do you think Patton was a PC moron?

There is absolutely no comparison to the roles of women in WWII, Korea and Vietnam to their present roles in GWII -- and George Patton would slap you from his grave for pretending there is. Back then, women weren't called Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Marines; they were called WACs, WAVES, WAFs and WMs, and there were no illusions that their roles stretched beyond home front and rear area support to fighting men. They served admirably in medicine and administration, and ferried trucks and planes -- but they were never intentionally deployed near enemy forces. No longer cherished, today's females are just more meat for the slaughter.

The woman captured WASN'T in a front line unit, she was in a backup maintentance unit.

That is true. However, she was assigned to a mobile contact team which was assigned to a forward position in support of a frontline combat unit. This role is called Combat Support. Because of the likelihood of enemy contact, such units were all male until the late 1980s, when the United States government reinvented human nature.

...my view on women in combat zones comes straight from my mother, a Viet Nam era Marine whom I garauntee can STILL outshoot you, out pummel you, and out drink you. People that have the will and the skill should be on the frontline.

I'm sure your mother is a fine lady and was an outstanding Woman Marine. But never in your wildest Zena fantasies would she last a day in close combat with men. It has been tried before, my friend, and for myriad reasons always failed.

We can pretend about human nature all we want, but it is that same denial which has placed our young women in such an awful position to begin with. We've all seen the photos of the pretty young girl from West Virginia. If there is one among us who did not immediately think of what any enemy troops would do to her if they caught her, I'll call that person a liar. Let us not pretend about her, and let us not pretend about where we send our females in future wars...

81 posted on 03/25/2003 7:43:49 PM PST by Always A Marine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies ]

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