Free Republic
Browse · Search
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Sen. Scott Brown pushes to allow women to serve on front-lines in military combat ^ | February 22, 2012 | Robert Rizzuto

Posted on 02/22/2012 9:44:14 PM PST by Tailgunner Joe

WASHINGTON D.C. - Calling for an evolution of policy, Republican U.S. Sen. Scott Brown is asking for changes that would allow women to serve on the front-lines in military combat.

Brown's push comes on the heels of a Department of Defense report calling for changes to the 1994 Direct Ground Combat Definition and Assignment Rule which barred women from certain roles in the military, including front-line ground-combat positions.

The report to Congress concluded that changes were needed so policy doesn't prevent enlisted female military members from rising to their potential. But Brown, in a letter to Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta, said he believes changes need to go further to level the playing field for women in the military.

"As a 32-year member of the Massachusetts Army National Guard, I believe women should be able to serve in front line positions if they desire. I am mindful of the fact that the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan have claimed the lives of 140 women serving as Soldiers, Marines, Sailors and Airmen. Their service was honorable and reflective of the day-to-day reality of modern warfare and the contributions made by female service members," Brown wrote in the letter. "Closing these opportunities to women affect their ability to develop a career path in the military and advance to higher ranks. We have an obligation to expand the professional opportunities available to women, especially considering their sacrifices. Doing so in my view would improve military effectiveness, not detract from it."

The DOD report to Congress on women in the military is centered around a new vision statement calling for removal of "all barriers that would prevent Service members from rising to the highest level of responsibility that their talents and capabilities warrant."

Brown's likely Democratic opponent in the U.S. Senate Race in Massachusetts, Elizabeth Warren, said in October that she believes women should be allowed to serve in front-line combat positions.

"I think women should be in combat positions," Warren said at a UMass Lowell debate on Oct. 4. "Frankly, I think that women are just as tough as men and we can make that work."

The revisions recommended in the DOD report would open up to women 13,139 positions in the U.S. Army, 371 in the U.S. Marine Corps and 60 in the Navy. The Air Force already allows women to serve in 99 percent of all positions and was minimally affected by the report's recommendations.

The report stated that significant time and research would precede any changes, a potential delay Brown aid is unacceptable.

"We should not waste time endlessly studying this issue and getting bogged down in bureaucratic red tape," Brown said in his letter. "Those deployed to Afghanistan serving on Female Engagement Teams in support of special operations forces illustrates that the Department can take a more aggressive approach to offering additional opportunities to our women in uniform."

TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Massachusetts
KEYWORDS: 112th; bhodod; brown4romney; militarywomen; rino; rinobrown; womenincombat
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 last
To: fortheDeclaration; Tailgunner Joe
The fact is that women can't meet the same standards for men, unless the standards are adjusted downward.

Where a genuine requirement to run 100 meters, pick up a 180 lb man and carry him back 100 meters in 60 seconds exists, those requirements should remain.

However, nature has conferred different strengths and weaknesses to men and woman. Both sexes are able to do some tasks naturally better than others. Feminists won't admit this but it's a fact.

The military probably already has considerable information pertaining natural abilities of men and women. Where raw strength and endurance is not a requirement, the best teams may be obtained by including men and women. Fraternization is always a concern in such situations and the most practical mixed sex teams may be those where at the end of a mission, everyone can go to their separate quarters.

In situations such as flying frontseat and backseat in a combat aircraft... especially helicopters, the generally better ability of a woman to multi-task than a man may make male-female pilot tandems a better mix. The male has natural aggression, risk taking, orientation and an ability to focus while the female of the pair is better equipped by nature to simultaneously monitor instruments, communications and maintain situational awareness.

Even with fighter aircraft, my understanding is women are generally better able to withstand g-forces than men which again, may give a male-female pair an edge.

61 posted on 02/23/2012 4:40:03 PM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie

Great post. Thanks for showing the link to Marxism in the continuing disaster of election of Scott Brown as a republican.

Voting for the lesser of two evils, is still evil. Both parties are fronting Marxism at an astonishing rate.

62 posted on 02/23/2012 4:44:46 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: USMCWife6869
My husband's biggest issue with this is what happens when she can't handle the physical part, or the mental for that matter, and they are already in the midst of battle?

They will take her off the front line, make her a captain or a general and put her in charge of the battle.--- At least that's what they do at the fire station.
63 posted on 02/23/2012 4:46:12 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: savagesusie
You are good! Great points!
64 posted on 02/23/2012 4:51:02 PM PST by hedgetrimmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: fso301
Even with fighter aircraft, my understanding is women are generally better able to withstand g-forces than men which again, may give a male-female pair an edge.

Got a link? The only study I have seen shows female performance in high g environment is 15% lower than males with significantly higher risk of neck injury due to bone and muscle structure differences.

65 posted on 02/23/2012 5:11:36 PM PST by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: hedgetrimmer

Thanks-—I’ve been studying Marxism and Natural Law Theory and just read Mark Levin’s new book.

We are post-Constitutional now like Mark says-—with Marxism being forced on us at such increasing speed, it is not funny.

We have to educate people to the ideas that these people are peddling and challenge them. They just will name call, of course, because their ideology is nonsense and destructive to man.

We need to get kids out of the public school system-—all a Marxist brainwashing machine. It is destroying the logic and reason of children—to condition them to think good is evil and evil is good and be good little useful idiots.

66 posted on 02/23/2012 5:44:41 PM PST by savagesusie (Right Reason According to Nature = Just Law)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07
Got a link?

No I don't and I don't remember exactly where i heard that. Thanks for calling me out on it.

67 posted on 02/23/2012 6:54:46 PM PST by fso301
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost
And, it gets worse. The USN is going to send one of its reconfigured Ohio-class SSGN boats to sea this year with a mixed male-female crew! No word yet on the friendly fire torpedoings that cause pregnancies.

(In all the years the Navy has put women on ships [about 30], the suits and admirals have yet to figure out why a certain number of females in the crews get pregnant during the cruise. Yup, and the majority of the pregnancies weren't caused by pre-deployment sex. USS EISENHOWER (CVN-69) didn't get the name of “The Love Boat” without a significant number of reasons. This is only one ship of many and Navy officialdom doesn't see a problem? Duuhh.)

68 posted on 02/23/2012 8:52:45 PM PST by MasterGunner01 (11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Tailgunner Joe

Are his daughters bruisers? Otherwise, he’s signing their death warrent. The globalists want to awaken the draft. Women who are women will die pretty quickly.

69 posted on 02/23/2012 9:42:34 PM PST by SaraJohnson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mashood

I’d rather have his picture than Sharon Angles.

70 posted on 02/23/2012 10:16:39 PM PST by TShaunK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: MasterGunner01

Don’t forget about the USS Acadia. Spent time on that boat . . . lots of shenanigans going on below decks . . .

71 posted on 02/24/2012 5:45:08 AM PST by Hemingway's Ghost (Spirit of '75)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: TShaunK

“I’d rather have his picture than Sharon Angles.”

I’m sure you would.

72 posted on 02/24/2012 7:14:15 AM PST by Mashood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: Hemingway's Ghost

I rest my case.

73 posted on 02/24/2012 10:16:14 AM PST by MasterGunner01 (11)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 71 | View Replies]

Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-73 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
Topics · Post Article

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