Skip to comments.Map: Which countries allow women in front-line combat roles?
Posted on 01/25/2013 5:28:07 PM PST by MinorityRepublican
When outgoing U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced that he had lifted the Pentagons ban on allowing women to serve in front-line combat roles, one of several questions it raised was: Is that unusual? Do a lot of countries allow women to serve in combat? The answer is that many Western, developed countries have women on their front-line forces. But outside of the West, its rare.
The map at the top of this page shows in red which countries formally permit women in combat positions. Shown in orange are countries that allow women to serve in military roles that involve fighting but not front-line combat. That typically means fighter pilots. In South Korea, women also serve in artillery and armored units.
A note on the data: It comes from piecemeal sources, mostly gathered by Foreign Policys Joshua Keating in this great overview (see also: National Geographic, NPR, New York Times). Rules and their enforcement for military servicewomen vary in different countries. And its possible that women serve in de facto combat roles in some countries not included here.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
Thank you. We honor your sacrifice and cherish your friendship. We will not forget.
To all- please ping me to Canadian topics.
what kind of argument is that? Ignore the facts that are inconvenient and harp on others? Of course Isreal counts. Women do very well in the Israeli military - and standards are not lowered because of their inclusion.
Women have been in battle throughout the centuries - It's no accident that Mars was God of War, but Mathematics, Logic, and Battle Strategy belonged to a woman-- the Goddess Minerva. Roman generals made offerings to Minerva before a battle, because they really, really wanted to win.
This is worth repeating! Thanks.
Why is Israel on that map? Based of Israels experience with woman in combat during the 1948 war Israel banned woman in combat in 1950.
Washington Post. Playing fast and loose with the facts for a number of these countries, including Israel.
I think that womens service in combat roles in the IDF should not be widened, he said. I cannot even imagine a female soldier serving inside a tank or in elite infantry units, mostly because of operational considerations. The army must not allow this thing to interfere with its operational ability.
Laws that mandate the inclusion of women in combat units place the military in a nearly impossible situation, he said. Expanding female service will be a grave mistake that will damage the prowess of the army. Womens service in roles that are not suited to them might harm state security, he warned.
General Ron-Tal led the fight to include woman in combat roles ten years ago. He evidentially has relearned the lessons of the 1948 war.
No. If this nation was under constant threat from Canada and Mexico, I would be in favor of putting women into combat because there would be no other choice. This is why Israel is justified. Since we do not have this issue, we have no excuse.
As has been said before, there is no problem with women serving in the military in support roles, but to place them on an equal footing with men when it comes to combat is a gross and unnecessary alteration to the already superior structure of the US military.
Please, when the first videos come back from the Middle East of women having their heads cut off after being raped, tell us then that you’ll be happy to have your daughters or granddaughters drafted like males.
Ummmm, this is from the Washington Post... a group that was appalled by Nixon Administration lies about Watergate, but fine with Obama Administration lies about Benghazi... Truth doesn't matter to liberal MSM folks...
I served with CJSOTF-A in 2006. We had Canadian soldiers.
|One of the best modern images of a Minerva-like warrior is with the image Britannia. The Brits for centuries have never had a problem with the notion of a female figure either engaging in war or peace.|
I love it!
Actually, we've never elected Gillard in Australia. She originally became Prime Minister when her party changed leaders in an internal vote, and though she held onto power at the 2010 election, it was as a leader of a minority government and only because two conservative independents betrayed their constituencies (a third joined them in giving her power, but he only did so after it became clear the other two doing so had rendered a conservative government numerically impossible and he decided better to support Labor than render the country ungovernable).
But in terms of Australian women serving in combat, yes, that's a Gillard initiative, announced in late 2011 to try and counter a sex scandal at the Australian Defence Force Academy. Women now have the legal right to serve in frontline combat roles from 2016 onwards - it hasn't happened yet, and if the polls are correct, we'll have a conservative government again before the end of the year, which will 'review the decision'.
Good information. Thanks for that. Every time Obama and Gillard meet, she seems as adoring as the mainstream media, slathering like an idiot.
Unifox you've been hanging around FR a long time.
I'm surprised at your ignorance.
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.