Women in direct combat

[Raccoon Love]

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-01-15/...bat-roles-iraq-and-afghanistan?_s=PM:POLITICS

The article has a lot of detailed and is extremely wrong, but apparently a recent pentagon study suggested that women should be allowed in direct combat forces. This is of course a major change in the military which tends to favor its traditional system( ex: DADT). Do you believe women should be granted the right to served in direct combat if they were willing to make the choice? what possible effects would this have?

My friend, who is a hardcore conservative, told me that he believes women should only serve in auxiliary roles because they would create distractions for men, who will die in an attempt to save this women as they are not used to seeing them in combat...I wanted to disagree, but I am not very knowledgeable on military issues.

 

[Peppermint]

If they can take it and perform satisfyingly, yes.

 

[detectivepope]

If woman want to die for no reason too, why not? If you want to die pointlessly it shouldn't matter what gender you are.

 

[Cyrus]

I think it's a little more complicated than "do women want to" or not... If they are allowed to, then it will mean that next time we have a draft, they will likely be required to... If they are allowed to fight in combat, it doesn't make sense that they wouldn't also be drafted eventually...

 

[detectivepope]

Modern warfare doesn't require drafting. Major conflict plans involve massive explosions and mass death not an equality version of the 1940's drafts. Being a man I feel woman are lucky in the fact they are not required to die in old mens wars. The horror of war should never be wanted by anyone.

 

[Raccoon Love]

Modern warfare doesn't require drafting. Major conflict plans involve massive explosions and mass death not an equality version of the 1940's drafts. Being a man I feel woman are lucky in the fact they are not required to die in old mens wars. The horror of war should never be wanted by anyone.

I have also pondered upon this, in the believe that conscription policies are sexist in that sense. Nobody, regardless of gender should be forces to serve in the horrible act that war is.

 

[Peppermint]

Nobody, regardless of gender should be forces to serve in the horrible act that war is.

Okay then in case your country is under assault, the civilians are free to be slaughtered and buildings pillaged and demolished.

 

[Majesty]

If woman want to die for no reason too, why not? If you want to die pointlessly it shouldn't matter what gender you are.

I agree

 

[ontheroadtohope]

Okay then in case your country is under assault, the civilians are free to be slaughtered and buildings pillaged and demolished.

The American military seems to have enough members without instituting a draft. Not to mention that a threat of invasion would probably inspire more people to join of their own free will because of ideals like patriotism that are drummed into us from elementary school.

 

[Peppermint]

The American military seems to have enough members without instituting a draft. Not to mention that a threat of invasion would probably inspire more people to join of their own free will because of ideals like patriotism that are drummed into us from elementary school.

Let me get this clear, I am not talking about the U.S, but war and military in general.

 

[ontheroadtohope]

Okay then in case your country is under assault, the civilians are free to be slaughtered and buildings pillaged and demolished.

From a broad standpoint, the way I see it is that war forces the individual to make a choice: are some people's lives more "valuable"? Someone who is willing (not coerced by any means) to fight a war must somehow have come to the decision that the lives of his neighbors and countrymen (or whoever he is fighting for) must be worth more to him than the lives of the "enemy". Other people will come to the conclusion that all human life is equally valuable and that their own countrymen or neighbors' lives aren't worth more than the "enemy's". I believe that this is a process each individual must decide for him or herself...forcing people to fight a war arbitrarily defines this choice for them, and I think that's wrong.

Just how I see things.

 

[bickelz]

Actually, if a woman was capable of not panicking under that kind of pressure, they might be even better than a male leader. Note that some men, like myself, would tuck their tails between their legs in combat. Most women that would stand proud in that situation would also have the natural gift of multitasking which is not something many men have.

Although, the male brain has evolved specifically for the purpose of combat. the average man has better reaction times, throwing distance, spacial awareness and knowledge of battle just from the process of evolution

 

[toska]

My friend, who is a hardcore conservative, told me that he believes women should only serve in auxiliary roles because they would create distractions for men, who will die in an attempt to save this women as they are not used to seeing them in combat...I wanted to disagree, but I am not very knowledgeable on military issues.

And the male soldiers wouldn't try just as hard to save their close male friends? I think your friend is wrong.

 

[Nighthawk]

I've served with some who were badasses and definitely could perform in combat ... particularly the pilots. I feel that if they meet the requirements and have the desire to serve, they should be afforded the opportunity. I also served with some who used their gender to get out of doing things that the military required. Of course, I met plenty of men who tried to get out of doing required things as well. It's definitely not gender specific, just the women had an extra tool in their arsenal if they felt like malingering.

In terms of a possible draft, I feel that one parent should be exempt from service per family ... with the two partners deciding which parent that is.

 

[Nighthawk]

The American military seems to have enough members without instituting a draft.

Well, in speaking with some of my acquaintances still in uniform ... they are pretty short on manpower. Soldiers are getting burnt out from so many back-to-back deployments to war zones without much down time. It's placing a huge strain on them and their families. Of course, if this were a total war, they would all be in it for the duration ... but democracies like to fight wars on the cheap, particularly unpopular ones. A draft would take some of the presssure off of them. It would be political suicide for any politician to implement it however. The U.S. will have to make do with an all volunteer military to fight its wars.

 

[Oranguh]

lol~ It's so ironic~ In ancient greece it was believed that an army of lovers would be invincible because the passion to save your loved ones in battle would overpower any army.... This was falsified when an army of a few hundred lovers got murdered at the battle of Thebes~ if I recall correctly.

Oh and the army didn't consist of any women~ they were all gay to some extent.

Which doesn't mean women can't be as brutal and bloodthirsty as men~ nooo gooo amazons!

The way we see the world is so relative isn't it xD? People fighting over these things~ I don't know it's sooooo fuunnnnnnyyyyy.


GENERAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS

Society reserves the right to change a perspective of any idea at any given time.

 

[NiennaLadyOfTears]

My friend, who is a hardcore conservative, told me that he believes women should only serve in auxiliary roles because they would create distractions for men, who will die in an attempt to save this women as they are not used to seeing them in combat...I wanted to disagree, but I am not very knowledgeable on military issues.

Hardcore conservative? I think not. REAL hardcore conservatives don't approve of women in ANY role in the armed forces.

 

[Raccoon Love]

Hardcore conservative? I think not. REAL hardcore conservatives don't approve of women in ANY role in the armed forces.

Well...that was a bit of a hyperbole xDD...since I am very liberal, that is quite conservative for me.

 

[NiennaLadyOfTears]

I personally am not hardcore conservative, being a Shieldmaiden type myself, but I grew up in a family that was.

 

[Nixie]

I am reminded of the line from that movie GI Jane--how strong do you have to be to pull a trigger? I think women can be ruthless and are capable of being in combat. I think the dynamics between men and woman make the strategy iffy at best. Changing the idea of roles in the military will be difficult and I wouldn't want to be one of the women forging that path. I mean, American society can't even agree that homosexuals belong in the service. I also remember my mom telling me that when she was working for the government, it wasn't until the 1970's that they gave permission for women to come to work in anything less than skirts or dresses--meaning they could wear pants to work. We like to think we have come so far but our ideas of equality and such aren't even a generation old.