Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
If there were any fudge packers in my platton it was a well kept secret.pssssst....don't look now but....you DID serve with "homo's." Ya just didn't know it.
Because if discovered; they wouldn't have survived past the next fire fight.
True story..........
If women are in combat, then they will be shot at.....and their male counterparts better be able to deal with that. If these guys are in combat and if their female counterparts are shot/wounded, they need to be able to handle that. Men need to be able to manage their emotions about that rather than enforce women to take a back seat to combat roles because the men can't handle seeing women wounded/killed in combat. Suck it up and deal with it. Now...with that said.....there are VERY few women who could pull their own weight in a true combat role. If any woman wants to EARN a Ranger or SEAL or Green Beret badge, then she needs to be able to complete all requirements WITHOUT accommodations or special requirements. If she is able to accomplish that, then she earns the right to be part of the team just like the men do. If the men can't handle that, then that is their own problem and not one created by the female. Right now we have women in the line of fire....they may not be in "combat" roles, per se, but they are in direct line of fire based on their MOS and many have died as a result. Security details, transport, EOD, etc.....women are on the front lines. The men better get used to the idea of at least some women being capable of combat roles. And, no, they don't have to be lesbians, either
Spin it anyway you want. Women are not as capable when it comes to combat.
If my ass is on the line I want the best available to watch my six. And anyway you slice it,thats not a women.
Deal with it.
Another idiot who can't handle the fact that a FEW women are as capable as men in a combat role. You are going to have to deal with that fact, whether you like it or not.
i have a lot of respect for women that serve in the armed service . but when it comes to putting ladies on the front line in a combat capacity is something i do not agree with.
I agree with you completely.
But then, if women feel they can take it.... and die horrible deaths .... well...who are we to stop them.
Go ahead,...I say.
i have a lot of respect for women that serve in the armed service . but when it comes to putting ladies on the front line in a combat capacity is something i do not agree with.
I agree with you completely.
But then, if women feel they can take it.... and die horrible deaths .... well...who are we to stop them.
Go ahead,...I say.
What about the other soldiers who die due to their incompetence?
Sounds like all you care about is letting the chicks go out and swing their thing and to hell with those other poor slobs who die because of it.
What I think is hilarious is that at several points in this thread I have illustrated where women have served in a capacity that spoke of combat, one receiving the Congressional Medal of Honor, yet the military has not been "feminized". Indeed, "women are serving and have been serving in uniform alongside their male counterparts in Afghanistan and did so in Iraq for much of the past decade, even as their theoretical fitness to serve was debated back home. Although officially in support roles, the distinction ultimately made little difference to the 152 female U.S. troops who have died while deployed in those two wars."
Women in combat? Pentagon says yes
Women have been accompanying combat patrols as interpreters, intelligence gatherer's, medical personnel and to interface with local women in ways men can't do in that culture.
What that means is that they've carried the same combat load as the men, done their share of shooting back, and have done everything the rifle squad does except wear the crossed rifles. There is literally no difference between a rifleman and anybody attached to the unit during combat operations. Everybody is a rifleman, and in Afghanistan, that means women accompanying patrols have been serving as riflemen anyhow.
Allowing them to be "officially" Infantry means very little in the real world. They're already there and doing that.
That is what I have been saying throughout this thread.
I agree with you completely.
But then, if women feel they can take it.... and die horrible deaths .... well...who are we to stop them.
Go ahead,...I say.
What about the other soldiers who die due to their incompetence?
Sounds like all you care about is letting the chicks go out and swing their thing and to hell with those other poor slobs who die because of it.
It sounds like you hold women in high regard. I bet you get laid all the time.
If there were any fudge packers in my platton it was a well kept secret.pssssst....don't look now but....you DID serve with "homo's." Ya just didn't know it.
Because if discovered; they wouldn't have survived past the next fire fight.
True story..........
I agree with you completely.
But then, if women feel they can take it.... and die horrible deaths .... well...who are we to stop them.
Go ahead,...I say.
What about the other soldiers who die due to their incompetence?
Sounds like all you care about is letting the chicks go out and swing their thing and to hell with those other poor slobs who die because of it.
It sounds like you hold women in high regard. I bet you get laid all the time.
We haven't been in a "real" war since DADT was rescinded.Women already serve, and serve honorably in the military. The argument youre making is the same one that was made about allowing gay soldiers to be open about their orientation, and as we saw, that was a lot of hype and nothing that was predicted happened.
So the jury is still out about the combat effectiveness of homo soldiers........
That's the very same, identical bullshit we heard from the WWII guys when we came home.
Nope, if there were any homos, that must have transfered to your unit.........If there were any fudge packers in my platton it was a well kept secret.pssssst....don't look now but....you DID serve with "homo's." Ya just didn't know it.
Because if discovered; they wouldn't have survived past the next fire fight.
True story..........
Oh, they were there and guess what? The fact that you didn't notice ought to tell you something about their service and abilities...right?
Women have already been involved in combat on the ground in Iraq and Afghanistan for the past 12 years.
Peripherally, NOT directly involved in Infantry or Spec Ops duties, which they are physcially incapable of doing. Woman cannot pass the same physical fitness tests, or keep to the same physcial fitness standards of the Infantrymen, which is why they will have to lower physical standards to allow woman to serve side by side with men in the Infantry MOS.
I'm sorry, but that sounds like over-generalized bullshit.
Now, I would be willing to accept that it will be harder for women to pass those tests. Many more may be incapable of doing so than men; there are certainly differences in male and female physiology. That doesn't mean that there aren't any women who can pass the tests, who can perform their duties at the necessary levels.
I don't want to see lower standards in order to allow women. I would, however, like to see women who meet the standards allowed to serve in the same capacities.
Instant 200,000 new soldiers. And they didn't have to lift a finger. As long as everyone is equal cannon fodder I don't have a problem with it.
Let women starting coming home in body bags.. Some raped and tortured. I promise you.. every liberal will starting singing a different fucking tune. This is FUCKED UP SHIT.. The military is no place to try out progressive experimental policy.
Instant 200,000 new soldiers. And they didn't have to lift a finger. As long as everyone is equal cannon fodder I don't have a problem with it.
Let women starting coming home in body bags.. Some raped and tortured. I promise you.. every liberal will starting singing a different fucking tune. This is FUCKED UP SHIT.. The military is no place to try out progressive experimental policy.
Women already serve, and serve honorably in the military. The argument youre making is the same one that was made about allowing gay soldiers to be open about their orientation, and as we saw, that was a lot of hype and nothing that was predicted happened.
What about the other soldiers who die due to their incompetence?
Sounds like all you care about is letting the chicks go out and swing their thing and to hell with those other poor slobs who die because of it.
It sounds like you hold women in high regard. I bet you get laid all the time.
Sounds like your parents wanted a girl Josie.
Oh....and I've been married for twenty three years. Get back to me when you're at least that old. Maybe you'll have enough life experience by then to speak with intelligence on such a simple subject.
Instant 200,000 new soldiers. And they didn't have to lift a finger. As long as everyone is equal cannon fodder I don't have a problem with it.
Let women starting coming home in body bags.. Some raped and tortured. I promise you.. every liberal will starting singing a different fucking tune. This is FUCKED UP SHIT.. The military is no place to try out progressive experimental policy.
Women already serve, and serve honorably in the military. The argument youre making is the same one that was made about allowing gay soldiers to be open about their orientation, and as we saw, that was a lot of hype and nothing that was predicted happened.
Good for them! Equal Rights baby, Equal Rights
Let women starting coming home in body bags.. Some raped and tortured. I promise you.. every liberal will starting singing a different fucking tune. This is FUCKED UP SHIT.. The military is no place to try out progressive experimental policy.
Women already serve, and serve honorably in the military. The argument youre making is the same one that was made about allowing gay soldiers to be open about their orientation, and as we saw, that was a lot of hype and nothing that was predicted happened.
No it's not.. I didn't say shit about gay or lesbians serving because I don't care about that. I SAID WOMEN WILL BE USED AS WEAPONS AGAINST FELLOW SOLDIERS.. did you get that??! You leftist HAGS only care about your progressive agenda and never think about the consequences, do you? Let's send Chelsea Clinton first in on the front lines.. You liberal BRAINDEAD morons go ahead and send your daughters in..
Women already serve, and serve honorably in the military. The argument youre making is the same one that was made about allowing gay soldiers to be open about their orientation, and as we saw, that was a lot of hype and nothing that was predicted happened.
No it's not.. I didn't say shit about gay or lesbians serving because I don't care about that. I SAID WOMEN WILL BE USED AS WEAPONS AGAINST FELLOW SOLDIERS.. did you get that??! You leftist HAGS only care about your progressive agenda and never think about the consequences, do you? Let's send Chelsea Clinton first in on the front lines.. You liberal BRAINDEAD morons go ahead and send your daughters in..
"Progressive experimental policy" is verbatim what was said about gays serving.
I'm not sure why you think women are more likely to be captured and raped than male soldiers, it simply isn't true. If it were, we would already be hearing about it since women are already proudly serving and deployed in the Middle East.
Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions - The Washington Post
This brings up an interesting question: If the draft were ever reinstated, would women now be eligible?
And what the fuck does that have to do with anything?
Meet your quota yet?
simply that women are already in some of the most dangerous jobs in the military - opening up a few more shouldn't be a problem.
It doesn't matter in what capacity they serve. If they endanger the lives of other soldiers because of their short comings they shouldnt be there.....PERIOD.
