The Right Scoop
Women in combat: I've never heard of such a ridiculous thing in my life. They'll get slaughtered in combat. Talk about a war on women.
I am a female and a strong one. With that said, I am not capable of the harsh physical demands of a Marine or soldier or SEAL. Can I run 10 km's or more (yes I am Canadian) with 100 lb's of gear on my back then proceed to carry a wounded male, twice my weight, another 10 km's to safety? Can I complete the Darby Queen Obstacle Course? Am I prepared to be on the battlefield pitted against the Muslim enemy who would brutally rape me because it is their allah given right to? What about the psychological damage that would do to my fellow male soldiers? If I am in a jungle and have my period, wouldn't my bleeding for a week put us all at risk? Would an OBGYN be forced to accompany each unit in combat? - we are talking about liberals and their policies...
Women can be and are doctors. We are subject to the same mcats as men, the same training, schooling, demands, expectations. In order for liberals to permit women on the front lines they are going to have to lower the physical standards required to do the job men currently do - how on earth does that make the unit stronger and in turn, America and her allies safer?
To all those who have donned the uniform in the name of freedom, front lines or not, you have my deepest gratitude.
I can't believe we live in a country where this is a debate this islike debating if 1+1 is 2. It is amazing how liberals decide what should be debated, and it is even worse that the conservatives oblige
Stage a game between the WNBA & the NBA. I will defend intellectual equality until my last dying breath because the neurochemical pathways and the receptor network of the brain are physiologically the same. I will concede that the male physique is superior in musculature and, therefore, endurance. Endurance is the true test of battlefield success.
I can guarantee you that Canadian Forces with women in combat situations DO NOT rise to the same level as the men... especially in the elite units.
On top of that, why are they ignoring the SEX problem? Unless all the women are lesbians (which may end up being the case anyway as it takes a certain type of woman both mentally and physically who would want to be in combat) what does Canadian general have to say about that? Since Anderson is gay and has a slanted view of the sexual angle, does he think that there will be no sexual problems with women at forward combat bases when we know that there are already a lot of problems with men and women in these combat zones... rapes, etc.?? like generals screwing their staff which seems to be a common occurrence??
America is several generations out from a "real war". An all out, 24/7, years long death fest with an opponent of equal or greater skill, equipment and motivation. Normandy. Guadalcanal. Iowa Jima. Or smaller but just as vicious wars like Vietnam, with a year of exhaustion and killing out in the jungle. Every single ounce of "upper body" strength and beyond is needed. The unspoken issue is also that men and woman ARE different. Men are hardwired for aggression, resistance, goal oriented, strategic power struggles. Women are physically and mentally designed for nurturing life, not taking it. Sexual attraction and relationships can only be a potentially fatal distraction on the battlefield. Sure, some women, some of the time, in the right situations, could and do contribute much. But the real question is: how would our "feel good, social experiment" army stack up against, say, an actual, modern army of millions of Communist Chinese troops trained using traditional military methods that have been proven for thousands of years? Remember, as a whole, after over 10 years of fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq, we basically have lost against small little Jihadi bandit gangs. So...what about facing a real army? With Obama's deep cuts? With social experiments? Almost all liberal policies and social experiments end in disaster. Why should this be different?
McCain is pandering, and comparing a real military to the canadian military is, come on, who is kidding whom?
This is just a smokescreen to get the focus off Benghazi and the economy.
I am worried about how it may compromise a unit or a mission. Will men react the same way if a woman is in jeopardy as they would if it were a man or will they be more protective?
Let's say a woman is about to be captured and to intervene and rescue her would place the mission or personal in undo risk. Is the decision process going to be altered because its a woman instead of a man? Are they going to be more likely to attempt a rescue that they might not have for this reason?
Then again she could be just a total lesbo b**ch and they are all glad shes gone...lol
Okay Wolfie I changed it thanks for the heads up.
I heard that the Israelis took out the women when they discovered that when the combat started in earnest, the men would instinctively group around the women to defend them and lose track of the larger mission. Millions of years of evolution can't be undone with liberal fantasies.
You made a good point!
(edited - :-) Thanks for understanding. I was really only trying to help.)
"Why aren’t women playing in the NHL with the men? Why is there a separate WNBA?"
Why is there a NAACP? Why is their a Congressional Black Caucus? Why is their a Black Educational Television? Why is there a Miss Black America? Why is their a National Organization for Women? Why isn't the Women's Liberation Movement called the Person's Liberation Movement?
If the libs want everything to be 'so equal', in the military, isn't it about time to 'equalize' America first? ;-)
The fact that this is even a discussion is incredible. If liberals are really this stupid why in God's name are they governing my country?
Ugh..I cringed when the Canadian said that women exceeded physical standards but then seconds later said they 'did not do well with push ups' so they altered the standards. Talking out of both sides of the mouth!
Exactly how good are Canadian commandos? It's my impression that to a large extent Canada relies on us, as do many, many countries. Changing their policies to fit their political narrative may not have had that much effect on their readiness. It will devastate ours. Which, I guess is actually the goal here.
there is a simple fix.
either fully equal or not.
if women are in the military in ANY role they should have the same standards.
men get kicked out for not meeting PT standards, make them equal.
if you need reduced standards to allow them to serve then they do you no good.
if soldier can do 42 pushups in 2 minutes, good.
if not boot them out.
no multiple standards sets depending on sex.
military is no place for social policy- gays, women, whatever. They have a singular purpose and the social dynamics will prove to be distractions that are folly and silly.
Does anyone believe that women aren't a distraction to young men, away from home, away from their wives? This is not progress, it is denying reality.
I can not believe they can not think past the pencil and look at the past. We already have seen videos of our male troops beaten and abused. You think they are going to treat females any better? Its going to be worse. I am not going to hold back here...I am going to paint a horrible picture. One that is going to happen. I am sure our goverment is going to cover it up so we don't think its happening but just wait and see. Its going to happen that females will become POW's. They are not only going to be beaten and abused like thier male counterparts but they are going to be raped....repeatedly...by multiple enemy soldiers. Some may even become pregnant. Then what? You think they are going to let them live? Just like beheading is posted on the internet the horrible rapes will be posted also by the enemy. What a horrible thing for a husband or mother and father to see. Rage and hate will take over our country and our soldiers. War is not kind...its not a game...its not XBOX 360 that when your done you turn it off and go to bed.
This isn't the worst of it. Just wait till they ban guns from the military. That will be the end all. Our fighting forces will be run by NASA and sent out to 'diplomatically approach' our enemies and 'try to understand' them in a more humane and politically correct fashion.
My husband retired just shy of 30 years....grateful he is to be out before they are issued one bullet with 10 pages of paperwork required to acquire that one.
He has my undying thanks for his service to our country. There is no greater gift that one can give and I'm grateful to him.
As I've posted in another forum, I'm leaning against women in combat, but I must say I am inspired by an American woman that wants to fight for her Country.
Also, if there were ever a foreign invasion on American soil (i.e. Red Dawn), every man, woman and child would be given a gun and expected to Fight! As long as we still have guns in our homes, no thanks to the Libs!
If we didn't have women 'fighting for their country' in the factories during WW2, we would have lost it. If we didn't have the Women's Airforce Service Pilots (WASP) delivering every known kind of military aircraft all over the world, there would have been that many fewer male pilots fighting in them.
There are many way to fight for your country. Front line infantry is not the only option... Not even for most men.
Bingo. I never fired a shot in Viet Nam but if we didn't fly in the 'beans and bullets' and take out the body bags :-( nobody was fighting or eating.
I know there are some bad a$$ women out there, and I respect and I admire them….Im sure there are some that could handle combat without batting an eye…..But as a gal…. I am really not in favor of women on the very front lines.
I consider myself a strong independent female, with lots of outdoor and other rugged and craggy experiences I personally don’t think it is a great idea.
My husband was in combat, and as a soldier he doesn’t think it is a sound thought. They may say chivalry is dead, well he begs to differ. On the front positions when your natural inclination is to make sure you don’t leave anyone behind, he feels it will be even more intensified if there is a female involved.
Simply put, the penchant to protect will kick in.
The test of this social experiment will be in a future failed combat event and it’s televised theatrical hearing on capital hill blurring the event to political confusion.
I usually agree with West, and I see where he's coming from.
In my opinion as long as the physical requirements are not degraded for women.
If a woman can mainatin the same standards that the men do, then I don't have as much of a problem.
Now my concern is that this isn't done for the sake of the VERY few women who would sign up for these combat positions, and the even fewere who would actually make it through. Instead it's a trojan horse that will eventually allow a lawsuit based on the "inequality" of the number of females there by forcing the military to reduce standards to make sure that females were more "equally represented" in these units.
Just like I don't care about gays in the military that much, but again, I'm worried about the first time a tranny sues the military because she/he can't decide if they shuld wear the skirt or the pants.
If people feel it is their duty to serve this country with honor and valor, they should. But we should not turn our military services into social experiments.
Allen always goes right to the heart of issues. His point on the athletic leagues is ecellent. Heck, why are the Olympic events not coed?
How many Canadian women will be fighting in our war? Is this about American women in combat, or Canadian women in combat? What influence does Canadian policy have to do with us?
When the Religion of Peace drags a dead woman's body throught the streets of Mogadishu and its on national TV, we'll see this policy change post haste.
"measured their standards in a different way"? Sounds like PC talk for lowering of the physical standards to me. That is EXACTLY what is going to happen in our military. This PC social experimentation crap doesn't impress any of enemies. It emboldens them. What we need are strong bodies. Men who can run, jump and carry heavy loads to include the weight of a wounded comrade.
Don't give me this crap that woman are physically equal to men. If they were they'd trade their cheerleader uniforms in for a helmet and pads in football.
I know men who couldn't helf a 100lb 155 round or pass Ranger school, or buds for that matter. The combat arms is a whole 'nuther world from flying planes and helicopters.
This country best be getting its head of its a$$...and soon.
That's when the squad leader puts them [her] on point. She will be ready to kick the crap out of anyone that moves!!!!!!!
lol, I still feel that pain in my donkey from the previous round (w/ due respect for the opposite sex (which I can't live with and can't live with out ! lol again !)
I'm thinking , it's never the quality and variety of jobs and performances that a female can handle.My girl can out do me a thousand times in things I have no discipline or patience or skill or right mentality or what have you. Yet she would always silently signal me in a manner that's to never yet forget to pamper her with all the fun cute staff like flower, chocolate, dinner date and so forth the way most of you go through. For me , those are waste of times and money, but it's got to get done ! We are both human and compatible in most situations, but our NATURE are completely opposite.
I love where West is standing, his povs. are not only from a soldiers povs.but from a head of a household and protector of a family rooted deeply in spiritual values from that inspired from the Good Book. People like West are Pillars a Country can Build upon.
Comment Policy: Please read our new comment policy before making a comment. In short, please be respectful of others and do not engage in personal attacks. Otherwise we will revoke your comment privileges.