Find fields & stores near you!
Find fields and stores
Zipcode
PbNation News
PbNation News
Community Focus
Community Focus

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-25-2013, 03:38 PM #43
Volucris
asmuchtextastheywillallow
 
Volucris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nashville
There already are and have been for years women in combat roles fighting front line engagements.
Volucris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 03:42 PM #44
EPAPressure
Jobs are for immigrants
 
EPAPressure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
Not riflemen, or women in this case. Lioness program, medics (I don't mean combat medics), etc yes we know. They aren't relied upon to be the force behind an infantry unit though. They are on FOBs and they fly all over combat zones, taking casualties. The point is they are never meant to be put in those situations that riflemen are trained to do. Twist that how you wish.
__________________
"Chic-Fi-La has an awful chicken sandwich"

-Said nobody, ever.


"Originally posted by drgonzo: That doesn't make sense, the people with the most interaction and dependence on government have the most significant stakes and should have the vote if anyone. People who reject government and do not use government services should be denied the vote if anything." ^^FAIL

"Originally posted by Rebeltilldeath3: When I think geocities I think ****ty tiled background and sparkly titles. Think of a minority's myspace page."

Last edited by EPAPressure : 01-25-2013 at 03:45 PM.
EPAPressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 03:42 PM #45
rT159
BlackOps
 
rT159's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Shadows of Darkness
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by jamest91 View Post
Out of that enture list of countries, the only one actually in a conflict right now is Israel. Within the Israeli military, 33% roughly are women. That's a pretty decent number imo.

I still do not believe a draft should comprise of women though. I believe only women who deem themselves fit to perform military combat actions should be in the military, for emotions sake.
Your point being? Women fight because they don't have enough people.

Quote:
Originally Posted by StellarKnight View Post
Not so timely:

Women in Ground Close Combat Roles

Canada, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Israel, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, and Sweden (plus Australia, if I remember correctly) allow women in combat roles that "[engage] an enemy on the ground with individual or crew served weapons, while being exposed to hostile fire and to a high probability of direct physical contact with the hostile forces personnel."
And which of those countries has 315 million people?
rT159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-25-2013, 03:54 PM #46
EPAPressure
Jobs are for immigrants
 
EPAPressure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Atlanta, GA
The story should read " Women in Combat Arms roles". Not combat roles. Two very different things.
__________________
"Chic-Fi-La has an awful chicken sandwich"

-Said nobody, ever.


"Originally posted by drgonzo: That doesn't make sense, the people with the most interaction and dependence on government have the most significant stakes and should have the vote if anyone. People who reject government and do not use government services should be denied the vote if anything." ^^FAIL

"Originally posted by Rebeltilldeath3: When I think geocities I think ****ty tiled background and sparkly titles. Think of a minority's myspace page."
EPAPressure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 01:53 PM #47
jsgnado1996
jsg_nado
 
jsgnado1996's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: San Diego, CA
jsgnado1996 plays in the APPA D5 division
jsgnado1996 has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
I disagree completely. Women should most definently remain excluded from the draft. I'm also not entirely sure that women should be allowed in combat ropes either, because, let's face it, biologically, most women are not suited for the rigors of combat. Not being sexist here, just pointing out something.
__________________
GOGO13 #11
Proudly sponsored by Almost Famous Paintball, gogged paintball, KM, Anthrax, and Camp Pendleton Paintball
#AFPLRULES
jsgnado1996 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 02:13 PM #48
Treghc
 
 
Treghc's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Seattle
Treghc is a Supporting Member
Treghc is a founding member
 has been a member for 10 years
Treghc is a Forum Captain
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsgnado1996 View Post
I disagree completely. Women should most definently remain excluded from the draft. I'm also not entirely sure that women should be allowed in combat ropes either, because, let's face it, biologically, most women are not suited for the rigors of combat. Not being sexist here, just pointing out something.
Draft aside, if a woman passes the same requirements needed for a man to pass in order to join, then why should she be denied?
__________________
“But men, they say a lot of foolish things. In the end, the only words I can find to believe in are mine." - Joe

Tarsier Slave


We are Sapien
Treghc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 02:26 PM #49
ElJefe13
 
 
ElJefe13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Utah
ElJefe13 has achieved Level 1 in PbNation Pursuit
ElJefe13 has achieved Level 2 in PbNation Pursuit
ElJefe13 supports Empire
Quote:
Originally Posted by jsgnado1996 View Post
I disagree completely. Women should most definently remain excluded from the draft. I'm also not entirely sure that women should be allowed in combat ropes either, because, let's face it, biologically, most women are not suited for the rigors of combat. Not being sexist here, just pointing out something.
While I agree that women should not be in the draft, I'm not sure if I agree with you there. The main difference biologically (at least that's relevant to this conversation) is body fat and upper body strength. The body fat difference is negligible, and can be defeated through training. The other problem, upper body strength, was a huge factor before the invention of guns, even before the advent of breech loading rifles. But in the modern battlefield, this difference is not a factor, or not much. Women can do the same things a man can do to a point; however, I do not believe women should be drafted. Let them volunteer for combat, except in SOCOM or other special forces, but not be drafted.
__________________
Women are like Wookies; you always let them win.
ElJefe13 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-14-2013, 02:34 PM #50
chodeyg
sprezzatura
 
chodeyg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: via lactea
You are forgetting that women have different sanitation requirements, and face different treatment in a POW situation.
__________________
Resurrect dead on planet Jupiter
chodeyg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 02-15-2013, 05:34 PM #51
Subterfuge
Arctic Wolf
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Alaska
 has been a member for 10 years
Not all of the military involves combat or even going overseas. I think about 10% actually involves combat. Rape; yes that does happen. But it would be nice to root out the corrupt **** bags from the platoons. If one tends to have bad moral character, he also tends to not have your back in combat. In fact; in my experience, these people with loose morals on my team were more of a danger to me than the insurgents.

Perhaps the existence of women in a combat team could force the team to be more professional?
Subterfuge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 05:11 PM #52
FuzzyFish
 
 
FuzzyFish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Carlsbad, California
 has been a member for 10 years
I disagree with those of you who believe women cannot handle combat arms roles. How about this one right here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko
Seems to me women are just as well suited for combat as men.
__________________
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W Bush Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
FuzzyFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 06:16 PM #53
rT159
BlackOps
 
rT159's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Shadows of Darkness
 has been a member for 10 years
Quote:
Originally Posted by FuzzyFish View Post
I disagree with those of you who believe women cannot handle combat arms roles. How about this one right here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lyudmila_Pavlichenko
Seems to me women are just as well suited for combat as men.
Says the guy who has never served in combat.
rT159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 06:57 PM #54
FuzzyFish
 
 
FuzzyFish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Carlsbad, California
 has been a member for 10 years
Nice try, I just got out of the military last January. Went on two deployments, you have yourself a nice day.
__________________
Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we." —George W Bush Washington, D.C., Aug. 5, 2004
FuzzyFish is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 07:14 PM #55
rT159
BlackOps
 
rT159's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Shadows of Darkness
 has been a member for 10 years
Oh? You went on two deployments? As a cook? You know how I know you weren't Infantry? You said women could hack it. Deploying doesn't mean **** if you stay on the fob.
rT159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 10:11 PM #56
Seahawk6060
 
 
Seahawk6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheSilentAssassin View Post
I believe men are different then women, and homogenization of gender for sake of equality is silly...But I am open to being proven wrong. I do not hold this opinion strongly.
SilentAssasin touched on it, but this needs to be explored further. Women are different from men and not just in terms of physical attributes. Why are we so, seemingly, afraid to talk about inherent "character" differences? We've gotten to be so PC about everything that we sacrifice our good sense (after all it can't be scientifically measured) on the altar of equality. Equality is now the all-conquering principle of social organization. Pop culture ideology has now trumped what we all know, at least at some primitive level, to be the unvarnished truth.

There's a reason women talk almost three times as much as men.

There's a reason why women shy away from paintball.

There's even a reason why girls don't participate in this forum.

There's a reason why girls don't typically wrestle with each other like young boys.

There's a reason girls like to play with dolls and boys don't.

Yet, somehow we convince ourselves that there isn't any reason why they can't fight on the battlefield nose-to-nose with the enemy. It always strikes me as odd when women can stand up and claim how they're more "empowered" than men, yet decry the first man that points out differences between the sexes that aren't an advantage to women. Recently 20 women were sworn into the Senate. Susan Collins (R., Maine) said that "with all due deference to our male colleagues . . . women's styles tend to be more collaborative." Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) said women in politics are "less confrontational." Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) said they are more supportive of each other. Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska) suggested women have less "ego." Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) said they're effective because "we're less on testosterone."

In other words, men are only good for procreation and drinking beer - I don't deny these truths, but believe there may be a few more things that we're uniquely good at.

In this age of metrosexuality, masculinity is dying a slow death. There's a few of us out there that remember, in our youth, the glorious feeling of being tackled, being bloodied by the pavement and standing right back up and throwing the football again. I remember actually enjoying the pain, because somehow it made me feel more alive, heightened by the awareness that my friends around me felt the same exact thing. My friends and I loved the heat, sweat, pain, innocent cruelty, and most of all the camaraderie, a shared bonding that somehow managed to rise above the gratuitous violence we inflicted on one another. We compared bumps, scrapes, and cuts, and then laughed about them. I'm convinced there are people on this board that know what I'm talking about, just as I'm certain that some have no clue. The point is that I don't believe that in 99.9% of the cases, women have ever felt this and for that reason I wouldn't want to serve with women, in a true combat role, 99.9% of the time. Leave the up-close killing to men. We seem to have evolved the capacity for it, just as women have developed other capacities that fit their unique natures.
Seahawk6060 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 10:21 PM #57
Iamamartianchurch
 
 
Iamamartianchurch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seahawk6060 View Post
SilentAssasin touched on it, but this needs to be explored further. Women are different from men and not just in terms of physical attributes. Why are we so, seemingly, afraid to talk about inherent "character" differences? We've gotten to be so PC about everything that we sacrifice our good sense (after all it can't be scientifically measured) on the altar of equality. Equality is now the all-conquering principle of social organization. Pop culture ideology has now trumped what we all know, at least at some primitive level, to be the unvarnished truth.

There's a reason women talk almost three times as much as men.

There's a reason why women shy away from paintball.

There's even a reason why girls don't participate in this forum.

There's a reason why girls don't typically wrestle with each other like young boys.

There's a reason girls like to play with dolls and boys don't.

Yet, somehow we convince ourselves that there isn't any reason why they can't fight on the battlefield nose-to-nose with the enemy. It always strikes me as odd when women can stand up and claim how they're more "empowered" than men, yet decry the first man that points out differences between the sexes that aren't an advantage to women. Recently 20 women were sworn into the Senate. Susan Collins (R., Maine) said that "with all due deference to our male colleagues . . . women's styles tend to be more collaborative." Claire McCaskill (D., Mo.) said women in politics are "less confrontational." Amy Klobuchar (D., Minn.) said they are more supportive of each other. Lisa Murkowski (R., Alaska) suggested women have less "ego." Dianne Feinstein (D., Calif.) said they're effective because "we're less on testosterone."

In other words, men are only good for procreation and drinking beer - I don't deny these truths, but believe there may be a few more things that we're uniquely good at.

In this age of metrosexuality, masculinity is dying a slow death. There's a few of us out there that remember, in our youth, the glorious feeling of being tackled, being bloodied by the pavement and standing right back up and throwing the football again. I remember actually enjoying the pain, because somehow it made me feel more alive, heightened by the awareness that my friends around me felt the same exact thing. My friends and I loved the heat, sweat, pain, innocent cruelty, and most of all the camaraderie, a shared bonding that somehow managed to rise above the gratuitous violence we inflicted on one another. We compared bumps, scrapes, and cuts, and then laughed about them. I'm convinced there are people on this board that know what I'm talking about, just as I'm certain that some have no clue. The point is that I don't believe that in 99.9% of the cases, women have ever felt this and for that reason I wouldn't want to serve with women, in a true combat role, 99.9% of the time. Leave the up-close killing to men. We seem to have evolved the capacity for it, just as women have developed other capacities that fit their unique natures.
Balance is more important than "equality"

Chivalry demands that I would rather die than have a woman take my place in combat.

I believe I've already made these two points in this thread.
Iamamartianchurch is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 11:05 PM #58
Volucris
asmuchtextastheywillallow
 
Volucris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Nashville
We've had plenty of women already in combat positions for quite some time. You just didn't read about it on CNN. Women trend towards feminine stereotypes because that's how society expects them to be.

But alas, seahawk is an old timer and unless you're scraping your knuckles against concrete and playin' football with yer' mates, yer' jus' a god damn ***** *** ***** to him.
Volucris is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-08-2013, 11:38 PM #59
rT159
BlackOps
 
rT159's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Shadows of Darkness
 has been a member for 10 years
They aren't in combat, they got caught in it. That is two different things. One goes out looking to kill bad guys, the other gets caught by the bad guys. To say women are in direct combat is asinine. The want to be treated like men, hop in the octagon during a UFC match and fight a man at the same weight. You don't get to pick and choose when you want to be equal.
rT159 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-09-2013, 11:00 AM #60
Seahawk6060
 
 
Seahawk6060's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Volucris View Post
Women trend towards feminine stereotypes because that's how society expects them to be.
Women trend towards feminine stereotypes not solely because that's how society expects them to be, but because that's the way they are. It's not that all stereotypes are true, rather that some of them actually are. You're simply letting your ideology cloud the truth. It's more necessary for you to believe in this faux equality notion than it is for you to accept a fact recognized by science and thousands of years of human history.

Without trying to be too harsh, I think you're being dishonest. And it's one thing to try to convince me that there are no cognitive-based differences between men and women, but it's another to lie to yourself. The sad part is I think you actually believe it. You drank the Kool-Aid and there's no going back. Your ideology is your religion, based in faith, not in fact. Leftism isn't based on science any more than some of the extreme principles of the religious right.

I like your reference to “old timer” and “scraping your knuckles.” I guess it offers you the false sense of assurance of being right. Old = bad, new = good, truth be damned.

Here's a study, by a woman...
http://www2.nau.edu/~bio372-c/class/...or/sexdif1.htm
Seahawk6060 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
Forum Jump