Women in combat?

[Dustin D]

Something else to consider is that while women have been in combat, they have not been in the INFANTRY Line of Combat.

There's a BIG difference between being in a Combat Zone *rollseyes* and BEING IN COMBAT!

If these Army Soldiers in the video below were in REAL COMBAT, They'd all be DEAD!

[Brian Cockfield]

This is much more complex than many people understand. This decision wasn't well thought out and isn't going to work out anything like the powers that be envision. I have been there and speak from experience.

[Tom. P.]

This is much more complex than many people understand. This decision wasn't well thought out and isn't going to work out anything like the powers that be envision. I have been there and speak from experience.

Agree with that and respect Your opinion.Just like many other issues the gubment takes up.

[Gerry Clinchy]

Chances are that many young women can meet higher fitness standards than can old men.

I still think a healthy 60 yr old man will generally be stronger than a healthy 60 yr old woman And under the new policy you could end up with a unit made mostly of older women, just as easily as a unit made up of mostly older men; or equal #s of older men and older women. Seems like it would be a good idea to keep fitness levels balanced, regardless of gender.

Israel is most cited as the country using women in combat. This from Ameircan Thinker:

Many people use Israel, a modern, democratic state, as a positive point of comparison when they want to talk about guns, the universal draft, and women in service. Israel (which has strict gun laws, by the way, and does not ignore homosexuality in the ranks) does not have women in the combat infantry. Even today, when missile technology to some extent erases the line between the "battle front" and the "home front," women serve in units at the front, as do American women -- my stepdaughter is a psychologist in the U.S. Army, and during her two tours in Iraq, she visited "forward operating bases" (FOBs); believe me, she was at the front -- but they are not combat infantry.

The IDF's own website mentions "combat options" for women, but if you read carefully, women are assigned to "command posts over advanced operational and attack systems, management and calculation of artillery fire, operation of communication devices, and conducting meteorologist case studies to improve artillery fire accuracy." Women are also dog handlers and intelligence officers, and they constitute the bulk of instructors in tanks, artillery, anti-aircraft, combat engineering, and field intelligence. There is no interest in putting Israeli women in direct combat with presumed Arab adversaries.


It is a deliberate decision made long ago. During the 1948/49 War of Independence, Israeli women were in combat because combat was everywhere in the country. Israeli women were captured and killed by Syrian forces. The result, said an IDF officer who was briefing an American military delegation in which I participated, "was that we didn't want that to happen to any Israeli woman ever again. We made a decision about what kind of country we are."


If our next adversary is part of the global jihad, don't look to the Geneva Convention for protection of female soldiers. In case the point isn't sharp enough, read Lauren Wolf at CNN.

But it isn't only about the potential for capture; it is about the society the army defends. Read Robert Kaplan's Surrender or Starve to understand what happened to Eritrean society when everyone was a soldier and the line between the military and civil society, between men and women, was erased. Eritrea is an extreme example, but it is a mistake to think that erasing the distinction between protector and protected, society and its army, its men and its women wouldn't have repercussions for American society as well as for the American military.


In a weekend interview, President Obama said that if he had a son, he would think "long and hard" about letting him play football. Fair enough, given what we know. The President has two daughters.

[Jason Glavich]

It's true.

They've been in combat for years. Now they can get payment and credit for it, and be promoted to positions that require previous combat experience.

'Bout time.

They have never been denied credit or payment. In the warzone gets the same pay no matter who you are, in the wire or out. Being in theatre and front lines are 2 different things.

[Jason Glavich]

I have no personal experience, so this may just be a blah blah blah moment, but...

Combat has changed, so say all; and there are now "combat positions" for which many young healthy women are highly qualified, and perhaps would be sought after. On the flip side, there are, so say all, many non-combat positions which women have been serving in well that, nonetheless, put soldiers in harm's way and require combat training and response.

so--really--what does this directive do but make women available to earn the pay grades and raises and promotions their male counterparts have available to them?

Analogy: I don't think anyone's talking about throwing gymnasts in with the Greco-Roman heavyweights... But if there are a few women that can run a marathon as well as or better than a typical strong male marathoner, and have a longer career out of it that then allows those few women to train and manage up and coming marathoners and marathon events with the experience of having run with the best of both sexes... What's the big deal? Isn't having more good people with real experience a good thing?

Provided the women are capable of the jobs--so what?

Males and females span all ranks. 2nd if we all want to be equal then the physical requirements should be the same but they are not, less push ups, less pulls ups, longer time to run the same distance, etc. The Military is not equal on physical requirements.

[duk4me]

I still think a healthy 60 yr old man will generally be stronger than a healthy 60 yr old woman And under the new policy you could end up with a unit made mostly of older women, just as easily as a unit made up of mostly older men; or equal #s of older men and older women. Seems like it would be a good idea to keep fitness levels balanced, regardless of gender.

Israel is most cited as the country using women in combat. This from Ameircan Thinker:

Gerry I must disagree. If this were true why in living rooms across the US when a women cuts her eyes at her husband he lowers his head and says yes dear?

[huntinman]

Gerry I must disagree. If this were true why in living rooms across the US when a women cuts her eyes at her husband he lowers his head and says yes dear?

rolling pins?

[charly_t]

rolling pins?

Solid wooden rolling pins ! vbg

But, Aunt Edna always said if a women hit a man first ( read husband ) she had put herself on his level. Therefore if she got hit back it was "fair". Paraphrased version ..........

We are now talking about intruders in a woman's home in this part of my post. 'Give intruders both barrels' or the best you have. If you got more than one intruder you need more fire power. That's why we want those
"guns" with a larger capacity for shells. I like a hand gun for some things but nothing beats a shotgun for stopping power up close. I'm partial to number 4 shot for armadillos. For snakes I use smaller shot most of the time. Haven't shot a human, ever, so I'm not sure what works best on them. More shot in the shell is sometimes better than larger shot. However it would seem like up close any size shot would do. Just my way of looking at it.

[huntinman]

Solid wooden rolling pins ! vbg

But, Aunt Edna always said if a women hit a man first ( read husband ) she had put herself on his level. Therefore if she got hit back it was "fair". Paraphrased version ..........

We are now talking about intruders in a woman's home in this part of my post. 'Give intruders both barrels' or the best you have. If you got more than one intruder you need more fire power. That's why we want those
"guns" with a larger capacity for shells. I like a hand gun for some things but nothing beats a shotgun for stopping power up close. I'm partial to number 4 shot for armadillos. For snakes I use smaller shot most of the time. Haven't shot a human, ever, so I'm not sure what works best on them. More shot in the shell is sometimes better than larger shot. However it would seem like up close any size shot would do. Just my way of looking at it.

You are my kind of woman Charly!