RacerJim
Posts: 1583
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LafayetteLady
I'm certainly no expert on this, but it seems to me that throughout history, there have been more than just a couple "diminutive" men who were drafted, and who were in the infantry throughout history. So I can honestly say I'm a bit confused that we can send a 5'2", 130 pound male into combat, but not a 5'7", 160 pound female.
As I think it was kali who said, if they can meet the requirements, they should be able to go.
I do admit that, personally, I think women should be afforded the choice. No, there is no sense to my line of thinking, but I think it all the same.
As for whether they are physically capable, again, there are many women that are. Women enter the police and fire departments, and they also become EMTs' and paramedics where, yes, lifting is a requirement. The military is simply, as usual, a bit behind the times. Sadly, it would seem that is so based on the views of the people, many of whom have voiced opinions similarly behind the times.
I can honestly say I'm not at all confused that we can send a 5' 2", 130 pound male into combat but not a 5' 7", 160 pound female -- the smaller male's inherantly superior physicality will allow him to carry more and carry it faster and further than the larger female, and the male's inherantly more situational demanding physical response
Back in 1976 the United States Military Academy (West Point) found out that women could not meet the same physical requirements as men, therefore "social justice" politicians forced the Pentagon to force West Point to lower the physical requirements for woman so they could attend. Anyone who thinks it's only about physical requirements is too ignorant to have a valid opinion, to wit: "Certain things still scare me. The biggest is war. What will happen if I go to war? I'll probably be killed. The first summer we learned a code of conduct in case we're captured, and they showed us motivational films—I came out of Patton saying, if that's what they want me to be like, forget it. I thought he was totally insane. That's something that scares me about West Point. I wouldn't do it over." -- Kathy Ann Wildey, West Point Class of 1980 And what did Patton want West Pointers to be like that she considered so insane and scary about West Point that she wouldn't do it over -- Patton wanted West Pointers to believe that their purpose in war was not to die for their country but, rather, to make the other poor bastard die for their country. Insanity? Scary? What's truely insanity and scary is that this woman became and served as an Officer in the US Army.
Because the current Commander In Chief of our military not only cancelled military assistance to our facility in Benghazi but also fired a General and an Admiral for having initiated military assistance per long-standing military protocol, I do admit that, personally, I think every woman (man and GLBT also for that matter) who voted for the current Commander In Chief should volunteer/be required to serve in combat before their chosen Commander In Chief leaves office so when they are facing imminent death they can take their final breath begging their chosen Commander In Chief to save them. Yes, there is sense to my line of thinking and I think it applies to every issue -- put your money (life) where your mouth is (vote was).
I think it would behoove those who have never and will never serve in the military to keep their opinons about the military to themselves, lest those who have served use facts to prove the former's opinions just and only that...opinions. The former are simply, as usual, ignoramouses denegrating that which they know nothing about because they can't refute the facts.
Army Brat
Vietnam Veteran
|
RE: Women in combat - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread