603
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 20:
Line 20: + + +
Debate:Women in the Military? (view source)
Revision as of 03:33, April 4, 2007
, 03:33, April 4, 2007→Yes
I'm personally not for seeing women in combat situations, not because I don't think they can do it, but because there's quite a bit of anecdotal evidence that male service members are reluctant to both pull the trigger on a woman or leave a wounded woman behind. I would not want a mission compromised because the men felt more obligated to save a woman than to complete the mission.
I'm personally not for seeing women in combat situations, not because I don't think they can do it, but because there's quite a bit of anecdotal evidence that male service members are reluctant to both pull the trigger on a woman or leave a wounded woman behind. I would not want a mission compromised because the men felt more obligated to save a woman than to complete the mission.
I feel I've babbled enough for now. [[User:Navy Nuke|Navy Nuke]] 17:51, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
I feel I've babbled enough for now. [[User:Navy Nuke|Navy Nuke]] 17:51, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
'''Yes''': One of the objections is that women don't have the upper body strength to lug an overloaded pack into combat. Well, this is the 21st Century, and no one should be lugging the kinds of packs they've made them lug around since World War One. Someone's got to lay that misguided tradition to rest. We've got Stryker brigades and uparmored humvees, you live in your vehicle and get out now and then to lay some hurt on the enemy. And you get women ready for that part by making the same physical test requirements for both genders. Same kind of pushups, same time on the 2.5 miles. Any woman who can't do what a man does, physically, washes out. [[User:Teresita|Teresita]] 23:33, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
== I don't care, but... ==
== I don't care, but... ==
Sorry to be quoting from a suspect source, but this part of their article is actually referencing a Department of Defense report (and I'm too lazy to go straight to the source):
Sorry to be quoting from a suspect source, but this part of their article is actually referencing a Department of Defense report (and I'm too lazy to go straight to the source):