We live in interesting times...

[DumbAss Tanker]

As far as women in combat go, I know I would not have been able to meet the physical requirements when I was 18-20 years old, not that I had any interest in military service. There are a few women who probably could-women are bigger than they used to be. I'm 5'10", which I always thought was tall for a woman. Then I moved to Detroit.

I know a lot of the issues in physical abilities has to do with upper body strength, though, and even a women who is 6 feet + tall might not have the same level of strength that a man of the same height would have. Then again, she might-watch Venus Williams when she's having a good match. She serves like a man.


As far as vulnerability to rape is concerned: if you are talking rape by the enemy in combat or as a pow, men are as vulnerable to rape as women are. As far as rape by their male peers, I have a major problem with blaming that on the nearness of females, and not on the violent impulses of men who should be in control of their impulses. It cuts very close to the way that Islamists view women-put them in burkas so men won't be tempted by them.

Living in the world of Shoulda instead of actual Reality has gotten countless people killed. Military combat operations, the outcome of which actually matter to a Nation for more macro reasons than the mere opportunity for the people involved to increase their self-esteem, self-actualize, earn benefits, and all the other societal and individual freight that weighs ours down now, is not the most suitable place to experience an epiphany about the difference.

[Unreconstructed Reb]

Living in the world of Shoulda instead of actual Reality has gotten countless people killed. Military combat operations, the outcome of which actually matter to a Nation for more macro reasons than the mere opportunity for the people involved to increase their self-esteem, self-actualize, earn benefits, and all the other societal and individual freight that weighs ours down now, is not the most suitable place to experience an epiphany about the difference.

Unfortunately, those making these decisions aren't at risk, in other words, no job is too big or too dangerous for the man who doesn't have to do it.

[Starbuck]

As far as women in combat go, I know I would not have been able to meet the physical requirements when I was 18-20 years old, not that I had any interest in military service. There are a few women who probably could-women are bigger than they used to be. I'm 5'10", which I always thought was tall for a woman. Then I moved to Detroit.

I know a lot of the issues in physical abilities has to do with upper body strength, though, and even a women who is 6 feet + tall might not have the same level of strength that a man of the same height would have. Then again, she might-watch Venus Williams when she's having a good match. She serves like a man............

Used to be, there were no particular qualifications for entering into combat. When I was sent to Viet Nam, the unit was sent. Everyone. We weren't particularly well trained - well, in fact, we weren't trained at all, except in operation of the boat (Navy).

And I bet there are an awful lot of one armed, and one legged women who are a little put out that NOW they announce "women will be permitted in combat". I know Jessica Lynch must have been real happy to hear it.

[marv]

Jessica Lynch was a truck driver whose convoy got caught up in an ambush. Proximate to combat has its risks to be sure, but combat, as in the front line, is much more. It's the difference between "in", and "near".

[noonwitch]

Used to be, there were no particular qualifications for entering into combat. When I was sent to Viet Nam, the unit was sent. Everyone. We weren't particularly well trained - well, in fact, we weren't trained at all, except in operation of the boat (Navy).

And I bet there are an awful lot of one armed, and one legged women who are a little put out that NOW they announce "women will be permitted in combat". I know Jessica Lynch must have been real happy to hear it.

I know that the qualifications didn't used to be as severe. My dad served in the Army in the late 50s-right after the Korean conflict was technically over. He did border patrol and nation building in S. Korea. He loved his service time and truly believed that the S. Korean people were worth the time and money the US spent there. But he couldn't really perform the duties he needed to, so the unit made him their cook. He couldn't climb telephone poles to string wires, which is what a lot of his unit's job was, when they weren't taking out NK snipers who hadn't gotten the message yet that there was a cease fire.

My dad had polio as a kid. He never walked the right way again, although he never realized he had had polio until he had complications as a senior. The Army doctors who did his physical at the time he enlisted should have picked up on it. He's not bitter or anything, because he is very proud of his service and believes that it is why he ended his budding career as a juvenile delinquent and became a "happy, productive member of society" (to quote one of my favorite juvie judges).

[Starbuck]

Jessica Lynch was a truck driver whose convoy got caught up in an ambush. Proximate to combat has its risks to be sure, but combat, as in the front line, is much more. It's the difference between "in", and "near".

All true. I'm just betting that her husband didn't come in busting the door down saying, "Jessie! Guess what?!"

No one made a distinction about being in or near, in my experience. Combat goes where it wants to. And as we all know, there is no longer a front line.

I know what they're saying, though. Women are now allowed into the units who get up before daylight, load up into the woppy choppers, and go get 'em.