Bound to happen sooner or later.
Military leaders lift ban on women in combat roles | Fox News

Fred

 

No negative feedback must mean everyone is on board with this idea ?

 

I agree in general. There are two different issue which got muddled together in the past...

1) Americans didn't want to see their daughters coming home in body bags. This is what the original combat exclusion was based on...keeping women from exposure to the worst (but not necessary all) enemy action. Most folks are over this now, and recently the DoD has certainly exposed troops of any gender in all manner of support roles to risk of insurgent action.

2) Physical performance. Other than physical strength and stamina, there's no reason that women can't do the vast majority of military jobs.

The submarine exclusion was based on privacy issues.

Artillery fell under the combat exclusion, but they are no different than convoy drivers...if they're engaging the enemy with small arms, things are not going according to plan.

Where I have serious reservations about is front-line infantry and special forces...they go out and intentionally engage the enemy, often overcoming physical distances and obstacles to get there on foot, all while carry 60-80 pounds of gear and weapons. The typical woman is going to slow that operation down, even very athletic women. There are plenty of women with speed and stamina, but when you have to carry the weight at the same time...women just don't hold up as well.

All that said I'm even OK with allowing the few women who could do it, but I'm very concerned Washington will start re-defining the current standards we have now to meet "quotas". Not enough female infantry? Lower the pull-up requirements...maybe our soldiers don't really need to climb walls with packs...we can just call in a helo to lift them over

And that's just the infantry, once you get into special forces, all those issues are amplified.

Like I said, I'm all for it as long as there's no affirmative action on performance standards for those branches that rely on strength and stamina for their primary role.

Keep in mind that regular military forces currently have different performance standards for men and women on physical fitness tests. Can we now eliminate that double standard? Remember, outstanding performance on those tests improves promotion opportunity for lower rank members...

 

If someone can meet the set standards - then let them work.
Start changing the standards - FOR ANYONE - and there is a problem.

 

Canada has had women in all combat roles for several years. Capt Nicola Goddard was killed while serving as an FOO with the first Royal Canadian Horse Artillery in Kandahar. If they are quailified they can serve anywhere.

 

Canadian special forces have no women operators. Not sure if they are not allowed or if it's due to the fact that Canadians have retained their standards with no dilution to accommodate gender.

I'm not sure if the politicians in the US would be able to resist the temptation to meddle.

But even the new US policy, which looks good on it's facade, has a safety valve in the details. USSOCOM, amongst other, will have final authority as to whether we can actually integrate women...so we have not actually been ordered to do so come hell or high water.

 

It is very fashionable now, the reality won't change much and the percentage of women who can tote 80lbs of gear in tough terrain is always going to be low.

Lots of noise and smoke over a tiny increment.

But if they are both strong and smart, they will stay out of the infantry anyway.

 

Ahhh yes...if we could only be as good as the Canadian army.

Has nothing to do with physical qualification for the job. Think about a forced entry scenario where Brown and Root are not in the second wave and we have to actually gain and maintain access to the battlespace. Not the best place on earth for a woman.

 

I believe this to be more principle than anything else. We opened up our IOC course at Quantico a while back and have had, what, two WM's apply and both fail or drop out. Not exactly a stellar record. Once reality of this type of stuff sets in, the volunteers seem to find other avenues of employment. But I concur with USMCFLYR. All fitness standards should be the same from this point forward. No adjusting of the bell curve for the "weaker" sex. Flexed arm hangs should be a thing of the past. And when it comes to taking the Combat Fitness Test, the same guy who weighs 250+ lbs should be used for all takers. No selective choices.

 

Totally agree.

85% of women in the Army are too small for men's extra small body armor.

Remember this was started because women claimed they did not have the professional opportunities as men. Well, tough. When I was in ROTC, 20/50 vision kept me from having the same opportunities but I realized it wasn't about me...it was the most qualified person for the job and at the time, that was a discriminator.

Short story. I was doing a recon of some mortar positions in Muenster (sp) Germany for an upcoming training event and the German major was making fun of the US army because we weren't allowing women in the infantry (circa 2000 when Cit was on the middle burner). So we spend three days cruising around and I see all these infantry units foot marching in the process. So finally I say, "I haven't seen a single female in any of these formations" the guy tells me essentially..."no crap, these are light infantry, women can't do that, they are infantry armored personnel carrier drivers."

I read pilots talk about the "race to the bottom" but at least flying with a crappy pilot is optional...going to war with a crappy Army ain't sometimes.