Another step forward for the U.S. military.

Subscribe
1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
Page 4 of 8
Go to
Quote: Huh??? I didn't realize men bearing children was an option for them. That has to be the most convoluted argument ever.

BTW, anyone who wants to and can serve on the front lines has my blessing.
So, are you thinking about signing up then?, show those b@stards how it's done?


All this is gonna do is get some swinging d!(k killed when he goes back to try to save some pc,liberal,idiot chick cause they broke a nail, or saw a snake.


I think I need to puke.
Quote: If someone can meet the set standards - then let them work.
Start changing the standards - FOR ANYONE - and there is a problem.
That's just it, there will be standards for some, and "special" standards for the others. Remember Uniteds hiring practices from a few years back?

Perfect example for ya.
Quote: That's just it, there will be standards for some, and "special" standards for the others. Remember Uniteds hiring practices from a few years back?

Perfect example for ya.
And here is an example of the Navy lowering the standards to force the PC issue...


Kara Hultgreen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Quote: I'm probably getting way a head on this but I wonder how the Selective Service requirement will play into this equally?
A loaded bergen gets heavy after a while.
Seems simple enough. Females must register.
I've been thinking the same thing lately but haven't heard of any change in the works; but then I just found out that Te'os GF wasn't real either!

Google-fu research:

Selective Service System: Fast Facts
Quote:
DoD noted that America's prior drafts were used to supply adequate numbers of Army ground combat troops. Because women are excluded by policy from front line combat positions, excluding them from the draft process remains justifiable in DoD's view. Although no conclusions were reached, DoD recognized that policies regarding women need to be reviewed periodically because the role of women in the military continues to expand.
Guess that will change then
Quote: And here is an example of the Navy lowering the standards to force the PC issue...


Kara Hultgreen - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Whelp, there ya go.


I got nothin else!!
Quote: Seems simple enough. Females must register.
I've been thinking the same thing lately but haven't heard of any change in the works; but then I just found out that Te'os GF wasn't real either!

Google-fu research:

Selective Service System: Fast Facts

Guess that will change then
As a father of four girls this does not make me happy.
Wow. People are so fearful of moving forward. Sure, a few people/entities in the past have lowered standards. Is that the way it is overall today with airlines and industry? You guys have got to get past your fear of other people having a "piece of the pie".
Quote: Yep. Right there is the fly in the ointment. Once in, then they can work to change the definition of "reasonable" to a fair thee well!

Just ask any competent lawyer.
Reasonable accommodation would be being supplied tampons, or having a women's shower in addition to a men's, etc...Get past your fear.
Quote: So, are you thinking about signing up then?, show those b@stards how it's done?


All this is gonna do is get some swinging d!(k killed when he goes back to try to save some pc,liberal,idiot chick cause they broke a nail, or saw a snake.


I think I need to puke.
Go right ahead. I SHOULD ignore you, since with children and trolls negative attention is better than no attention. I also love how you came on these threads with your chest puffed out and your ruler ready and willing to have a weewee-measuring contest, but here goes. First off, you seem like a misogynist. For all the times I'm called a man-hater and a raging feminist---I'll be the first to say it. It looks like the boys on APC have elevated you to cult status and jump on your pathetic "we now know who the alpha males are on here" bandwagon. Big friggin' deal. You know what, you keyboard "warriors" can't hold a candle to those men who go against the grain and call you out on your ridiculous rants.

I also think you have a reading comprehension problem. I NEVER say or intimate most of the things you accuse me of. I said if anyone wants to sign up for the front lines, God bless 'em. Not me....I'm not cut out for it. Then again, I'm sure there are plenty of males who aren't either. AND you're totally off the mark with your stupid "liberal chicks" comment as they don't believe in war and would never sign up for anything, much less the front lines.

So, go ahead and continue your silly little game and try to bait me. I'm not taking it anymore. You and your pals have your fun. I will only respond to level-headed, intelligent and mature comments. Sadly, there's not much of that here lately.

Tata darling.
Re: Another step forward for the U. S.
Quote: If you think the anti-gun crowd doesn't secretly delight in the Sandy Creek tragedy for the PC leverage it gives them, you only have 1/2 a brain.
Wow. This is really beyond the pale. No one secretly delights in a tragedy like Sandy Hook unless they're a psychopath. But trying to conflate political correctness with reasonable gun control measures and make that the issue sure is twisted leap of delusion.

The issue here is an equal playing field for military promotion. One needs a command and a warfare specialty (better still-the command of a warfare unit in theater) to get
to the flag ranks.

This isn't new. US military women have been getting killed and maimed in hot zones
for years. Regulations are just now catching up with reality.

.
1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8 
Page 4 of 8
Go to