The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Interesting Poll: Should women join the infantry (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17~18 [Next]
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3465 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 21:36, mastermindreader wrote:
In combat, the skills of a long range sniper, for example, are significantly different than those of a tank driver.

Ruth Westheimer.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
My daughter served proudly in the Navy, you know. As did my son-in-law and I.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 21:52, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 21:36, mastermindreader wrote:
In combat, the skills of a long range sniper, for example, are significantly different than those of a tank driver.

Ruth Westheimer.

Vunderful!
:eek:
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Bob, where did they serve? When we first got the women on board we just staredbat em cuz we were scared to talk to them. I am kind of like the Susan B. Anthony of women in the navy....a guiding light of goodness regardless of what theofficial reports said.

Other that spec war I opened the door for women to do all jobs. Why with the navy and air force any woman would join the army is beyond me.
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Santa-

Both my daughter and son-in-law were flight mechanics and served at various Naval Air Stations including two years at Whidbey Island NAS here in Washington. My son-in-law also served in the Persian Gulf during the Iraq War and after twenty years service now works in a civilian capacity at Andrews Air Force Base. My daughter served for eight years and is now a school teacher in Maryland where they live with my two granddaughters.
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Wonderful! Maryland is the only state I want to visit that I have not been to solely for crabcakes.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
I guess I am just sexist. I have to bow out of this. It is becoming to unsettleing for me to continue reading what I consider to be nonsense (my opinion) to the arguements put forth here and me tring to defend my position because of my experiences. I guess I am to biased in my views. I have pictures I am tempted to post but it would be beaking a trust. I believe they would change some opinions here.

I am sure I will be critized for this. Do you really believe this is a woman's job? These are just some pics of the war. These are not my pictures but rather pictures that can be found on the internet and probably considered PG. Just a quick peek to see what war produces. The reason for posting this link is to pose the question as to whether you believe this is a place for women. I know for sure it is not a great place for men. My favorite pic is # 12.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/pi......ml/1.stm

I realize this is not going to change anyones view but it makes me feel better posting them just to give you an idea where I am coming from.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-07-20 00:08, MagicSanta wrote:
Wonderful! Maryland is the only state I want to visit that I have not been to solely for crabcakes.


Maryland is the only state that had regiments serving on both sides at Gettysburg, too. One of the monuments on or near Culp's Hill has a somewhat-hidden dig at the Maryland troops that went confederate, as the monument (to one of the infantry regiments that fought for the Union), after listing games, troop strengths, etc., finishes "To Maryland's loyal sons."
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Wasn't there a situation where one Maryland side caught the other and the officer in charge showed no mercy on them?

Acesover I don't get why some want women in assault units myself.
stoneunhinged
View Profile
Inner circle
3079 Posts

Profile of stoneunhinged
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 19:59, critter wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 19:05, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Let me put this REALLY simply. And I believe I can safely speak for Bob here as well as myself, but I apologize in advance if I misstate his position (and I'm sure he'll correct me). But our position appears to be the same, and unless I'm badly misreading Bob's post, his seems to coincide with mine.

1. For the types of positions we're talking about, there should be a single standard, and it should be reasonably related to the job, i.e. not arbitrary and/or capricious.

2. Nobody who meets the standard should be excluded from the job on the basis of gender.

3. Nobody who fails to meet the standard should be included to the job on the basis of gender.

The end.


+1


+2
Woland
View Profile
Special user
680 Posts

Profile of Woland
Yes, Lobo, there is a monument in Baltimore, across from the Art Museum near the Johns Hopkins University canvas, memorializing the last time in this life that two commanders met, Lee and Jackson on the eve of Chancellorsville. And a monument to the "Confederate Women" a few blocks north. The uniform that General Lee wore at Appomattox Courthouse was made by ladies in Baltimore, too.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1192 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
I think the south lost the war at Chancellorsville. Not that they were winning before, but they had chances, and Jackson was the best field general on either side. 6 weeks letter, a lot of mistakes were made at Gettysburg. Who knows what might have happened?
"Torture doesn't work" lol
Guess they forgot to tell Bill Buckley.

"...as we reason and love, we are able to hope. And hope enables us to resist those things that would enslave us."
rowdymagi5
View Profile
Inner circle
Virginia
3323 Posts

Profile of rowdymagi5
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:25, mastermindreader wrote:
I am fascinated by the reference to combat troops as being those "on the front lines." In most of today's combat situations there is no such thing. In places like Afghanistan and Iraq the are/were no real front lines. And as the Christian Science Monitor article I referenced earlier made clear, there are situations in such combat theaters of operations where women play vital roles in de facto combat assignments.


There most certainly is such a thing as "front line". Tell the Navy Seals and the Grunts in the Marines that todays military has no front lines. Somebody has to be the first in. What do you call the team that is going in and sweeping buildings and securing the area? Then when it is secured, the rest of the troops come marching in and set up.

There is more front line fighting going on than most realize. The liberal media has kept most of the stuff like this from us and most people really believe that the war is somehow "sanitized" now. Ask General Norman Schwarzkopf. People like him shoot straight about the war.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 21:36, mastermindreader wrote:

I think that something that is being overlooked here is the obvious fact that different combat jobs require different physical skills and characteristics.

In combat, the skills of a long range sniper, for example, are significantly different than those of a tank driver. Combat roles, like almost everything else in today's society, have become increasingly specialized. Hand- to-hand combat requires different skills than those needed to disarm IED's. Some roles would seem to favor men and others would seem to favor women or are gender neutral in regards to the physical skills required to carry them out.

The statement that men are better suited than women for all combat roles - particularly in today's military - completely ignores the different skill sets required in different combat related specialties.



Yes, but to be fair the original question specified "infantry". Not "combat roles". So the discussion should probably stay near to that specific combat role. We discussed the fact that women serve in combat roles already. But they don't serve in the infantry.

Infantry is it's own occupational field. Tankers aren't infantry. Explosive ordinace specialists aren't infantry. Field artillery isn't infantry. Motor transpost isn't infantry etc.
Destiny
View Profile
Inner circle
1429 Posts

Profile of Destiny
Bringing together the discussion of the Civil War and the main topic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Emma_Edmonds
Dreadnought
View Profile
Special user
Athens, Georgia
836 Posts

Profile of Dreadnought
Quote:
On 2012-07-20 05:36, rowdymagi5 wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:25, mastermindreader wrote:
I am fascinated by the reference to combat troops as being those "on the front lines." In most of today's combat situations there is no such thing. In places like Afghanistan and Iraq the are/were no real front lines. And as the Christian Science Monitor article I referenced earlier made clear, there are situations in such combat theaters of operations where women play vital roles in de facto combat assignments.


There most certainly is such a thing as "front line". Tell the Navy Seals and the Grunts in the Marines that todays military has no front lines. Somebody has to be the first in. What do you call the team that is going in and sweeping buildings and securing the area? Then when it is secured, the rest of the troops come marching in and set up.

There is more front line fighting going on than most realize. The liberal media has kept most of the stuff like this from us and most people really believe that the war is somehow "sanitized" now. Ask General Norman Schwarzkopf. People like him shoot straight about the war.


Technically, in this war, there is no front line. Technically, this is not a war. I haven't been there but from what I hear from those who have, there isn't much security. There is no real demarcation line or forward edge of the battle area. At the most there is a forward line of friendly troops but in order to have a front line the forward line of enemy troops has to be established. In an urban combat environment, this is pretty hard to nail down. In Desert Storm there was a definite frontline.

Peace and Godspeed.
Peace

"Ave Maria gratia plena Dominus tecum..."

Scott

Would you do anything for the person you love?
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-20 08:48, Marlin1894 wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 21:36, mastermindreader wrote:

I think that something that is being overlooked here is the obvious fact that different combat jobs require different physical skills and characteristics.

In combat, the skills of a long range sniper, for example, are significantly different than those of a tank driver. Combat roles, like almost everything else in today's society, have become increasingly specialized. Hand- to-hand combat requires different skills than those needed to disarm IED's. Some roles would seem to favor men and others would seem to favor women or are gender neutral in regards to the physical skills required to carry them out.

The statement that men are better suited than women for all combat roles - particularly in today's military - completely ignores the different skill sets required in different combat related specialties.



Yes, but to be fair the original question specified "infantry". Not "combat roles". So the discussion should probably stay near to that specific combat role. We discussed the fact that women serve in combat roles already. But they don't serve in the infantry.

Infantry is it's own occupational field. Tankers aren't infantry. Explosive ordinace specialists aren't infantry. Field artillery isn't infantry. Motor transpost isn't infantry etc.


You're right. But the original poster quickly expanded his argument into his belief that women are generally inferior to men in sports and other fields as well. Strictly speaking many, if not most, combat roles in the Middle East aren't technically infantry related. War isn't really fought on that model any more and even the commanders in the field refer to combat positions rather that whether they are specifically infantry or not. (Navy Seals, for example, are hardly "infantry" but I doubt that anyone would dispute that they are a combat unit as are many others.)


Good thoughts,

Bob
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-20 05:36, rowdymagi5 wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:25, mastermindreader wrote:
I am fascinated by the reference to combat troops as being those "on the front lines." In most of today's combat situations there is no such thing. In places like Afghanistan and Iraq the are/were no real front lines. And as the Christian Science Monitor article I referenced earlier made clear, there are situations in such combat theaters of operations where women play vital roles in de facto combat assignments.


There most certainly is such a thing as "front line". Tell the Navy Seals and the Grunts in the Marines that todays military has no front lines. Somebody has to be the first in. What do you call the team that is going in and sweeping buildings and securing the area? Then when it is secured, the rest of the troops come marching in and set up.

There is more front line fighting going on than most realize. The liberal media has kept most of the stuff like this from us and most people really believe that the war is somehow "sanitized" now. Ask General Norman Schwarzkopf. People like him shoot straight about the war.


Actually, it is the so-called liberal media that has fought to bring this information to us. Sanitization was perhaps typified best when the previous administration forbid the media to photograph American coffins being returned to us.

Not surprised, though, that someone would try to make a partisan political snipe out of this.

And no, in urban guerrilla warfare there are no front lines. Yes, there have been battles in Iraq and Afghanistan that fit that model, but for the most part it doesn't apply in the day to day combat that is occurring now.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-20 10:42, mastermindreader wrote:
War isn't really fought on that model any more and even the commanders in the field refer to combat positions rather that whether they are specifically infantry or not. (Navy Seals, for example, are hardly "infantry" but I doubt that anyone would dispute that they are a combat unit as are many others.)


It's not about a model of war or anything. Infantry is, what infantry is. There are combat positions, some of which are infantry. Yes. Commanders in the field certainly know that. If commanders in the field group them all together when refering to them it's probably because they are adressing someone who doesn't understand the distinction. You can bet they do.

It's not like they sit around and some commander says "ok we need to send some infantry troops over here" and another guys says "oh you mean some navy seals, and a couple of motor transport units, and some field artillery?" The first guy is going to come back with something like "I said infantry stupid". lol. Come on now.

Obviously it's not a big deal for the purpose of this discussion. Or among civilians. I was just pointing out that "combat roles" doesn't mean "infantry".

Which takes me back to an earlier point. The reason I drew the distinction was because earlier you said "Whether or not women can be technically assigned to infantry or not is beside the point because, as has already been pointed out, they ALREADY serve in de facto combat positions."

But it's not really beside the point. If there is a woman who wants to become a machine gunner, or mortarman (mortarperson?), or whatever. She currently can't. So, I don't think she would find the fact that she can't join the infantry "beside the point" if she went in and asked to become a machine gunner and they replied "No, you can't be a machine gunner. But hey! Why don't you join Motor T and learn to drive a truck? Maybe if you're lucky you will find yourself serving in a de facto combat position!"

That doesn't help that particular individual. See what I'm saying?
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Yes. I understand your point. I just think that infantry/non infantry is an artificial distinction given the realities of urban warfare where most, if not all personnel, can be in combat situations at any given or unexpected moment.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Interesting Poll: Should women join the infantry (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3..6..9..12..14~15~16~17~18 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.39 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL