We Remember The Magic Café We Remember
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..11~12~13~14~15~16~17~18 [Next]
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3465 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:14, LobowolfXXX wrote:
If you're in factor of sacrificing quality . . . .

I hope that you don't use that iPad for BBO.

Though it might explain some things . . . .
Destiny
View Profile
Inner circle
1429 Posts

Profile of Destiny
Women have been fighting on the frontlines since the dawn of time - maybe not in the military, but they've been there fighting to protect their lives, children, homes...

As for them actually fighting in combat roles in the front lines of the military - I'm undecided - in which case I always come down on the side of democracy - if they can do the job - let them.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1197 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:09, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:14, LobowolfXXX wrote:
If you're in factor of sacrificing quality . . . .

I hope that you don't use that iPad for BBO.

Though it might explain some things . . . .


Fortunately for me (and you!) BBO doesn't work on the iPad.
"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."
S2000magician
View Profile
Inner circle
Yorba Linda, CA
3465 Posts

Profile of S2000magician
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:11, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:09, S2000magician wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:14, LobowolfXXX wrote:
If you're in factor of sacrificing quality . . . .

I hope that you don't use that iPad for BBO.

Though it might explain some things . . . .

Fortunately for me (and you!) BBO doesn't work on the iPad.

Now . . . if only The Magic Café didn't . . . .
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:57, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:25, acesover wrote:
I am not mistating your position at all. Your position is that women are as capable as men in a combat situation.



Ok, this has been an interesting thread, but clearly this statement reveals that it's been a gag. Great joke!!


It has to be a joke, Lobo, because I can't believe that ANYONE who has read and understood my posts could conclude that is my position.

His statement is a perfect example of the straw man fallacy. He completely misunderstands or intentionally mischaracterizes my (and your) position, and then attacks that mischaracterization.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:50, mastermindreader wrote:
What do you mean you are not misstating my position? Did you even read what you wrote and what I am specifically referring to? Here, I'll quote you AGAIN:

Quote:
You may think differently and when being attacked you can quote the US constitution to the enemy and counsel him, maybe pass on some anger management ideas to calm him down. That should work. Bang your dead and so is your bud, you just bought the farm. You feel you are correct and that is all that matters. So be it.


THAT IS NOT MY POSITION. IT IS A STRAW MAN.

I can only conclude that you are being intentionally obtuse.


It is obvious that you do not even know what the tests are in the contest you speak of when talking about the winner of your contest. They must know about the constitution, and understand certain laws and know how to counsel. Read what is in the contest and then tell me how it pertains to staying alive in combat. Le tme repeat staying alive in combat. STAYING ALIVE IN COMBAT..that is quite important, more so than understanding the constitution and counseling and whatever other things they put in there such as looking good is also one of the criteria.

That is what is meant when I say you may think differently when being attacked. I don''t think the above requirements are going to help. However they help win your contest for the ultimate warrior. Jeeez.
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
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:25, mastermindreader wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:57, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 13:25, acesover wrote:
I am not mistating your position at all. Your position is that women are as capable as men in a combat situation.



Ok, this has been an interesting thread, but clearly this statement reveals that it's been a gag. Great joke!!


It has to be a joke, Lobo, because I can't believe that ANYONE who has read and understood my posts could conclude that is my position.

His statement is a perfect example of the straw man fallacy. He completely misunderstands or intentionally mischaracterizes my (and your) position, and then attacks that mischaracterization.


OK. Lets assume I don't understand your position. What is it? However I ask that your answer takes into consideration Viet Nam because you know that is where I have been arguing from.

I wil cocede that womencancompete woith men in combat and sports. They just can't win with any consistency. Not a difficult concept to understand. Even a blind chicken finds corn once in a while.
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
Destiny
View Profile
Inner circle
1429 Posts

Profile of Destiny
They do quite well in spelling bees also.

;( - You fixed it up before I posted. Smile
mastermindreader
View Profile
V.I.P.
Seattle, WA
12589 Posts

Profile of mastermindreader
Viet Nam has nothing to do with your original post any more than World War II or Korea do. The poll you cited at the outset was clearly about how people feel about women joining TODAY'S military.

If you want to know my position, just take a moment to actually read my posts carefully.

Then you will know.

I'm not going to waste any effort typing it out for at least the fifth time. But here it is as briefly and concisely as I can put it.

Women who can meet the same mental and physical standards for combat as men should not be refused combat assignment based SOLELY on their sex.

That is a far cry from your broad conclusion that I believe all women should be allowed to serve in combat.

When you just conceded that SOME women can, in fact, compete with men in combat and sports you effectively conceded to my entire argument.
critter
View Profile
Inner circle
Spokane, WA
2551 Posts

Profile of critter
I'm sorry Destiny, you're not allowed to talk about spelling bees unless you've competed in at least a regional level event. I believe that I'm the only one here with state spelling bee experience, so my opinion trumps all others, even the ones I don't understand. The rest of you just read about spelling bees. Smile
"The fool is one who doesn't know what you have just found out."
~Will Rogers
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1197 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:26, acesover wrote:
Read what is in the contest and then tell me how it pertains to staying alive in combat. Le tme repeat staying alive in combat. STAYING ALIVE IN COMBAT


I can see where you thought a few days ago that playing golf had a lot to do with staying alive in combat.
"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
I am confused by this thread.

Is the question concerning women having to opportunity to become infantry?

If so are you accepting that no standards be changed including that no ,special accomidations' be made due to their being women?

I doubt you are saying to take women and place them in the same living quarters and open bay showers and have them meet the exact same physical standards. I think ten seconds after saying to let them in special accomidations will start because we would have to.

You are, equal opportunity types, aware that there are special units, not all combat, which have standards based on height and body type? Should they also be forced to accept anyone and dismiss the standards?

What next? Outlaw same sex universities and private schools being forced to accept the other sex? What about black universities, should we force them to change their student body to reflect the state they are in?

There is one standard that certain jobs should have and that is physical for certain military, police, and fire fighting jobs. The fact is in the case of fire fighters and police the groups had lower standards which has not been a good thing and has cost lives.

I believe in equality and with some exceptions I have stated in jobs. Their are jobs in the military that people in wheelchairs etc could do and I don't have issues with them joining up and doing those jobs. Women can do any job the same as guys. It is limited to knack, brains, and desire. I, for example, could never be a nurse or doctor, I can't cut on people or give shots. I am thankful those people exists. When it comes to bosses I prefer a woman, always have. I am pro women, gay, minority, and pro myself as well yet I seem to have no one waving signs for me (Greenpeace 'save the whales' does not count). But if I am trapped in a building and I am not rescued because a 102 pound woman or man cannot break down the door I am going to be miffed.
Destiny
View Profile
Inner circle
1429 Posts

Profile of Destiny
I certainly believe they should have the same capabilities as the current incumbents to do the job and strongly disagree with changing standards in any job in order to look succesful in including the previously excluded.
LobowolfXXX
View Profile
Inner circle
La Famiglia
1197 Posts

Profile of LobowolfXXX
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:53, MagicSanta wrote:
I am confused by this thread.

Is the question concerning women having to opportunity to become infantry?

If so are you accepting that no standards be changed including that no ,special accomidations' be made due to their being women?

I doubt you are saying to take women and place them in the same living quarters and open bay showers and have them meet the exact same physical standards. I think ten seconds after saying to let them in special accomidations will start because we would have to.

You are, equal opportunity types, aware that there are special units, not all combat, which have standards based on height and body type? Should they also be forced to accept anyone and dismiss the standards?

What next? Outlaw same sex universities and private schools being forced to accept the other sex? What about black universities, should we force them to change their student body to reflect the state they are in?

There is one standard that certain jobs should have and that is physical for certain military, police, and fire fighting jobs. The fact is in the case of fire fighters and police the groups had lower standards which has not been a good thing and has cost lives.

I believe in equality and with some exceptions I have stated in jobs. Their are jobs in the military that people in wheelchairs etc could do and I don't have issues with them joining up and doing those jobs. Women can do any job the same as guys. It is limited to knack, brains, and desire. I, for example, could never be a nurse or doctor, I can't cut on people or give shots. I am thankful those people exists. When it comes to bosses I prefer a woman, always have. I am pro women, gay, minority, and pro myself as well yet I seem to have no one waving signs for me (Greenpeace 'save the whales' does not count). But if I am trapped in a building and I am not rescued because a 102 pound woman or man cannot break down the door I am going to be miffed.


Perhaps the confusion comes from chasing the straw men. If you read my posts and Bob's, you'll see no suggestion of, or support for, lowering standards. In fact, you'll see least a dozen references explicitly saying or strongly suggesting the exact opposite.
"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."
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:53, LobowolfXXX wrote:
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 14:26, acesover wrote:
Read what is in the contest and then tell me how it pertains to staying alive in combat. Le tme repeat staying alive in combat. STAYING ALIVE IN COMBAT


I can see where you thought a few days ago that playing golf had a lot to do with staying alive in combat.


and how did you arrive at that conclusion? Or are you back to the arguement where you believe women can compete with men on a level playng field in sports such as golf. If so...well Believe what you want. Its been tried and they cannot make the cut.

When you take the best of the best and pit them aganist one another the women lose. When you take the average ability of each group the women lose. When you take the worse of the worse in each froup the women lose.

However you like to take the best woman and compare her to the average male or the worst male and then you say , see she can compete.
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
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 15:04, LobowolfXXX wrote:

Perhaps the confusion comes from chasing the straw men. If you read my posts and Bob's, you'll see no suggestion of, or support for, lowering standards. In fact, you'll see least a dozen references explicitly saying or strongly suggesting the exact opposite.


I think it comes down to whether or not a person really WANTS to see women in infantry roles. Or if they simply think they should be allowed if the person can meet the current standards of their male counterparts. I think some people are under the impression that you and Bob somehow want to see female grunts, when in fact you are just saying that someone who can meet the requirements should be allowed to become one..

Those people who would very much like to see women in those positions might agree at first with your position. But I have a feeling they would not be pleased with the amount of women who ulimately made it through. It wouldn't be long before they started calling for a lowered standard. Certainly these types of discussions took place back when the notion of allowing women in the armed forces first came up. And in the end what was settled on was two seperate standards for physical fitness. We have two standards in the interest of "fairness". Which means, I suppose, that somewhere along the line someone decided that true equality in that area didn't exist. Or at the very least was quite rare.
acesover
View Profile
Special user
I believe I have
819 Posts

Profile of acesover
However if we can get the enemy to send its inferior troops aganist our best women troops I think the women MAY win. We should ask the enemy if they are willing to do this. Smile Smile Smile
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
Dreadnought
View Profile
Special user
Athens, Georgia
836 Posts

Profile of Dreadnought
War is not static even though its basic underlying principle is the same, that being the total and complete destruction of the opposing force by any means necessary. Most people cannot stomach that principle so they enact rules and laws trying to civilize it, nevertheless, the principle is to destroy the enemy.

What does change is the strategy and tactics. As Bob pointed out, today's wars are not regulated to a "frontline." This is due to many different reasons, chief and foremost, the enemy and the terrain. We are fighting an ideal not a specific enemy. Our front line is world wide not some particular chunk of land. Our terrain is urban, which is the most difficult because it has to be fought city by city, block by block, house by house. This type of terrain does not allow a front line as the battle is not just regulated to your direct front. Therefore, women and men, serving in traditional non-combatant roles (logistics, intelligence and especially the military police) are seeing greater military action as opposed to being safely tucked away in the rear. Women have answered the call and have stepped up and delivered. They may be in a hummer as opposed to an M1A1 or M1A deuce, or lugging an 85 lb ruck sack, but they are equipped with the same equipment and trained in the same tactics as their male counter parts.

In the future I foresee women in infantry units serving in combat roles. I do not see them being awarded a Ranger or Special Forces tab, because of a special condition required in passing those respective schools, however they are already assigned or attached to those units in a merely support role, which means they have to meet the same and more strenuous physical requirements as the men. I do not know about SF units, but in a Ranger Bat they are housed in other barracks.

Peace and Godspeed.
Peace

"Ave Maria gratia plena Dominus tecum..."

Scott

Would you do anything for the person you love?
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
I don't know what a strawman is outside of Oz.

Here is the fact concerning physical testing in the Navy and Marines. I don't know about the army. The standards are and always have been different based on sex and age.

The issue about infantry from what I know, which isn't much since I intentionally avoided the mud crawling. In combat situations with actual combat and movement will not allow for special accomidations. So let's say that is acceptable and we have a pack of six foot tall 180 pound women (who bt military standards are sexy). Scoopin and poopin and staring at big words with the fella's and fornicating every few minutes girls with girls, boys wit boys. Boys wit girls, and one group of three girls and two guys. Let us also assume we programed the fella's to not following instinct and wanting to protect the women. We still have to deal with the fact that if captured rape and all that stuff will go on and I am bothered by that aspect. That is one thing we cannot control.

When I was in because we were the experiment and my stand was the same, what happens to prisoners. Heck, even in wars where they sent in children they tended to not send in women as troops.
Marlin1894
View Profile
Special user
565 Posts

Profile of Marlin1894
Quote:
On 2012-07-19 15:29, Dreadnought wrote:

however they are already assigned or attached to those units in a merely support role, which means they have to meet the same and more strenuous physical requirements as the men.


I agree with most of what you say. But that statement is not exactly true. I'm not trying to argue with you because I understand your general idea. But I think if you re-examine that statement you will understand what I mean as well.
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..11~12~13~14~15~16~17~18 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.3 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