All Combat Roles Now Open to Women in U.S.

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
prove-all

prove-all

Senior Member
#1
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
63
#1
Defense Secretary Ash Carter announced on December 3 that the U.S. military
would open all positions to women. “There will be no exceptions,” said Carter at a news conference.


He added: They’ll be allowed to drive tanks, fire mortars and lead infantry soldiers into combat.
They’ll be able to serve as Army Rangers and Green Berets, Navy seals, Marine Corps infantry,
Air Force parajumpers, and everything else that was previously open only to men.

The decision overruled Marine Corps objections for its continued exclusion of women in certain
front-line positions. Gen. Joseph E. Dunford Jr., the former commandant of the Marine Corps,
argued that months of testing revealed mixed-gender units were not as capable as all-male units.


With Carter’s announcement, the Marine Corps will now operate under the same rulings as the
rest of the military. “We are a joint force, and I have decided to make a decision which applies
to the entire force,” said Carter

.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/us/politics/combat-military-women-ash-carter.html?_r=0

I'm sure this will not cause fear in our enemys.
 
Last edited:
T

Tintin

Guest
#2
#2
Are we looking at women soldiers receiving all of the perks that come with being a male soldier and none of the cons?
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#3
Mar 19, 2011
12,312
1,039
113
#3
Tintin said:
Are we looking at women soldiers receiving all of the perks that come with being a male soldier and none of the cons?
Click to expand...
No? did you even read the original post?
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#5
Mar 19, 2011
12,312
1,039
113
#5
the original post is quite clear so I will assume you are just trolling
 
p_rehbein

p_rehbein

Senior Member
#6
Sep 4, 2013
30,209
6,548
113
#6
Speaking of trolls.............sigh..........


Don't worry Tintin............he also hates anything/anyone Southern..............
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#7
Mar 19, 2011
12,312
1,039
113
#7
p_rehbein said:
Speaking of trolls.............sigh..........


Don't worry Tintin............he also hates anything/anyone Southern..............
Click to expand...
But I'm from Tennessee... Soooo......
 
Dude653

Dude653

Senior Member
#9
Mar 19, 2011
12,312
1,039
113
#9
the original post states that all combat roles are now open to women in the Marine Corps.....what part of this are you not understanding?
 
p_rehbein

p_rehbein

Senior Member
#10
Sep 4, 2013
30,209
6,548
113
#10
I understand it better than you obviously, since it is now Policy that all Combat roles are open to women in all four Service Branches...........

That however, is irrelevant as well. It is irrelevant because in this day and age the way wars are fought have drastically changed and there are no longer well defined "front lines" and "rear support troops."

IF a person, male or female, is "in country," be it Iraq, Afghanistan, or where ever, they are in a position of danger in that they could be attacked by the enemy.

The subtle difference is the assigning of MOS's.

This is nothing more than Liberals continuing to use the US Military as the "test subject" for their Social Engineering Project. Such is the way of things.............

BTW...........I don't care one way or another as long as the requirements for women to qualify for said Combat MOS's remain the same as they are for men. The moment they "dummy down" said requirements is when women will fail. There are/and have pretty much always been a few women who could and can qualify for Combat, and that is fine with me.

Women have pretty much fought and died in every conflict we have ever had.............so this is really no big deal IMO.
 
R

RachelBibleStudent

Guest
#12
#12
p_rehbein said:
I understand it better than you obviously, since it is now Policy that all Combat roles are open to women in all four Service Branches...........

That however, is irrelevant as well. It is irrelevant because in this day and age the way wars are fought have drastically changed and there are no longer well defined "front lines" and "rear support troops."

IF a person, male or female, is "in country," be it Iraq, Afghanistan, or where ever, they are in a position of danger in that they could be attacked by the enemy.

The subtle difference is the assigning of MOS's.

This is nothing more than Liberals continuing to use the US Military as the "test subject" for their Social Engineering Project. Such is the way of things.............

BTW...........I don't care one way or another as long as the requirements for women to qualify for said Combat MOS's remain the same as they are for men. The moment they "dummy down" said requirements is when women will fail. There are/and have pretty much always been a few women who could and can qualify for Combat, and that is fine with me.

Women have pretty much fought and died in every conflict we have ever had.............so this is really no big deal IMO.
Click to expand...
the only danger is that someday someone is going to propose that all women must register for the draft...
 
prove-all

prove-all

Senior Member
#14
May 16, 2014
5,977
400
83
63
#14
p_rehbein said:
BTW...........I don't care one way or another as long as the requirements for women to qualify for said Combat MOS's remain the same as they are for men. The moment they "dummy down" said requirements is when women will fail. There are/and have pretty much always been a few women who could and can qualify for Combat, and that is fine with me.
.
Click to expand...
The average woman is almost 5 inches shorter and over 30 pounds lighter (with closer to 40 fewer pounds of muscle and 6 more pounds of fat) than the average man. She has less than half of his upper-body strength, 20 percent less aerobic capacity, and lighter, brittler bones. She cannot run or jump as far; last as long; grip as well; push, pull, lift or carry as much.

Thus, the first females joining basic training suffered far higher rates of injury—including stress fractures, shin splints and tendonitis—which meant they visited the medical clinic three to four times more than the men. (And with more medical restrictions, they missed considerably more training.)

Officials responded by implementing separate conditioning standards for women: In lieu of having to do a certain number of pull-ups, female cadets were graded according to how long they could hang on the bar; on the obstacle course, they could use a 2-foot step-stool to climb an 8-foot wall. Academies adopted an “equivalent training” doctrine, striving to elicit from each cadet “equal effort rather than equal accomplishment.”

In some cases, rather than create a double standard, officials eliminated the standard altogether. Certain requirements became optional; certain activities became history. Competition among platoons (which many drill sergeants considered key to galvanizing recruits and developing squadron esprit de corps) was stopped, in part because of the unfair advantage held by all-male platoons. Boxing and wrestling were replaced by karate and self-defense or “interpretive dancing.” Once traditional training methods began to be abandoned, virtually everything came under scrutiny.

Lowering Standards for Female Marines Is Not Gender Equality
Lowering Standards for Female Marines Is Not Gender Equality - The Daily Beast#

As Expected: Physical Fitness Standards Lowered and Delayed Again for Female US Military Members


Mission Accomplished? U.S. Marine Corps Might Lower Combat Standards For Women
 
crossnote

crossnote

Senior Member
#16
Nov 24, 2012
30,707
3,650
113
#16
Nothing like knowing (as a man) you are being protected by women.
Sigh I must be getting too old for all this. Obviously another step down the Politically Correct path.
 
Billyd

Billyd

Senior Member
#17
May 8, 2014
5,055
1,495
113
#17
crossnote said:
Nothing like knowing (as a man) you are being protected by women.
Sigh I must be getting too old for all this. Obviously another step down the Politically Correct path.
Click to expand...
I know a few women that I'd rather fight alongside than most of the young men graduating from our high schools today.
 
Magenta

Magenta

Senior Member
#18
Jul 3, 2015
55,998
26,134
113
#18
I couldn't do it. Kudos to those that can. In some ways they face greater dangers from their fellow fighters. The military is brutal. Female soldiers are 15 times more likely to be raped by a comrade then killed by an enemy.
 
M

Miri

Guest
#19
#19
Hi folks, who said anything about having to lower standards,
seriously, have you ever seen a woman with PMS!
Would you stand in front of a woman holding a sub machine gun
with PMS!

Be afraid, be very afraid!


image.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.