Women in hostile action?

[philly]

Female Military Police Women have come under sniper fire and heavy gun fire during the Panama Invasion and Somalia. I'm not sure about the other conflicts we've been involved in the most recent past.

Some female MP's are assigned to carry medium weapons. When I was enlisted, I was a back up 60 Gunner. During one of our U.S. invasions, we escorted the 82nd Airborne Infantry to various locations. We have worked in security teams with the 82nd Ariborne Infantry by performing vehicle inspections/searches, traffic control points, enemy prisoner of war arrests and transports. We have performed protective security for foreign high officials. There are other duties we are assigned to perform, but I'm not going to list all of them. Even though I experienced all of the things I've listed above, I still do not believe women belong on the frontlines.

The equipment the infantry carry today weigh anywhere from 80 to 100 pounds. They hump 20 or more miles a day in some of the most horrible weather conditions. Most women do not have a lot of upper body strength. There are also hygenic issues women are faced with. There are the issues of torture and rape that women would be subjected to. Our enemy, today, does not value the life of a female human being. I think there are more reasons to keep them out of the infantry than any positive reasons to allow them on the frontlines.

[the humper]

Read the above post!! It's plain and simple language written by a reasonable person of intelligence, that has an insite that you and I can't acquire. Think about it!!!!!!
SF
NC

[BLUEHAWK]

The more we discuss this the more convinced I am that the next step, since we're stuck with things as they are, could REALLY be great!

Why not convince the Defense Department to divvy up combat units into all-male and all-female ones. Let the women who think they can, and just cannot keep from it, bear arms and whatever else they please, in their own units. We DO need the fighters, and are probably gonna need a lot more in the coming years if things keep going as they are here lately.

That way, the female units would have female commanders and NCOs. They could figure out how to divide the responsibilities up in their own dang way and time. Maybe one of those short gals would actually be strong enough to shoulder the bazooka, or carry a lot of weight in the upper body area. Maybe one of those tall lanky ones with big muscles would work well as a scout/sniper (think of the make-up possibilities!). Maybe they oughta have a pack to carry that is more in keeping with their abilities. Their legs are surely known to be plenty strong, that's for sure, so no problem with the long march on that score. There have gotta be some of 'em who can throw overhand, but if not, then I know for sure there are a bunch of fast-pitch softballers who could take an eye out with a grenade at fifty yards. The women are every bit as durable to suffering and deprivation, that I've seen anyway. Their minds are sure crack shot as much as any male's, we know that. I doubt that the more delicate type is likely to put herself in for combat to start with, so she'll have other important duties and a good role to play.

The value of this, also, would be that the women would have unit cohesion like never before. There could even be contests between male and female units during training, like on the confidence course and riflery, where they'd put their best troops out there and we'd put our best out, and we'd each try to whip the other's butt... fair and square.

Two things though, they gotta cut off ALL the hair that first time. ALL of it, right down to the stubble. Also, when they get the draft going again, they gotta draft females age 18 and above too. But let's keep things separate, have some fun, have better fighters, and have more fighters... if we must fight. I'd like to see all female ships, even carriers, and all female service academies.

Hell, if we're gonna have this deal, let's do it up right and proper! I'm gettin' kinda excited about it. I really think this would work, it'd relieve practically all this stupid tension we're operating under, and probably most of the harassment charges too. All this little bit here and a little bit there is not working. Nice try though.

In any battle, what a proud day it would be to know that on a flank was an all-female unit, mean as the devil and fired up to hold that line or advance, in their own right. Cripes, the time is likely to come when they would be the ones to rescue our sorry asses.

[sfc_darrel]

Sgt_Tropo,

I am a woman engineer that lives in a testerone world. No daughters for me .

I agree with you.

Joy

[philly]

Having an all female infantry company or battalion fighting in combat, could cause these women to be more valunerable then if they faught side by side with male soldiers. The enemy would try like h*ll to hunt down the "all female" company. Why? If the enemy wiped out or captured most of these female soldiers in one big sweep, it could demoralize many of our male soldiers. It would give them a bargaining tool as well.

I remember when my company was deployed to Panama right after the coup attempt on Noriega, we were directed to remove our state side division patches and we could not disclose our state side location with anyone. This directive came down because it kept our enemy guessing and off balance. If we had an all female battalion of infantry women, our enemy would know what division they were assigned to and how many were assigned. They would become too high profile if clumped in one company or battalion. If we're going to have female fighting machines, then they need to fight next their male counterparts.

[BLUEHAWK]

Philly,
Maybe you're right.. I was just thinking that the enemy might be imagining a female unit was the more vulnerable, and get a real big shock in battle as a result. Theoretically, if ANY females can be combat, then they are there in their own right as full and trusted partners, INdependent of any males...so we are constantly told anyhow.

I do not believe it would demoralize your male counterparts at all, in fact I am fairly certain it would p--s us off like never before.

All speculation anyway, it'll never happen.

[philly]

Blue Hawk,

Putting our gunho fighting spirits aside, war in it's most honest description is "hell". It's not a place where any of us want our children to be unless we have no other option but to send them to protect and defend our country and the oppressed.

I guess, I was thinking like a female when I stated it would demoralize our men. You're right in stating it would p*ss our male soldiers off. I hope we never have to find out...

Take care,

Philly

[BLUEHAWK]

Philly...

I hope and pray we never have to find out too, most sincerely and deeply.

Doesn't it strike you as being odd that so often we talk about all this with the full knowledge that everyone is going to have to do something nobody wants to do, and that we KNOW what the better alternative is...but there seems always to be no way to choose the preferable solution?

[Seascamp]

?You?ve come a long way Baby?. I thought I?d give some Navy perspective on this issue. During my Navy time there were WAVES but they were limited to specific roles on Navy commo stations, Yards and bases. They were mostly into administrative, clerical, supply or medical/dental rates. Some got into to technical rates and were held in high regard at the commo stations and yard technical shops. But the reality of it all was that opposite from what might thought be true. Forces afloat were the low form of life at a Navy station or Navy Yard, held in very low regard, avoided at all costs, etc, so anything beyond the most basic and perfunctory business conversation with a WAVE was more or less a taboo deal on their part. More to the point, there was no way I was ever going to allow a piece of equipment to go to a yard technical shop for ?some Girl? to work on, no way. So there was resentment and ego in the mix, big time. From a practical point of view, the WAVES took up shore billets and that decreased the likelihood of ever getting a stint of shore duty. At the time, a Sailor could expect 75% of a career to be spent in a sea going command and that was optimistic. So ?some Girl? crowding shore billets was not a favored topic at all.

Fast forward to current times. When Pres. Bush did his Carrier landing deal I saw something I didn?t think was possible, but there it was. There were Gal Sailors in their flight deck multi colored garb, helmets, etc., and I thought, ?I?ll be dammed?. Of all services, all tasks there is simply no more 24/7/365 dangerous place to work than a Carrier flight deck. War, peace, or training ops, the risk is the same and nothing is theoretical. A 30,000-pound jet coming in at 120 knots is a force to be reckoned with and if something goes wrong, the disaster is gender non-discriminatory. More to the point, the Navy doesn?t let any nitwit work the flight deck so I was impressed a ton that those Sailor Gals qualified and nearly equally impressed that Navy let them qualify. So I?d say if a Gal has some Macha, is smart, can think fast, is cat-quick and wants to get the adrenalin moving a lot, go do that.


About the only place in the Navy where Gals are still not allowed is in Submarines. I don?t see that changing but then I never thought I?d see a Sailor Gal working a Carrier flight deck. Hanger deck, sure, but never the flight deck, no way. But there it was. Good job Sailor Gals, I?m very impressed. And contemporary Sailor Gals, sorry I was such a turd about things long ago, but heck, I just worked there and didn?t invent the environment.

Scamp

[BLUEHAWK]

Scamp -

Wouldn't it be amazing to one day see an all-female Submarine boat!

It'd be kinda like watching a filly win the Kentucky Derby, or even the Triple Crown! Last time one got the Derby I was yellin' my lungs out for her...