The Conservative Cave
Current Events => Politics => Topic started by: Ptarmigan on February 12, 2013, 06:49:36 PM
-
Fox News Poll: Majority of voters favor women in combat
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/11/fox-news-poll-majority-voters-favor-women-in-combat/?test=latestnews
-
We'll see how the majority of voters feel when combat deaths of women rise, or when women are being injured/disabled by training in larger numbers than they are now.
-
My son was talking with his fiance, my daughter and son and law. They all basically agreed that, especially in the war zones we're in now women will be captured and tortured. My son said to his fiance, "Yeah, they'll be captured and asked geography and history questions! :tongue:
-
They already ARE in combat. The false narrative that what the DoD is doing is somehow letting them get into something they weren't previously engaged in is a lie.
What this Administration is doing is alloing women to serve in the Infantry...Artillery and Armor...to joing Special Forces and Rangers.
And the sad part of it it...this is being done for nothing more than multi culti political correctness. It's not going to strenghten the force or raise esprit de corps.
It's gonna get people killed.
-
If women aren't already in combat...then explain this:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Tammy_Duckworth_wheelchair.jpg/220px-Tammy_Duckworth_wheelchair.jpg)
I'm not mad at Ptarmy for posting the poll...I'm pissed that the pollsters are being dishonest in the questions they are asking.
-
If women aren't already in combat...then explain this:
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0c/Tammy_Duckworth_wheelchair.jpg/220px-Tammy_Duckworth_wheelchair.jpg)
I'm not mad at Ptarmy for posting the poll...I'm pissed that the pollsters are being dishonest in the questions they are asking.
I'd say that the majority of Americans don't know WTF they're talking about, having never served, but meh.
And yeah, women have been awarded Silver Stars, DFC's, Purple Hearts, etc., in Iraq/Afghanistan. But not in front-line "grunt" units.
No, I do not think they should be in combat arms, JMO, because they cannot meet the physical standards required. Don't give me that one-in-a-million exception, because you're having to waste a shitload of resources that could/shoult be going to men to fill those slots.
Finally, this idea will sit well with the American people until they see some female getting dragged through the streets of some Third World shithole or burned and hung from a bridge. Then you'll REALLY see the people freak the **** out.
-
Finally, this idea will sit well with the American people until they see some female getting dragged through the streets of some Third World shithole or burned and hung from a bridge. Then you'll REALLY see the people freak the **** out.
They really should have talked to this lady before they made the decision:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhonda_Cornum
-
The majority of voters aren't going to serve in the military so what the hell does it matter to them.
-
I don't understand why some women feel they have to push the envelope. It is wonderful to be able to serve our country, and many people wish they could. God made men and women physically different for a reason.
-
They already ARE in combat. The false narrative that what the DoD is doing is somehow letting them get into something they weren't previously engaged in is a lie.
What this Administration is doing is alloing women to serve in the Infantry...Artillery and Armor...to joing Special Forces and Rangers.
And the sad part of it it...this is being done for nothing more than multi culti political correctness. It's not going to strenghten the force or raise esprit de corps.
It's gonna get people killed.
I agree with your sentiment but not the bolded statement. There is a world of difference between being incidentally involved in combat when, for instance, your convoy is attacked or your FOB is shelled, requiring immediate action, vs. sustained offensive operations killing people face-to-face. The overwhelming majority of any gory pics you want to show are from the former. The latter thing is something that damned few enlisted women or NCOs could either do or want any part of at all...the whole train is being driven by female officers who are worried about their career promotion prospects without first-line combat in their resume, who think they will all be treated like aviators with somebody to do the heavy lifting and maintenance dirty work for them...which, DOD being the PC-paralysis cluster**** that it is, they will probably get...
Bitch of it is, they'll probably get away with it, since it doesn't look like we'll be taking on anybody who can seriously challenge us for quite a long time, and so long, long after the people that are moving this have benefited from it and moved on to become senior officers or retire, the butcher's bill will come due.
-
Words fail me on this. The people they polled have NO F@#KING clue about what they were asked. And the sad thing is, even when women are killed in combat, or more likely, a bunch of men will be killed trying to rescue the one woman who got hit. These same oxygen thieves will be the first to be outraged. :banghead:
-
They already ARE in combat. The false narrative that what the DoD is doing is somehow letting them get into something they weren't previously engaged in is a lie.
What this Administration is doing is alloing women to serve in the Infantry...Artillery and Armor...to joing Special Forces and Rangers.
And the sad part of it it...this is being done for nothing more than multi culti political correctness. It's not going to strenghten the force or raise esprit de corps.
It's gonna get people killed.
What's worse, the problem that the Navy has been having, with female sailors - a small percentage, admittedly, but... - who'll go out and deliberately get knocked up in order to avoid a deployment.
-
Words fail me on this. The people they polled have NO F@#KING clue about what they were asked. And the sad thing is, even when women are killed in combat, or more likely, a bunch of men will be killed trying to rescue the one woman who got hit. These same oxygen thieves will be the first to be outraged. :banghead:
In a way, we already saw that. How many resources were tied up trying to find Jessica Lynch and the rest of her little group?
Now imagine that there's a female Bowie Dahl out there.
-
What's worse, the problem that the Navy has been having, with female sailors - a small percentage, admittedly, but... - who'll go out and deliberately get knocked up in order to avoid a deployment.
That can happen in any of the military branches, but why would a woman get her self pregnant, to avoid deployment, when the reason she went in was to defend her country?? It seems like these women want their cake and pie, and eat them both.
-
That can happen in any of the military branches, but why would a woman get her self pregnant, to avoid deployment, when the reason she went in was to defend her country?? It seems like these women want their cake and pie, and eat them both.
Newsflash--guys pull that shit too...they're what we call the "10 percenters".
"My wife she/my kids they/my dog it" bullshit. Then to top it all off when we're deployed, married guys get FSA (Family Separation Allowance) or what we used to call "lack of ***** pay".
You'd always have a couple of guys trying to pull some shit to get out of an underway/deployment. Only saw it work once--guy claimed his wife left him and abandoned the kids while we were on Westpac and had to get back home. The command sent him back and he ended up getting a hardship. While we couldn't PROVE it, we were all pretty sure they had that shit planned out beforehand.
-
Newsflash--guys pull that shit too...they're what we call the "10 percenters".
"My wife she/my kids they/my dog it" bullshit. Then to top it all off when we're deployed, married guys get FSA (Family Separation Allowance) or what we used to call "lack of ***** pay".
You'd always have a couple of guys trying to pull some shit to get out of an underway/deployment. Only saw it work once--guy claimed his wife left him and abandoned the kids while we were on Westpac and had to get back home. The command sent him back and he ended up getting a hardship. While we couldn't PROVE it, we were all pretty sure they had that shit planned out beforehand.
That is unnacceptable!! Why enlist in the first place, if one is going to make plans to avoid deployment? That is dishonest!!
-
That is unnacceptable!! Why enlist in the first place, if one is going to make plans to avoid deployment? That is dishonest!!
At least half of the time, these'll be the ones who "joined for the college benefits". :thatsright:
-
At least half of the time, these'll be the ones who "joined for the college benefits". :thatsright:
While sitting at "green ramp" getting chuted up for "Just Cause" I had a SPC tell me he was a conscientious objector and he only joined for the college benefits. I smiled, checked his rigging, patted him on te shoulder and replied "Thar's okay Specialist, We are just going to take you along for the bill".
-
That is unnacceptable!! Why enlist in the first place, if one is going to make plans to avoid deployment? That is dishonest!!
Because if you don't pull that shit, you might have to do the dangerous job you signed up to do.
I've heard of women who got pregnant three times by different men, always just about the time that deployment was rolling around. It's disgusting, because it's completely obvious what they're doing. And then, the men in that unit still have to go do the mission and pick up her slack.
Only good side of that is, usually, it's a case of addition by subtraction (the team is better off without the distraction)
-
That is unnacceptable!! Why enlist in the first place, if one is going to make plans to avoid deployment? That is dishonest!!
Not everyone sees it that way seahorse. The concept of doing what you said you do is foreign to some people.