Male chauvinist arguments aside, If a woman wants to go into combat she should be allowed to do so. As long as she meets the physical and mental qualifications for the job, she should not be disqualified from serving simply because of her gender. I say this as a combat veteran of Vietnam.

As much as some members of our culture want to eliminate the lines between gender, they still remain. Men are better suited for some things and women are better suited for others. This is how God designed it from the beginning. A real man will naturally protect a woman. In a prisoner of war situation this would create a national security problem. The enemy will use this natural response of a man to protect a woman to obtain sensitive military information from the man. It is a recipe for disaster.

I agree with Ted Crawford – men will put themselves in harms way trying to protect women.
Plus our young people are being used as pawns all over the world to fight unrighteous wars – we are running out of men who want to fight these continuous wars, and so now
the idea is to get the public used to the idea of using women in their place. Women would
fight to protect their husbands, children, or freedoms if they were at stake, but most of us have no desire to fight wars that wicked men have devised for us for oil, or dominion, or power. Its bad enough we have to send our sons out to do their dirty work, let alone our daughters. We all need to catch on to what is happening and not buy into this new
assault on us as puppets for someone else’s agenda. .

Everyone! Read the book, War is a Rackett by General Smedley Butler. If this doesn’t't kill your enthusiasm to die for oligarchic interest, nothing will!

If women are physically qualified fine put them on the front line, however, they all need to be in the selective service system, all citizens male and female. Why should woman be left out of the draft system? Why do we put up with this double standard? I am tired of hearing women bitch about the glass ceiling crap, how they are not treated as equals when in fact they must be treated so delicately in a work force situation. F*** the sensitivity training bull.

I’ve got a great idea. Put all the homosexuals in units that are front liners. The more that meet their demise the quicker we can rid ourseloves of this society wrexking disease.

If the women are so dead set on getting on the front lines, fine let them. with the following conditions.
1) when you get to the front line you get treated just like the other solders, no special favors or protections or anything else, fail to do you job like any other front line deployed individual and you now face UCMJ charges and you are out of the military.
2) First time you can’t deploy because you have a female induced problem you are disqualified for military service period.
3) You get pregnant to keep from deploying to a combat zone, you are other than honorably discharged from the service period.
4) you go to the front lines and get a hang nail, and start complaining, you get your ass kicked until you get it together just like everybody else.
5) here is the biggy, If these women want to speak for all the females in the military let them, every female in the military services are now front line elgible not just the ones that volunteer, it is all or nothing just like the males in the military. lets see how long that one lasts before the females start complaining about the work, conditions etc.

My suggestion is to form a battalion of women and let them compete in actual combat with a battalion of men. Point for point, no handicaps.

Look at things from an historical perspective.
In some cases,women had to fight alongside the men.
But historically when armies marched,it was only in a support role that women went along.
Some point to Israel as an example.
But they are a tiny group of folks in an area where every hand is needed.They are surrounded by enemies on every side,and may lack the people power to engage the enemy if all resources are not available.
This is simply not the case in most modern nations.
So that argument is quickly debunked.
Historically armies have been made of men for a reason.
Men thrive in a battlefield envronment.They dont need to wash,they dont need to have seperate latrines.They dont need separate chnaging areas.
Women are designed for a support role.
Men are designed to carry weight and each other if need be.
Emotionally/mentally women have the advantage over men.But since men never grow out of the”lets play army stage”,we are uniquely designed for combat.
Whereas women wonder why violence is necessary,men thrive on it.
It harkens back to the macho side of our mentality.
These people are taking the gender roles to the extremes,and not considering the larger picture here.
But then again,isnt everything being twisted to support some kind of agenda?
-CC.

What seems odd to me is that they are basically saying that there are intentional limitations insofar as advancement within the ranks of women serving. Money and Benefits? Both while I was in the Navy and my wife in the Air Force there were both women Admirals and Generals as well as plenty of top level enlisted. No, none within a SEAL Team. Sorry, Demi Moore doesn’t count. In the realm of “frontline combat” desires, so be it. If they’re seeking out a bronze, silver or even a CMH, have at it. How long that desire would last is another side to this equation that more than likely wouldn’t last very long. They think there is an abundance of PTSD cases now, allow women on the “front-line” and it will increase exponentially! Then what?

No matter how highly well trained any combat soldier is , there is a shock to the senses that actual combat induces .And until one experiences that there is no way to tell how one is going to react . As a rule women do not handle this well , that is in no way to infer that they are inferior in anyway . Many women have fought bravely along side men in combat , but that said , modern warfare or any warfare is no place for women unless absolutely no way to avoid it . These women may think they want to put on a jockstrap and go to war in a combat company but trust me when I say , they are lucky that they are not on the front line .The enemy we face today is every bit as ruthless and unmerciful , if not more so , than those we faced in Viet Nam or anywhere else in this world . Why any woman with common sense would want to face the possibility of rape and torture if captured is beyond me . They should be thankful they are not required to serve in a combat unit . But I suppose these two are part of the new Gay Corps of Obama and need to prove just how big their Johnson and balls are

I see many here who question the abilities of women in combat. I am less concerned with this, given the examples of the Israeli Army and the history of the various resistance forces during WWII. Women have, it seems to me, proven they can serve with distinction in combat situations. My concern lies along a different path.
In this country males are taught to shield females, as much as pratical and possible, from the more unsavory aspects of situations. Should this habit spill over int a combat situation a commander might hesitate to give an order putting a female into harms way. Even though she might be better positioned to accomplish a task, he might give the order to a male in a lessor position. This would cause unnecessary deaths and the unnecessary lose of engagements. While this would surly be overcome with time, my other concern, the desensitizaion of both male and female would be increased with time. Fundamentially, I feel, changing the culture of this nation!

Women should not be in combat,what do they think would happen if they were captured by the enemy.they would be raped.it is hard to be promoted in the infantry anyway i know.besides they are not strong enough to carry a 50lbs ruck sack 20 or 30 miles in a day.what about hand to hand combat?they would not stand a chance vs.a man.women should not be any place were there is combat,they should be in the rear with the gear!!

I started to write,stopped, read what I was writing and saw it was leaning towards PC, (political correctness). I hate PC, it’s social engineering. These two women are obvious. A rainbow flag flies over a tent in Afghanistan, two men in an airport one in uniform in a lip lock, this kind of crap makes me puke! If not that, look at the commands lost because of women at sea. Remember, it was Adam and Eve not Dave and Louie, and look what happened when Adam trusted Eve. Women that want combat don’t remember Jessica Lynch and the Men that had to get her out all because we couldn’t stand the thought of what the enemy was doing to a woman. Bless her heart but she is still crippled today! Women in combat, NO WAY!!

What everyone seems to miss (even the Col. and SGM. is that if women want to be equal and be able to go into combat their whole careers have been a farce. They have different PT standards, different lartine standards and dont what they will smell like after a 5 or 6 day patrol. Who carries their extra ammo or how do they get their pads or kotex. Ever smelled a woman on her period after 2 weeks without a bath? I have been to combat 3 times and not a woman in site, we did however have a few women ask not to participate in a resupply convoy. Also when Desert Storm went down, how many women intentionally got pregnant so they wouldnt have to depoly? Thats called dereliction of duty in my book and they should be court martialed for it.

Barefoot and pregnant. . .
That is my response. . .

If they want fight in combat, let them. They are highly trained.

I am sure these women are vying for the futures of future and upcoming commissioned and noncommissioned women alike. It seems that they want to garner a place for women in the career management fields of the combat arms where men enjoy the greater percentage of promotion advantages and secure a more impressive resume after retirement. I will not attempt to argue the male vs female dilemma in the profession of the combat arms because that will be discussed many times over by various zealots from both genders.
I agree a change has to be affected in the politics of military advancement and positions of authority but force integration of the genders is pretty well solved in TRAADDOC more so than in the FORSCOM. I wish them well in their cause. My question would be: Are these women that are suing the US ARMY, Active Army, or reserve forces?
Their careers may not last long, citing violations of the constitution, if the end result of this case turns out to be capricious in nature.

All of you are forgetting one small thing, Women in the military ARE being placed in harms way without getting official credit for frontline duty. When you are in a war where there is NO front line, any place in country is apt to become frontline territory at any time. These women have a valid point, without official combat duty, their advancement and retirement are severely affected, as it takes combat experience to advance beyond where they are now, even for, dare I say it, men.

I respect the ladies but,I can tell you from experience that Combat really is hell! I’ve known some women who are very strong in character, but when you are faced with the fact that you may very well die because bullets and grenades, artillery and a host of other factors increase your risk of dying, if i were you, i would’nt push the issue of wanting to be on the front lines. Women nurses are very much respected by all service people, and, if i want my records in good order, i would trust the woman to do them for me. Ladies, you can hold your head high for the jobs you’re already doing, but you should give up your fight for the combat role, in my opinion, it’s not for women.

REAL MEN would never approve of women in harm’s way—unless and util there are not enough REAL MEN left to fight. Men and women are DIFFERENT and have different roles because that is the way Nature and Nature’s God designed us. If you disagree then GET THE HELL OUT OF MY COUNTRY and go start your own!

As a war vet, my 2 cents is that if war vets had been consulted about combat, there would be NO women anywhere near combat zones.

Yes woman who volunteer for combat service should be allowed to do so . Those who aren’t wiling to do combat service may well have to give up promotions. Considering that female military personal are occasionally subjected to rape by fellow soldiers how would they react if captured by the enemy? Emotional trauma (PTSD) can be just as cruel as a physical war wound. Women who serve in all branches of military should be equally respected as having served their country. Those who die in combat should be given the same honors at Memorial Day ceremonies as well as those who are wounded. God Bless all Veterans who serve honorably. .

These women have not been “deprived” of life, liberty, or property. They have no case based on the fifth amendment.

But ignoring that, there are practical reasons that women have no business on the front line. Just watch a man and woman argue. We think differently, act differently, etc. Some women, no doubt, can handle the pressures of combat. But most can’t. No soldier, male or female, needs to deal with the risk of a panicked woman in the middle of combat.

That point of view is based on my general opinion of women, and not due to any specific woman. Again, I acknowledge that women can fight if properly trained, and some of them even have a mind for it. But as a general rule, nature itself has determined that women are weaker, more timid, less violent, far more emotional, etc.

They just don’t belong on the front line.

HHHHHMMMMMMM……another fascinating journey down the rabbit hole of constitutional
never, never land. Sadly, these people should actually KNOW they are subject to “admiralty and maritime” jurisdictions under the UCMJ. Not to mention that rank wise, Sgt Maj. and Colonel are pretty much the upper limits of rank for both Echo Mikes and Oscars, with the exception of the latter…….and the military is already top heavy in the Oscar dept. I guess the re-enlistment bonus’ and the automatic raise function as time served increases, plus the retirement pay after 20 and 26 years, in today’s economy….
plus the other benefits, just aren’t enough? Career ambition now requires one to seek out opportunities to slaughter other humans as a necessary means to career advancement?
The forever war beckons the forever warriors………clearly we should be grateful for such
eager and patriotic cannon fodder………..after all, the theory of infinite growth demands
that we take advantage of every option……..