Go Back   Professional Soldiers ® > At Ease > The Early Bird

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-23-2013, 14:40   #1
Streck-Fu
Area Commander
 
Streck-Fu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,086
Women into combat roles.....

I guess they must be referring to Infantry and other currently designated Combat Arms roles as women already serve in a variety of positions that are exposed to combat.

LINK

Quote:

Senior defense officials say Pentagon chief Leon Panetta is removing the military's ban on women serving in combat, opening hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando jobs after more than a decade at war.

The groundbreaking move recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule banning women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units. Panetta's decision gives the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believe any positions must remain closed to women.
__________________
Daniel
GM1 USNR (RET)

Si vis pacem, para bellum
Streck-Fu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 14:45   #2
glebo
Quiet Professional
 
glebo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Hope Mills, NC
Posts: 2,819
I get the "equality" thing, but I wonder who is actually pushing for this. Womens groups who will never even be in a combat situation, just to push their agenda, or is actually driven by women who are serving.....and it would actually be their butts on the line???
__________________
Out of all the places I've been, this is one of'em....
You haven't lived...until you've almost died...

Last edited by glebo; 01-23-2013 at 14:45. Reason: spelling
glebo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 15:27   #3
griper23
Asset
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: The Frozen Wastes
Posts: 16
SecDef allows women in combat jobs

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/panet...at-roles-women


this will be good.
griper23 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 15:33   #4
trvlr
Quiet Professional
 
trvlr's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Near the Smokies.
Posts: 242
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/0...n_2535954.html

It looks like the real deal.

We should now be able to double our selective service numbers and make one streamlined physical fitness test that ensures troops will be able to carry their buddies to a casualty collection point in full kit.
__________________
"If you don't hit the target, you're never going to score."
-Andy Gray
trvlr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 15:42   #5
Pete
Quiet Professional
 
Pete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Fayetteville
Posts: 13,080
Standards

If the Standards remain the same then no problem.

If the Standards are normed into male & female standards then the bottom level standards for doing the job were lowered.

If they are lowered to allow females in then why would males have to meet a higher standard?
Pete is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 15:48   #6
Bechorg
Quiet Professional
 
Bechorg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: >6000ft
Posts: 219
Allowing females on ODA's would be a detriment to the teams ability to conduct its mission. It creates an extremely weak member of the team and that weak link is all it takes to put everyone in jeopardy.

If I got shot on a remote mountaintop this female better be able to climb up that mountain in full kit, pick my ass up, and carry me down the mountain. This is not an extreme example, I know men who have done it. Bottom line is that it cannot be done. No woman can pick up 220 pounds and carry it for extended distance. This isn't limited to SF, it occurs in all of the combat arms and you cannot allow them in any of them if this situation exists.

KILL THIS IDEA NOW!
Bechorg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 15:56   #7
SF_BHT
Quiet Professional
 
SF_BHT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Sneaking back and forth across the Border
Posts: 6,681
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete View Post
If the Standards remain the same then no problem.

If the Standards are normed into male & female standards then the bottom level standards for doing the job were lowered.

If they are lowered to allow females in then why would males have to meet a higher standard?
Pete

I agree. Do not change the standards. If they can make it just like you and me then go for it.
SF_BHT is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-23-2013, 16:01   #8
DIYPatriot
Guerrilla Chief
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: TN/NC
Posts: 604
FWIW

Quote:
“It will take awhile to work out the mechanics in some cases. We expect some jobs to open quickly, by the end of this year. Others, like Special Operations Forces and Infantry, may take longer,” a senior defense official explains. Panetta is setting the goal of January 2016 for all assessments to be complete and women integrated as much as possible.

The Pentagon has left itself some wiggle room, however, which may ultimately lead to some jobs being designated as “closed” to women. A senior Defense official says if, after the assessment, a branch finds that “a specific job or unit should not be open, they can go back to the secretary and ask for an exemption to the policy, to designate the job or unit as closed.”
Article
__________________
"Don't tell me what a good man should be. Don't tell me about his character or what should be in his heart - show me. And then show me again when I'm no longer here because I'll be watching." - my grandfather
DIYPatriot is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 18:29.



Copyright 2004-2022 by Professional Soldiers ®
Site Designed, Maintained, & Hosted by Hilliker Technologies