Women in Combat

+100

You can't force someone to take training. I worked in a shipyard and they had an apprencticeship welding program. Only one woman took them up on their offer. I love to point out to a complaining woman (or an emasculated male counterpart) that it is possible that women get paid less but 99% of all work place deaths are male, same number goes for debilitating work place accidents. So maybe when women start sharing everything then they have a point.

Women has as much right to be in the military as the men. They should be allowed to be in combat situations as well as the guys.

The women soldiers I know were frustrated that they were not allowed to join fields such as infantry and their training was limited too (1980's to 90's). I have met quite a few women that could be far more dangerous and kick ass than a man.

If you don't want your daughter to join the military then talk to her. It still will be her decision whether you like it or not.

Would the guys get distracted? I know I would.


Yes this is terribly sexist.

You're illiteracy is astounding, LL. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

It may be "astounding" to you, but given your superficial, agenda-ladden perspective of what is printed, while ignoring the caveats, is sufficient for me to discount your evaluation of my qualifications to critical examine "popular" reports of bravado by wives who joined their husband's sides in a domestic conflict during which they may have been involved nonetheless had they remained on the farm or plantation.

My opinion is that examples of civil war brides and gf's even (or female doctors and nurses) are not relevant to the 2013 military changes that have "opened the door" for women to engage the enemy directly in combat .... about which I am NOT opposed so long as the standards, training, and expectations are EQUAL.

Can you comprehend that last underlined statement?

Now, back to the 21st century and ....

..... international military engagements in remote spots of the world.

Before I start pulling out tales of Robin Hood and his merry women.

Mikki here is the problem. Men don't have a choice, women do. When a woman starts in the army and they TELL her that she will be infantry even if she stands all of 5' nothing then we have a problem. If women want to serve in combat then they need to accept everything that comes with it including selective service.

Do women in Mossad count? We know what happened to Jessica Lynch don't we? A lot of women served in the Iranian-Iraq war.

Mikki here is the problem. Men don't have a choice, women do. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

I'll put it this way, in my attitude, ...

.. when a female has regularly baited her own hook, gut and scale her own fish, field dressed the deer she just shot and carry it back to camp, skin the dove and quail she just bagged, and break down and clean her own hunting firearms and equipment up until she is 18 years of age, since she was 8, then I will give it a little more thought......

... without complaining about her broken nail or falling hair do.

And last, but not least, when females quit trying to "bond" with and "mother" men. As the saying goes the chain is only as strong as the weakest link. That means all links have to be of the same strength. This issue is not about "equal opportunity" and any "glass ceiling" or an interpretation of the 14th amendment ... or even some social agenda ...

it is about the necessity in today's world to have the most efficient and responsive military ALL THE TIME regardless of when and where the need arises.

When it's time to FUCK the enemy, having a headache won't cut it.

My opinion is that examples of civil war brides and gf's even (or female doctors and nurses) are not relevant to the 2013 military changes that have "opened the door" for women to engage the enemy directly in combat .... about which I am NOT opposed so long as the standards, training, and expectations are EQUAL.

Can you comprehend that last underlined statement? Originally Posted by LexusLover

No, he can't.

IBHankerwrong will ignore it and instead take other comments you made out of context or, worse yet, try to put words in your mouth and then argue against those other "fake" points in order to make himself look good.

He will throw in words like "extant" and "suzerainty" (on a whore board!) and then accuse ME of being pretentious. He thinks the big words will make the rest of us just fall down in defeat over his brilliance.

I left an engineering career and went into a different field that tripled my pay. Part of that meant relocating to Texas and escaping NY taxes.

Nonetheless, IBH, who knows nothing about me, says I was dismal failure in my own eyes and had to leave "my beloved" NY. He gathers all that from my handle "ExNYer".

Think about that. Apparently, IBH thinks can determine my relative success in life from my handle AND he thinks can read my mind to know if I am in a failure in my own eyes. AND he knows that NY is beloved to me, despite the fact that 1) I left; and 2) I have criticized NY (and CA) for high taxes and liberal politics numerous times.

You can't penetrate an egotistical mind like that with straightforward reasoning. IBHankerwrong always has been and always will be a narcissistic twat.

He will post in this thread 37 more times and each time he will split even more hairs. He will demand you prove negatives and post anecdotal evidence to support his own case.

He kept writing the word COMBAT in all capitals and used it over and over to refer to the unit that broad served in. But he never provided any evidence that the unit, you know, actually engaged in combat while she was serving in it.

Like I said above, you have to be dragged down 5 flights of stairs with your head banging on every riser to post and think like IBHankerwrong.

Annnnnnd, over to you, IBH!

Don't they say if you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere or is that just Broadway?

Don't they say if you can make it in New York, you can make it anywhere or is that just Broadway? Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

True that. And sometimes you can make it better elsewhere.

At least you won't have Andrew Cuomo or another Kennedy reaching into your pocket.

Look at the bright side. Bigoted assholes like you will die off and open minded folks won't have to hear carp like this in the future. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

I hear an ambulance in the distance you fat fuck, why aren't you chasing it?

Look at the bright side. Bigoted assholes like you will die off and open minded folks won't have to hear carp like this in the future. Originally Posted by TexTushHog

You need to check birthrates among the "open-minded" folks in the parts of the country you like and compare them to the birthrates in the parts you don't like.

http://www.mca-marines.org/gazette/a...-created-equal

It may be "astounding" to you, but given your superficial, agenda-ladden perspective of what is printed, while ignoring the caveats, is sufficient for me to discount your evaluation of my qualifications to critical examine "popular" reports of bravado by wives who joined their husband's sides in a domestic conflict during which they may have been involved nonetheless had they remained on the farm or plantation.

My opinion is that examples of civil war brides and gf's even (or female doctors and nurses) are not relevant to the 2013 military changes that have "opened the door" for women to engage the enemy directly in combat .... about which I am NOT opposed so long as the standards, training, and expectations are EQUAL.

Can you comprehend that last underlined statement?

Now, back to the 21st century and ....

..... international military engagements in remote spots of the world.

Before I start pulling out tales of Robin Hood and his merry women. Originally Posted by LexusLover

You’re the one who has completely failed to “comprehend”, LL. Without justification or substantive fact, you’ve continued to attack and trivialize the service record of women who demonstrated they could meet the standards and expectations required of their male counterparts in a combat unit. Your POV has been revealed as superficial and wanting.

No, he can't.

IBHankerwrong will ignore it and instead take other comments you made out of context or, worse yet, try to put words in your mouth and then argue against those other "fake" points in order to make himself look good.

He will throw in words like "extant" and "suzerainty" (on a whore board!) and then accuse ME of being pretentious. He thinks the big words will make the rest of us just fall down in defeat over his brilliance.

I left an engineering career and went into a different field that tripled my pay. Part of that meant relocating to Texas and escaping NY taxes.

Nonetheless, IBH, who knows nothing about me, says I was dismal failure in my own eyes and had to leave "my beloved" NY. He gathers all that from my handle "ExNYer".

Think about that. Apparently, IBH thinks can determine my relative success in life from my handle AND he thinks can read my mind to know if I am in a failure in my own eyes. AND he knows that NY is beloved to me, despite the fact that 1) I left; and 2) I have criticized NY (and CA) for high taxes and liberal politics numerous times.

You can't penetrate an egotistical mind like that with straightforward reasoning. IBHankerwrong always has been and always will be a narcissistic twat.

He will post in this thread 37 more times and each time he will split even more hairs. He will demand you prove negatives and post anecdotal evidence to support his own case.

He kept writing the word COMBAT in all capitals and used it over and over to refer to the unit that broad served in. But he never provided any evidence that the unit, you know, actually engaged in combat while she was serving in it.

Like I said above, you have to be dragged down 5 flights of stairs with your head banging on every riser to post and think like IBHankerwrong.

Annnnnnd, over to you, IBH! Originally Posted by ExNYer

You are pretentious, ExNYer. You established that in an earlier thread where you out of hand completely discounted as irrelevant the works of subject matter experts because those individuals lived south of the Mason-Dixon Line. You imagine your self superior to the same, and you are demonstrably not. Furthermore, you are hypocritically guilty of every action you ascribe to me.

You would do well to reexamine closely the posts in this thread, ExNYer. You're the one who is "ignoring" that it was you who precipitately posted an insult without any provocation. Now you pretentiously leap to LL’s defense, while again "ignoring" that he is the one who prevaricated in regards to the historically established service records of several women who demonstrated that women can serve in COMBAT units as equals to their male counterparts. It was LL who ignorantly initiated this exchange. Are you now going to join LL in his specious argument, ExNYer? Are you too, like LL, going to ignorantly deny the documented and factual historical service records of those enumerated women, ExNYer? Further, ExNYer, it wasn’t necessary to prove that the 38th Infantry engaged in COMBAT. All that was required was to show that women, such as Cathay Williams, performed their duties as equals to their male counterparts in a COMBAT unit, ExNYer. Other examples of women who did engage in COMBAT were provided, but like LL, you too choose to ignore (you didn’t note their valid service in your hypocritical, accusatory – and completely off topic – post) those examples and ignorantly pretend they were never provided as examples.

You are a loser, ExNYer. You were forced by circumstance to find employment in the South, yet you long to be in New York: you intimate as much in your choice for a handle, “ExNYer”. You vilify southerners, and you pretentiously think yourself superior, but you are quite wrong. Every intellectual want or moral failing you ascribed to southerners can be found in Yankees: including yourself, ExNYer. So carry your pretentious-ass back to New York, and don't snort too much water up that snooty-nose of yours when you cross the Red River as you head north!

[QUOTE=I B Hankering;1052302842]
You imagine your self superior to the same, and you are demonstrably not. Furthermore, you are hypocritically guilty of every action you ascribe to me.
Prove it, bitch!

You would do well to reexamine closely the posts in this thread, ExNYer. You're the one who is "ignoring" that it was you who precipitately posted an insult without any provocation.
I'm not ignoring anything. I proudly admit I insulted you. You richly deserve it. BTW, why did you put quote marks around "ignoring"? You weren't using it in any special way. Is it pretentious to point that out?

Now you pretentiously leap to LL’s defense, while again "ignoring" that he is the one who prevaricated in regards to the historically established service records of several women who demonstrated that women can serve in COMBAT units as equals to their male counterparts. It was LL who ignorantly initiated this exchange. Are you now going to join LL in his specious argument, ExNYer? Are you too, like LL, going to ignorantly deny the documented and factual historical service records of those enumerated women, ExNYer?
Actually, I'm not defending LL or taking ANY position on the subject of this thread, which I find boring. I just joined in because I wanted to point out what a twat you are. My sole purpose was to attack you. It's such fun.

Further, ExNYer, it wasn’t necessary to prove that the 38th Infantry engaged in COMBAT
Yes, it was. That was the whole fucking point of your post, wasn't it? That she had served in actual combat. NOT that she was stationed in a unit that might one day go into combat. You just posted some shit without reading it and didn't want to retract it.

You are a loser, ExNYer. You were forced by circumstance to find employment in the South,
Ah, there it is again. You have NO idea what my circumstances were or are. And yet somehow you think you know. Who is pretentious now, little twat? In fact, I had employment opportunities in NY, Silicon Valley, VA (near DC) and Dallas. I chose Dallas for a bunch of reasons.

... yet you long to be in New York: you intimate as much in your choice for a handle, “ExNYer”.
You see, this is yet more reason to conclude you are stupid twat. Most folks would see a handle like "ExNYer" and think "He got out - musta found something better". But, not you. You think "He must long to be there". Why? Because you're a stupid twat..

You vilify southerners, and you pretentiously think yourself superior, but you are quite wrong.
I do NOT vilify Southerners. Just stupid twat bigots like you who wax nostalgic for the Confederacy. I'm actually quite fond ofSoutherners and feel contempt whenprogressive assholes like Bill Maher look down on red state folks for their religiosity, patriotism, etc. But that still doesn't excuse the small minority of Confederate sympathizers longing for the good old days when you could own "nigras".

Every intellectual want or moral failing you ascribed to southerners can be found in Yankees: including yourself, ExNYer.
Sorry, but i do not have ANY intellectual wants or moral faiiingsand neither do Southerners who think like me. Now run along little twat, you bore me.[/QUOTE]

It is so painfully evident that you have a HUGE inferiority complex when it comes to northerners in general and New York in particular. And it colors all your thinking and makes you act like a little twat.