MORE, ABOUT WOMEN IN 'REAL' COMBAT.....

Discussion in 'Vietnam Memories Forums - A Place For All Vets Fro' started by rooter, Mar 23, 2014.

  1. rooter

    rooter *VMBB Senior Chief Of Staff* Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2001
    Messages:
    17,889
    Location:
    Glendale Arizona
    Warfighter is part of theWarfighter Foundation. It is a means for people to connect and relate to our nations combat veterans and their families.

    http://warfighterfoundation.wordpress.com/about/

    DEBUNKING THE ISRAELI ‘WOMEN IN COMBAT’ MYTH

    Despite 225 years of witnessing the horror of wars fought by male American soldiers, there are still a number of idiots – mostly feminists who themselves will never have to face an armed enemy soldier – pushing lawmakers to drop a ban against allowing women in combat.
    Israel – a nation of about 6.2 million people constantly at war with its neighbors – allowed women in combat, the idiots shriek. Why, then, must the American military, as regards ground combat roles, remain so androcentric, so “male-centered”?
    It’s time to debunk the myth, once and for all, that Israel’s experience with allowing women in combat was successful and, therefore, should be duplicated by the Pentagon. It wasn’t successful. It was a disaster by Israel’s own admission.
    “History shows that the presence of women has had a devastating impact on the effectiveness of men in battle,” wrote John Luddy in July 27, 1994, for the Heritage Foundation backgrounder.
    “For example, it is a common misperception that Israel allows women in combat units. In fact, women have been barred from combat in Israel since 1950, when a review of the 1948 Arab-Israeli War showed how harmful their presence could be. The study revealed that men tried to protect and assist women rather than continue their attack. As a result, they not only put their own lives in greater danger, but also jeopardized the survival of the entire unit. The study further revealed that unit morale was damaged when men saw women killed and maimed on the battlefield,” Luddy said.
    Writes Edward Norton, a reservist in the Israel Defense Forces: “Women have always played an important role in the Israeli military, but they rarely see combat; if they do, it is usually by accident. No one in Israel, including feminists, has any objection to this situation. The fact that the Persian Gulf War has produced calls to allow women on the front lines proves only how atypical that war was and how little Americans really understand combat.”
    “Few serious armies use women in combat roles. Israel, which drafts most of its young women and uses them in all kinds of military work, has learned from experience to take them out of combat zones. Tests show that few women have the upper-body strength required for combat tasks. Keeping combat forces all male would not be discriminatory, as were earlier racial segregation schemes in the military, because men and women are different both physically and psychologically,” said the Feb. 5, 1990, National Review.
    Furthermore, Israeli historian Martin Van Creveld has written extensively about the failure of the IDF to successfully integrate and use women in combat.
    Finally, even Israeli citizens don’t relish the thought of allowing their women into combat roles. In 1998, a survey conducted by the Jerusalem Post newspaper found that 56 percent of Israelis don’t want women in combat.
    There are now and always will be idiots who say the Pentagon should put women in any combat unit they wish to serve. Most of these people will speak with the ignorance of never having had to experience the horror of combat, as well as the luxury of never having to worry about engaging in armed conflict themselves.
    But to use the “Israeli experience” as an allegedly successful model for the U.S. to follow is not only absurd, it’s disingenuous. It is a lie propagated by radical feminists like ex-Democratic Rep. Patricia Schroeder who have falsely claimed that such a goal is merely an extension of “the will of the people.”
    Perhaps if more lawmakers – and Americans in general – were exposed to military service, the idiots who seem to be dominating this debate wouldn’t have many sympathetic ears.
     
    jedwil, lonewolf204, raven818 and 2 others like this.
  2. Zepher6

    Zepher6 Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2014
    Messages:
    52
    Location:
    Tide water, Va.
    As a fire arms instructor, I find that a large %age of females can't reload their expended magazines without slowing down the entire firing line. They also have difficulties pulling the slide of the weapon to the rear in order to clear the weapon during failure to feed problems. I can only imagine what their plight might be in a real knock down drag out battle. I wouldn't have one near me in a real fire fight!!! But then I'm just an old timey fart that should be pushed off to the trash bin of history in a wheelchair and given a towel upon which to drool. My best recommendation would be to amass a large group of them in a single unit and send them forth as a spoiling force!!!! Oh my, how insensitive of me!
     
    Last edited: Oct 23, 2014
    Designer likes this.

  3. rooter

    rooter *VMBB Senior Chief Of Staff* Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2001
    Messages:
    17,889
    Location:
    Glendale Arizona
    Greetings, Z6....it took some time for you to comment but first, welcome aboard...things about discussions get lively on here at times and over the years I have posted things about female infantry troops. Your remarks mesh with mine however with your first hand teaching of the ladies, yours are a great deal more accurate than mine...I'd never have wanted to serve with any of my relatives in a combat role...I do have a grand daughter-in-law who served in the army as recent as 2007...She's sharp and must have made a good troop in the motor pool where her duties were. Chief
     
  4. rooter

    rooter *VMBB Senior Chief Of Staff* Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2001
    Messages:
    17,889
    Location:
    Glendale Arizona
    Here, going on 2 years since I posted this about the women in the military.. There have been a goodly number of views, but without much discussion. We used to have a former Army enlisted on here...Hope was her ID and she would mix it up frequently about women in the service...Hope served in Vietnam and spoke well of the Woman's Army Corp...Hope and her husband, who was former army enlisted also, use to hunt and fish out of either Idaho or Oregon...Hope, just in case you stop in now and then and read this, give us a hail and a cheer! Chief
     
    Last edited: Jun 28, 2015
  5. cpt-t

    cpt-t Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2012
    Messages:
    81
    Location:
    Wichita Ks
    There are jobs for Boys and there jobs for Girls. But actual Combat is not a place for Girls. IMHO all this does is put a lot of Young Men`s lives in real danger. Combat is a Mean, Nasty, Evil, and Unforgiving Bussiness. And Girls have no place there, it is bad enough with out them. I personly witnessed this in Viet Nam and the out come I saw was completely unacceptable. And because of that, this is why I have such an extremly hard and negative opion of Women in Combat.
    ken
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 26, 2015
    jedwil and jim brady like this.
  6. jim brady

    jim brady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    4,454
    Location:
    Simla, Colorado
    I agree. The people pushing for 'equal opportunities' (women in Combat Arms roles) is just plain stupid. Most of who I see pushing for women in combat are rich old biddies or young yuppie-ettes who have absolutely no idea of what they are talking about. Everything the say is pure classroom theory.

    Soldiers in combat have to be able to absolutely depend on the team, and each and every member of that team, to be as physically strong and emotionally aggressive as possible. A combat team is no stronger than it's weakest link. All must be able to endure the worst possible conditions that a living human being can imagine. That is the reason why our combat soldiers receive hard training - to toughen and to weed out those who can't/won't hack it.

    Recently, the Army (reads 'The Press') boasted that several females were graduated from the Army's Ranger School. They've been trying a long while to accomplish this. Run enough people thru (and lower the bar for them) and they will eventually succeed. Makes no sense to me to water down the combat effectiveness of the Army to reach a political goal. But this is the same Army who is letting a turncoat traitor off the hook so as to not embarrass the CIC for his own stupid decisions and complete lack of leadership and moral compass. He has no respect for the military. None. The top brass in the Army are the same as he is. No guts.
     
    PapaRich and jedwil like this.
  7. PapaRich

    PapaRich Member

    Joined:
    Feb 7, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Location:
    W.Md
    I know that this is an old thread but I'm new. I went through Army Drill Sergeant school. We had three female student in my class. We had all of the classroom instruction together. They were taken away by a female instructor to do "other physical things." Equal?
     
    rooter and jedwil like this.
  8. rooter

    rooter *VMBB Senior Chief Of Staff* Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 31, 2001
    Messages:
    17,889
    Location:
    Glendale Arizona
    Papa, this is the Chief again...Land Sakes, I posted that about the Israeli women years ago.
    Lets watch the new SECDEF and see if he rescinds anything...never served with women but
    they are in the naval construction forces now...I won't make fun but have my personal
    reservations about them....not my wife, sister, daughter or any of the kin I know well...Just
    don't seem right, in my opinion...how to handle a sucking chest wound with a battle dressing...lace in some exposed intestines with a 'skivvie-shirt'...Chief
     
    PapaRich likes this.