Jump to content
fixer

Are Females A Combat Liability?

Recommended Posts

2009415173_ScreenShot2019-10-12at3_59_42PM.thumb.png.a8015081a97a4db7b9a68281c0603c4c.png

 

Women can serve in most areas of the military except riot control. They have been allowed in submarines, including nuclear submarines, since 2014. Women are allowed to serve in combat infantry. 1.7% of combat infantry are women.

 

Conservatives often stand accused these days of standing firm on "traditional existence" Yet liberals can be blinded by a sporadic ideology, and nowhere is this divide more true than in the debate over women in combat.....

 

Over the past two decades, the United States has moved steadily to open all military roles to women. Women may henceforward qualify for every duty, including combat infantry.

 

Yet to deny the highly combat-relevant differences between the sexes is to deny reality as blatantly as ever done by any anti-evolutionist - and with potentially much more lethal consequence.

 

In 2007, Kingsley Browne gathered the evidence in a clear and concise book, Co-ed Combat: The New Evidence That Women Shouldn't Fight the Nation's Wars. The case presented by Browne won't come as news to any military decision-maker. But it will and should jolt those who have relied on too credulous media sources for their information about what soldiers do and how they do it.

 

The case for women in combat runs more or less as follows:

1) We have entered an era of push-button war in which purely physical strength has lost much if not all of its military relevance.

2) To the extent that strength continues to matter, some women can meet requirements and should be given a chance to qualify.

3) Other than physical strength, there are no militarily relevant differences between men and women.

4) To exclude willing women from military service is unfair and unjust.

 

So maybe it's because War as we know it has changed and now they are more suited for it?

 

Fact is... many units will not go into combat with a female, The reason i was given was that if the female is captured the men are more prone to risk life and limb and make bad decisions in order to rescue them. Ever since being a child and maybe a bit of evolution involved but Men are naturally programed to protect Women, the physically weaker sex.... just the same as Women are naturally programed for a number of other things. I have been told by respected high ranking military personnel that putting a Woman in a combat situation puts the entire unit at risk and that they have refused to accept them into their units and are willing to accept punishment for this decision in order to protect their men.

 

Our enemies will use our culture and conventional being against us... In the most evil ways.

 

So...What do you think? Comment Below...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no issue with women serving in the military in so far as they are not serving in combat positions.  Call me sexist or whatever.  Women in general are not as strong, durable, and built for the rigors of combat as men are.  Male and Female bodies store energy and consume energy differently.  Male and female bodies are built for different tasks.  That isn't to say women can't be helpful in a pinch - there are some great female shooters out there.  There are always 'exceptions' to the rule as far as bigger and more fit women are concerned.  But, even then, they still pose a liability.  Base defense has a place.  Out in the streets where lead is flying back and forth... keep them back and out of the way.

 

At the end of the day in regards to combat...  I'm 6'1 - 230.  No 5'5 - 130 woman is dragging my wounded backside to safety.  

 

https://www.dailywire.com/news/leaked-slides-show-84-of-women-failing-army-fitness-test-official-responds

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Women who can do the job should be allowed to serve in any capacity.  One of the most battle hardened women brigades in the world, the YPJ of the Kurds is a perfect example.  

 

However, having said that, one needs to look at the recent results from the newly designed Army physical fitness test.  The pilot program launched had over 80% of the women who failed; not just scoring lower but failed!  If they retain this high bar and it is one if you take a look at the events, women will not only be discouraged from joining the military but also having their careers shortened.  Someone at the Department the Army in the Pentagon really needs to take a scientific approach to this and not come up with a three tiered program as well.  If you are a cook, you still will find yourself in combat sometime needing to drag a 200 pound plus soldier from danger.  Lowering that standard for everyone is an anathema to the Warrior Ethos because there would be some left behind.  Keep the standards the same for both men and women but make them so that they are achievable as a combat soldier given their responsibilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, John Fuller said:

Lowering that standard for everyone is an anathema to the Warrior Ethos.  Keep the standards the same for both men and women but make them so that they are achievable as a combat soldier given their responsibilities.

Your first sentence quoted above is amazing and i am totally on board. (and learned a new word)

 

Your second sentence I am not. No matter how hard the world tries, Men and Women can never be treated the same. They were never meant to be. If they were the same then our species is doomed. It takes the combination of a Man and a Women together to live their best lives. Where one is weak the other is strong, almost like someone planned it this way....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True but the world has changed immensely.  When I was in Vietnam, women were not in that type of combat then or even being considered for it.  However, since Desert Storm up through today, the technology and equipment for combat has changed dramatically.  The Kurdish Women fight just as fiercely as their Men and the exception is that they are separate brigades.  Either way, as a former Marine and retired Army Major, I have served with outstanding women many whom were in far better shape than many men.  So strong and weak do apply but in that sense the woman can be stronger.  So, if they can do the job and do not pose a physical threat to other soldiers due to lack of strength or stamina, go for it.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two nations experimented with women in combat, and they were not cooperating with each other in any kind of study.

 

1.  All-Female units tended to gain less ground and have a higher percentage of casualties than integrated units, and all-male units.

 

2.  Integrated units tended to gain less ground, and have a disproportionately higher rate of casualties among men than all-female units and all-male units.

 

3.  All-Male units tended to take more ground, and have disproportionately lower casualties that either all-female, or integrated units.

 

The two nations were the USSR and Israel.  If I could remember where I saw this, I would tell all of you.  In the Soviet Union, women ... operating on their own ... had amazing success as snipers, many having over 500 kills.

 

Now, in a civil war scenario, the "rebels" would have to make do with whatever mix of genders they had at-hand. 

 

Three women, in the Army, have been inducted into the Rangers, and the Army admits that they "fudged" the test results.  The men had to pass their tests on the first try, or they were out.  The women had multiple attempts.  Two of them did not pass all of the tests, and still became Rangers.  I would say that would be a drag on the morale of men in the Rangers.

 

@John Fuller, I was in Vietnam in 1968-69 in the 101st, and saw a lot of combat.  I would much prefer to have men on each side of me, than women.  I would definitely not like to be carrying part of a non-wounded woman's combat load.  Also, I don't want to be put into the position where I fail to accomplish the mission, because I was busy protecting a woman.  Note that when I was "over there", there were no women who could have done what I did, and the other men did.

Edited by Headhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Some women are probably capable of doing it.  Just the chances of finding Bruce Jenner is slim.     The idea that you need to be in combat is silly.  The lat 20 years their has been very little of front line units only fighting.    Truck drivers to mechanics have been in the fight..

 

I dont want standards lowered for those combat mos personal either.    

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As in any job , prove you can do it. I did find your statement interesting that if a  female is captured you will do all to free them, would you not do the same for any soldier? In combat during a woman's monthly cycle, hier strength is reduced. We need to put men and women in positions of their strengths and talents to truly achieve best results.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Spiritwomyn said:

As in any job , prove you can do it. I did find your statement interesting that if a  female is captured you will do all to free them, would you not do the same for any soldier? In combat during a woman's monthly cycle, hier strength is reduced. We need to put men and women in positions of their strengths and talents to truly achieve best results.

Thats what i was told and i asked the same question.. “wouldn’t you do the same for a man” and the immediate answer was “No”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Spiritwomyn said:

As in any job , prove you can do it. I did find your statement interesting that if a  female is captured you will do all to free them, would you not do the same for any soldier? In combat during a woman's monthly cycle, hier strength is reduced. We need to put men and women in positions of their strengths and talents to truly achieve best results.

If someone took one of my guys Male or female....I'll rip your throat out

 

You take care of your team and dont let shit roll up or down

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, fixer said:

5A1788DB-2181-4F31-A8C5-F607751409F2.jpeg.25eebee32143b235c044c85f5d379628.jpeg

 

 

This picture is worth a thousand words.  The young lady has about 5-10 seconds to get out of this situation.

Edited by Headhunter

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Claw Hammer said:

If someone took one of my guys Male or female....I'll rip your throat out

 

You take care of your team and dont let shit roll up or down

 

I think I'd want to be in your unit, when the SHTF!

 

When I was in 'Nam, I was strong as the proverbial ox.  I'm 70 years old, now.  I can knock a gnat off a tit at 500 yards, but put me man-to-man with a guy 50 years younger than me, and I'm dead.  It's just that simple.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Headhunter said:

 

I think I'd want to be in your unit, when the SHTF!

 

When I was in 'Nam, I was strong as the proverbial ox.  I'm 70 years old, now.  I can knock a gnat off a tit at 500 yards, but put me man-to-man with a guy 50 years younger than me, and I'm dead.  It's just that simple.

Thanks I think it's just how teams should be a family.  A family who will kill for each other and take no shit will go far.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that picture above, if she is trained in defense combat and or martial arts, strength is not the issue. Anyone can be trained for any eventuality.  Not all men should be in combat either.  Again, the right person for the job. I am not my body, I am what uses it.  I was a firefighter, I carried my own pack, no one questioned my ability simply because I was female. I trained and worked hard. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My three rules to life

1.. Stand behind me, ill Protect you..

2.. Stand beside me, ill Respect you.. 

3.. Stand against me or my family, Dues Vult.. pray to your god i will send you..

 

That being Said.. Mad Respect.. Ide gladly fight beside you

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they pass everything the men have to without lowering the standards to allow them to pass, or ignoring their failure then hell no!  If they don't pass what the men have to or the standards are lowered for them or their failures are ignored, then hell yes they are!

 

84% of Women Fail Army Fitness Test

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LFR, thanks for the video.

 

If 84% of women can't do PT, then they don't need to be putting the lives of the men, in the Army, at risk.  They should find something else to do with their lives.  What?  Do the men have to climb up the 8-foot wall, then turn and help the women to clear the obstacle?

 

As I've said before, I'm 70.  I know for a fact that I could not pass this test, even though I'm in extraordinarily good condition for a man of my age.  And note that we're not talking about militia, in this thread.  We're talking about the US military.  If every person wearing the uniform can't do the job, then those who can't need to be gone.  It's as simple as that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Let_Freedom_Ring said:

If they pass everything the men have to without lowering the standards to allow them to pass, or ignoring their failure then hell no!  If they don't pass what the men have to or the standards are lowered for them or their failures are ignored, then hell yes they are!

 

84% of Women Fail Army Fitness Test

 

 

 

It's the new army test..    honestly its really a hot mess that's going fail.  Its pretty dumb.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

not sure why this still gets asked in the media. must be the front line concept and movies theatrics that bring it up. the war on terror is pushing 20 years with no modern fight being like a front line and women are there everyday and have been. the author of that article is a bit of a clown bringing up strength, which was never the issue. plus today fitness and strength is a huge factor which led to the army finally changing their fitness requirements to something more realistic and geared towards battle and combat. as long as everyone in uniform is treated independent of the gender and equally as a soldier, sailor, airman and marine than standards will be followed and not changed to "accommodate" as that is not needed. Sure most women cannot move most men in full gear and drag them out of a vehicle. but that's not because they are women. it is because some idiot leader took a 110 pound human and made them the battle buddy of a 250lb human which is not only stupid but bad leadership. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If she can fire a rifle, use a knife and slit someones throat, then i have no problem having a woman on the lines. Kurdish women do it, and i'd like to believe that our women are the best in the world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Idlestorm said:

If she can fire a rifle, use a knife and slit someones throat, then i have no problem having a woman on the lines. Kurdish women do it, and i'd like to believe that our women are the best in the world.

The Kurdish women don't have a choice.  Similar to the women in the military in Israel.  When everyone you're surrounded by wants to kill you... you have to fight.  If our women are the best in the world... why do you want them to die?  Do you protect the people you love or do you expose them to danger and death?   

 

Anyone can be trained to fight, go through strength training, tactics, and so forth.  There still remain obvious biological matters to be concerned with.  Then you get into the realm of cultural and ethical standards.  Having women fight in combat serves as a reflection of the culture and their value of women - it's socialist dehumanization to send women into combat.  Bodies to carry rifles and get shot at.  Cogs in the machine.  I value women too much for that kind of thinking.  We don't prohibit women from fighting because they can't... we prevent them from fighting because we love and value them highly enough to spare them of that Hell.  Feminism and communism go hand in hand - they devalue women and degrade their beauty and virtue.  The very destruction of the family and the decay of our Western values are rooted in this line of thinking. 

 

It makes little sense to fight back against Communism and Socialism if you're going to allow all the ground work they put in place to destroy our nation remain in our way of thinking.  Necessity is one thing - sometimes women and children have no choice but to fight.  But, we are not barbarians nor are we communists.  We are the civilized West and we need to restore those values.  As Scripture teaches... a little leaven leavens the whole lump.  

 

I don't think we are aware of how deeply our own way of thinking has been infected by the decades of work that the ism's and ist's have pumped into us.  .  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, RevRifleman said:

he Kurdish women don't have a choice.  Similar to the women in the military in Israel.  When everyone you're surrounded by wants to kill you... you have to fight.  If our women are the best in the world... why do you want them to die?  Do you protect the people you love or do you expose them to danger and death?   

 

 Pretty soon, our women may not have a choice either. Also, no, I don't expose those i love to fire and yes i do protect them!!

The question is Are women a combat liability? Which means can they do what men do on the front lines. I answered the question as i saw it. If a woman chooses to fight, then let them fight. Can you explain the "Molly Pitcher" story of the revolutionary war? There were men there when she started loading cannons, but yet she stayed and fought and the men let her. Yes, her husband died at that same post, but she jumped in and helped.  I'm not going to try to explain cultural or ethical part, because i cannot, the question was asked and i answered it as i saw it......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Idlestorm said:

 Pretty soon, our women may not have a choice either. Also, no, I don't expose those i love to fire and yes i do protect them!!

The question is Are women a combat liability? Which means can they do what men do on the front lines. I answered the question as i saw it. If a woman chooses to fight, then let them fight. Can you explain the "Molly Pitcher" story of the revolutionary war? There were men there when she started loading cannons, but yet she stayed and fought and the men let her. Yes, her husband died at that same post, but she jumped in and helped.  I'm not going to try to explain cultural or ethical part, because i cannot, the question was asked and i answered it as i saw it......

 

There are plenty of examples of women stepping up when necessary.  A lot of great female patriots out there that I deeply respect.  Women certainly have a role in serving our nation.  Your answer was more than fine... my point was to drag the discussion further.  And, of course, your comment was used in my response... but anyone else is free to discuss.

 

As Patriots we must not forget the fact that if a war breaks out at home... there will be cultural, ethical, moral, and legal conversations taking place.  What happens after the war has to be part of the conversation before the war ever begins.  I'm glad some YT folks have begun pushing on that subject as well, such as John Mark.  It's not just guns, mud, and blood.  

 

Are women in combat a liability?  Yes and no.  Are men in combat a liability?  Yes and no.  Anyone can become a liability.  Does the service of women in combat roles potentially weaken our military?  Maybe.  Anything other than a bold 'NO' isn't a politically correct answer.  Is there some vast conspiracy to weaken the strongest military in the world - the Commies in the system making our men walk in high heel shoes, putting women on the front lines, changing fitness requirements, etc?  Maybe... maybe not.  There is a lot to think about and given how politicized science has become we can't even trust half the studies coming out of the very same liberal institutions that are destroying the minds of our youngest generations.  Heck, psychological institutions and associations are catering to the notion that there are potentially an infinite number of genders out there.  Who knows what has trickled into our military in the upper ranks.  

 

The point I was making is that such a question can lead to answers that can be used to promote an ends justify the means mentality.  Do we advocate for women in the military and the militia serving in combat roles out of necessity or is it because we have changed in regards to how we value and view women?  That someone is capable is only a piece of a much bigger picture.  

 

Sorry if I've made a simple question more complicated than it needs to be.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


Follow: @My_Militia

Mission Statement

As the de facto authority in american patriot militias we understand that we oversee a significant share of the publics perception of the militia, and with this many individuals and militias entrust their ideas, work, and data to our platform. We do not take this lightly as we mandate an extreme amount of responsibility and assurance of good faith, transparency, and due process. We will remain vigilant as a trusted force among our people. So help us God.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Your Privacy Is Important To Us Learn More: Privacy Policy