Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Women serving in combat in Western Armies

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • 1. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/y...n-combat-jobs/

    WASHINGTON — Defense Secretary Jim Mattis is offering a dim view of females serving in infantry jobs, telling Virginia Military Institute students that the jury is out on whether women can succeed in combat. Mattis says there are too few women in the infantry ranks to provide enough data on how it’s going.

    He says he has asked top Army and Marine leaders for information to determine if having women in the infantry is a strength or weakness.

    Responding to a question from a male student, who described some of his female classmates as fierce, Mattis said the issue must be resolved by military officers who are objective and understand that the natural inclination is to have service open to all. But, he added, "we cannot do something that militarily doesn't make sense."

    2. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/y...n-in-infantry/

    Here is the Virginia Military Institute male cadet’s question on women in combat infantry units and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis' full response that he provided during a Sept. 25 speech there: “Sir ... first off I’d just like to say, pardon my language, but there are a lot of bad-ass women here , some physically fit than I am, some smarter than I am, but I remember I was doing some research on the Marine Corps’ experiment if female in combat arms makes us more combat effective, and I would just like to hear your thoughts on that.”

    Mattis response:

    “It’s a very, very tough issue. Because it goes from some people’s perspective of what kind of society do we want. You know, in the event of trouble ... you’re sleeping at night, in your family home, you’re the dad, mom, whatever, and you hear glass break downstairs. Who grabs the baseball bat and gets between the kids’ door and whoever broke in? And who reached for the phone to call 9-11. In other words, it goes to the almost primitive needs of a society to look out for its most vulnerable.

    H'17-Yep, well said Sec Def!
    Again, no discussion of higher injury rates for women in these physically demanding specialties, nor the larger issue, pregnancy and unit readiness. An issue to address for any unit, in which case, another soldier will have to fill the shortage...
    Last edited by haze17; 26-09-2018, 03:37 PM.

    Comment


    • https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-..._source=clavis

      This January will make three years since the Army opened infantry, armor, fire support and special operator jobs to women for the first time. At last count, there were 783 women serving across five divisions and one independent brigade, the Army’s deputy chief of staff for personnel told Army Times in a Sept. 25 interview.

      H'17- of course, what is not covered how many are injured in training or drop from a course and have to reclassify. (nor that their injury rates are higher than males) Pregnancy and unit readiness is NOT mentioned, as usual. So what does a unit do when a female infantrymen becomes pregnant? Crickets...carry on the fantasy!

      Comment


      • So what does a unit do when a male infantryman becomes long term injured?

        Comment


        • Runs short during a training phase, or if they're about to deploy, posts someone in. Most Companies have someone out in our neck of the woods, generally it's knees, shoulders or ankles, more often than not it's from playing footy.

          Comment


          • So pretty much what they'd do if a woman is out of action for a while?

            Comment


            • Originally posted by downsizer View Post
              So pretty much what they'd do if a woman is out of action for a while?
              Yes, however, for a pregnancy it is much longer, throw in Maternity Leave, and then the woman would have to be cleared to return to duty. So length of time out of the squad/platoon, 12-15 months. Hell of a long time to be out of 'action'.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by downsizer View Post
                So what does a unit do when a male infantryman becomes long term injured?
                For the US military, this depends on the medical condition of the soldier. Whether they are placed on a Profile (which would dictate what they can do and limits activities negative to their recovery or Pre-Surgery) that is for light injuries. Heavier injuries require being reassigned until surgery/recovery of injury. Such duties would be administrative-type, within Headquarters at Company or Battalion-level and/or could be conducted at another agency on Post. (Garrison/JAG/Public Affairs, etc.) And this reassignment could be anywhere from 3 months to 1 year or more. Again, the soldier has to be cleared by a doctor Post-Surgery/Rehab in order to be fit to serve.

                https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-...-know-in-2020/

                It’s been two years since the Army first started accepting women into its infantry, armor, fire support specialist and special operations communities, and, so far, hundreds have volunteered to be among the first.

                In late September, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis told a group of Virginia Military Institute students that he wasn’t ready to give the effort a passing grade. The Army is also withholding an opinion.

                “It’s early in the process. It’s probably too early to call the ball, but we feel positive about what we’ve seen so far,” Lt. Gen. Thomas Seamands told reporters Wednesday at the AUSA annual meeting in Washington.

                H-'17- My contention, that not enough women are interested in doing this in the first place to warrant lifting the restriction, which is shown in the data collected thus far. Next, the USMC already conducted a gender-integrated test in 2012-2013 and came to the conclusion, that is was not beneficial to open up front-line specialties to women. For many reasons listed in their report and which I have stated from my own experience as a soldier.

                If you did not know any better, from the article, you would think women were not serving in the military at all. Yes, this article focuses on the front-line specialties and how women entering into them are fairing. However, the DoD does not have to gather much research, women have already been serving in Combat Support and Combat Service Support (as known in the U.S. Army) for 40 years now. One only has to compile that data to get a rough idea of what is going on now and what will happen near term. Now the difference is the front-line (Combat Arms) will see higher attrition rates, due to the physically demanding nature of these specialties. Daily PT (lots of running & calisthenics) time in the field, time on the range (in all types of weather) etc. and that is 5-6 days a week in garrison! Field exercise's are anywhere from 2 weeks to one month, pushing 20-24 hour days, all this catches up with one's body, let me tell you! Now a 5'4, 120 lbs. woman is only going to do any of this for so long...

                But, since the nation is now into Post-Modernism, facts of human biology are ignored and the realties of combat are brushed aside, in order to push a fantasy.
                Last edited by haze17; 12-10-2018, 07:39 AM.

                Comment




                • 10 chars .............. 10 cahrs
                  Last edited by javahtmlcss; 12-10-2018, 08:03 AM.

                  Comment


                  • EFFECTS ON UNITS

                    Using multiple methods (i.e., interviews, surveys, focus groups) to assess effects on units, this study found that gender integration has had a relatively small effect on readiness, cohesion, and morale. This is not to say that it has no effect; it does. However, other influences, such as leadership, are perceived by those interviewed and surveyed as being far more influential.

                    Readiness

                    When compared with the effects of training, operational tempo, leadership, and materiel, gender is not perceived as affecting readiness. Pregnancy can affect the deployability of a unit when the unit has a disproportionate number of women or is understaffed. In terms of the quality of women, the majority of officers and experienced enlisted personnel surveyed asserted that women perform about as well as men do.
                    https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_b...15/index1.html

                    Comment


                    • yay.

                      https://www.armytimes.com/news/your-...ces-selection/

                      For the first time since the Army opened its special operations jobs to women in 2016, a female soldier has completed the initial Special Forces Assessment and Selection process, a spokesman for Army Special Operations Command has confirmed to Army Times. Several women have attempted the 24-day program, part of the Special Forces Qualification Course, since then, but none have made it to the next round.

                      Comment


                      • I doubt it is something to worry over, except for the manpower shortage (Oops- sorry, "Personnel shortage") that will take place the week before hostilities start. "Oh, my. I am pregnant- how did that happen? Here, Corporal Greg Smith, you will have to carry my SAW and ammo in the upcoming assault. I have to go on maternity leave." Don't worry. She will be replaced, no doubt, by a man.

                        All wars are not fought from air-conditioned insulated barracks with H&C showers and flush toilets. When a real one starts, it is going to be a sweatty, bloody, dusty, thirsty, crap in a hole in the ground, bathe in a mud puddle full of leeches affair. Real wars are Hell- they suck like a Hoover and no one really gives a dayum about your time of month, especially the enemy!

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Mastermind View Post
                          I doubt it is something to worry over, except for the manpower shortage (Oops- sorry, "Personnel shortage") that will take place the week before hostilities start. "Oh, my. I am pregnant- how did that happen? Here, Corporal Greg Smith, you will have to carry my SAW and ammo in the upcoming assault. I have to go on maternity leave." Don't worry. She will be replaced, no doubt, by a man.

                          All wars are not fought from air-conditioned insulated barracks with H&C showers and flush toilets. When a real one starts, it is going to be a sweatty, bloody, dusty, thirsty, crap in a hole in the ground, bathe in a mud puddle full of leeches affair. Real wars are Hell- they suck like a Hoover and no one really gives a dayum about your time of month, especially the enemy!
                          Apart from displaying your misogynistic opinion of women in the armed forces, exactly what is your point?

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Fallap View Post

                            Apart from displaying your misogynistic opinion of women in the armed forces, exactly what is your point?

                            Oh, you think that's 'misogynistic'- I think that's interesting when we are talking about war. Not one of these "Base Camp Follies" we have been engaged in- but the real stuff. Been there, done that.

                            Look, I have no doubt there are some jobs women can do. But, I have been a tanker, I have been airborne, I have been cavalry, I have led ambush patrols- all in combat. You can put the ladies out there in all that if you want. They can go to it if they want. But, you know as well as I do, when it comes to the real mud, blood and deprivations of a real war, all that "misogynistic" PC stuff will end- in a heart beat. The military is not a social services outfit- not a real military. Sure, put the gals out there repairing jet engines, tuning up the missile guidance systems- sounds great. And I'll admit, I am totally being a sexists, egotistical, lying, hypocritical prig, if you can assure me the U.S. military is through with battles like D-Day, Guadalcanal, Inchon, Tet and Hue.

                            Signing up for an infantry tour, or a two year final commitment in an armored division is not child's play. It can get really real in three days! And once you ship out to the battle arena, you had damned well better be able to hold up your end of the Ammo humping detail, the bunker building and the 6 miles out and back through the swamp for ambush patrol carrying your SAW and 400 rounds of ammo and two or three Claymore mines. So far, I have not seen the gals actually doing that. And I can tell ya, from first hand experience, as can anyone who has survived a year or two or three doing all that, I doubt a female- not one in five hundred - can keep up. Is there that one-in 500? If so, God bless her. But, meanwhile, the military is having to babysit these "macho" gals, toning down their general physical standards, to let the gals play "Army"- and that is not doing the real warriors, the men, a fair deal- not at all.

                            Someday, the Shit will actually hit the fan. Like it did for the U.S. Navy going into gulf War I. The day the PA announced, "The fire Is Lit, folks- We are going into harms way- Prepare the ship for battle- Saddam has Chinese made Silk Worm missiles and they can tear the ass out of this big old carrier- so get your a-holes tightened up-" Almost instantly, the gals were sacking every guy willing, collecting that "make me pregnant ASAP serum". In a few weeks, divisions all over the ships were getting short handed- Who had to pick up the slack? The men!

                            In my own unit, Way back in the olden days of Vietnam, If we had had any women, I can not even imagine them beating the bushes for weeks, engaging every three days on average, crapping your brains out from the filthy water, sleeping in insect infested holes or on ammo cans in the bottom of the track, not changing clothes for a month or two, and scraping brains and guts off the top and inside of the track from casualties--- old Vietnam photos show all this, too. It was a very nasty, "No one gives a damn about you" war. I have yet to meet a woman who would have lasted past the first bloody fire fight. But, then again- I might be wrong. I haven't properly engaged these tough, macho feminists who claim, without a shred of evidence, the gals are every bit as good as a man in combat!

                            Is the NFL misogynistic for not letting gals play line backer or quarterback? How about pitching 9 in baseball? Why are the women allowed in the PGA men's, but not a single one has ever made the cut? Do you think a platoon of U.S. Marines or Rangers or Seals, or or just plain old, every day Infantry is any different in "play" when it comes to real combat expectations? And by the way, I guess some future enemy "Team" just might get to vote on all that "Wimmin in combat" stuff too. I'll bet a hog ranch, those MEN will be delighted to see the U.S. combat females out there being all "equal" and shit.

                            Well, social justice warriors might want to call this old combat vet "Misogynistic". I'll wear that badge proudly, though, if it prevents just one infantry squad from being wiped out, or one Marine Platoon from being short handed in the clutch. Or one single 150 lb PAE bag full of ammo not being dropped with the stick when it is desperately needed. Call me old fashioned- But, you know what? War is old fashioned, too and it demands the toughest, strongest and boldest to get into it. War sucks- and you had better bring your 'A-Game' best to that gritty table. If I am wrong about all that, let me see the proof.

                            Comment


                            • At the same time, Mastermind, many Soviet women performed admirably and with great distinction against the Germans, in some of the hardest combat of WW2...

                              Comment


                              • And the key word there is "many". There was a Soviet all-female anti-aircraft artillery unit that ended up stalling the German's final push into Stalingrad, knocking out many German armored vehicles. They stood their ground to the last woman. All female! There were some successful female snipers- one particularly that rose to fame, Lyudmila Belova, who ended up with more than 100 kills to her credit. And, when the Soviets set up whole female fighter squadrons and whole female logistics commands and whole female tank outfits, those units performed up to parr. But, even the Soviets understood not to blend these units because it could create tremendous inter-unit stress. That is not to say there were not some mixed-sex units organized out of desperation, as in Stalingrad and at Petrograd (Leningrad). Those were "anybody will do" situations organized in a more-or-less 'last stand' effort. But, when you read those personal accounts of such experiences, the men and women fought shoulder to shoulder as a matter of incredible situations.

                                Although the Soviets in WWII and the Jews (in the first battles to preserve and establish the state of Israel) established mixed sex battalions, they did so simply because they had no other choice. Can a female pull a trigger? Yes, Absolutely. Can a female fly an aircraft- that goes without question. But, currently, the U.S. is serving females up as though they were little "imitation men", trying to blend them into some sort of futuristic "Star Treck Generation" of fully blended combat forces. Real life is not at all like that- and it likely never will be. What the fantasy here that is being presented, is that all wars of the future will be nice, little sanitary things, fought via robotic drones from some air-conditioned office in Miami on a 3-shift's a day basis with weekends and holidays off. When every possible enemy agrees to that basis for war- then let's do it. When we achieve a level of technological idiocy where we think our robotic extensions of ourselves can be so perfect, then, by all means, sure- put those gals in the driver's seat. If a frail old man like Halsey can command an entire battle fleet, so can a frail old lady- put her in there. But taking a highly trained, fast-moving, battle group of ground fighters and blending in little girls to run with them into the maw of muzzle to muzzle fighting, as at Iwo Jima, Bastogne, or in the City of Hue, that is pure idiocy.

                                Women served well in Vietnam, as nurses and logistics personnel. They saw stuff that would make a strong man shiver and pulled a Hell of a load- Yeah, God bless them. Female nurses did a fantastic job right up to the front in Korea and WWII admirably. In Korea, some M*A*S*H units were overrun and the resulting horror that was visited upon those women should not be wished on anyone. So, yeah- in a perfect world, women can do the mental part. But, I am arguing they should not be expected to perform as first-class fighters in mixed organized battle units. Not without some sort of physical enhancement so they will not be a burden to the men having to carry their load. So far as I know, that enhancement is not yet available.

                                When that enhancement does come available, then set them up to register for the draft and take pregnancy as an excuse for avoiding that draft and avoiding combat off the table and put them in those foxholes.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X