Women In the Infantry

[gradenko2k]

I'd hardly consider it a problem if putting women into combat might actually get politicians to more closely consider whether it's worth getting America involved in ground operations that are going to result in American casualties.

[Kuokkanen]

Those who have NOT READ all the posts carefully, I repeat the major problem about women in the infantry. Men are required to throw hand grenade 35 meters, but women are allowed to pass it with only 25 meters. Women are allowed more time to run certain distance, men have less time. Many women don't reach the men's standards, yet they are assigned to infantry. Don't you see a problem there? CHAIN IS AS STRONG AS ITS WEAKEST LINK!

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I didn't think about that Matti. That would be a huge problem (100's of women killed). Another problem related to that could be that the anti-war activists (Code Pink, etc...) could/would seek to stop the war on that basis...and probably have more impact with that than their usual schtick.

I got idea from novels where military helicopter crash into ocean. Pilots (both women) were encouraged/forced out of the service and they weren't accepted into mercenary forces. Becouse potentially bad publicity for getting killed in action. Then they were directed to Georgia in east Europe where rich american hired them to pilot Czech made Hinds he had bought. Paladin of the Shadows by John Ringo. He thought it was too bad to be published, but much to his surprise, his fans wanted to read it. Thus Mr. Ringo reluctantly agreed to allow first novel to be published and wrote sequels.

[waltero]

ORIGINAL: Matti Kuokkanen

Those who have NOT READ all the posts carefully, I repeat the major problem about women in the infantry. Men are required to throw hand grenade 35 meters, but women are allowed to pass it with only 25 meters. Women are allowed more time to run certain distance, men have less time. Many women don't reach the men's standards, yet they are assigned to infantry. Don't you see a problem there? CHAIN IS AS STRONG AS ITS WEAKEST LINK!

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

I didn't think about that Matti. That would be a huge problem (100's of women killed). Another problem related to that could be that the anti-war activists (Code Pink, etc...) could/would seek to stop the war on that basis...and probably have more impact with that than their usual schtick.

I got idea from novels where military helicopter crash into ocean. Pilots (both women) were encouraged/forced out of the service and they weren't accepted into mercenary forces. Becouse potentially bad publicity for getting killed in action. Then they were directed to Georgia in east Europe where rich american hired them to pilot Czech made Hinds he had bought. Paladin of the Shadows by John Ringo. He thought it was too bad to be published, but much to his surprise, his fans wanted to read it. Thus Mr. Ringo reluctantly agreed to allow first novel to be published and wrote sequels.

A dog can run faster than both. Use women like you would any other weapon. Tank killer vs ---...which one is better?
The world is a changing, give it a chance. Consider this a trial run. We leave you the bragging (I told you so) rights.

Think Positive!

[Jagdtiger14]

I'd hardly consider it a problem if putting women into combat might actually get politicians to more closely consider whether it's worth getting America involved in ground operations that are going to result in American casualties.

The key words are "closely consider" and "more closely consider". I assume every commander in chief already closely considers their actions when it comes to committing troops (the alternative should also be closely considered...ie...what happens when troops are withdrawn and what might happen next...as in the rise of ISIS).

As for adding the word "more"..."more closely consider"...that is subjective...to what standard? Your standard? The standard of those politicians you agree with? Your preferred leader could take that to the nth degree in which military force would never (or nearly never) be used...which would make diplomacy useless (or nearly useless).

[Jagdtiger14]

Waltero: The world is always changing. "give it a chance"..."consider this a trial run"? Are you willing to risk lives for this chance/trial run? How about if it was your life at risk?

[waltero]

The fact that we allow women in the military at all makes them eligible for combat duty...go figure. The military has their fare share of dipshits...what's the diff?

Change is taking place...good, bad, indifferent, you have no choice but to cope with it.
You think I liked it when I joined the military and found a female as my drill sergeant, pfft!
Believe me when I say; it will go harder for you (military personnel) if you oppose this.
Women are our equal, in every respect...better to give in than oppose.

You got to love Women[&:]

[rhondabrwn]

ORIGINAL: waltero

The fact that we allow women in the military at all makes them eligible for combat duty...go figure. The military has their fare share of dipshits...what's the diff?

Change is taking place...good, bad, indifferent, you have no choice but to cope with it.
You think I liked it when I joined the military and found a female as my drill sergeant, pfft!
Believe me when I say; it will go harder for you (military personnel) if you oppose this.
Women are our equal, in every respect...better to give in than oppose.

You got to love Women[&:]

Love this guy [;)]

Speaking of female casualties influencing public opinion...

Seen Representative Tammy Duckworth lately? Frankly, she's a breath of fresh air when it comes to military and Veterans issues when they are considered by Congress. One doesn't need to be infantry to get their legs blown off. I don't think female infantry casualties will even register to the public to be honest. There will never be that many of them anyway.

You guys seem to be fixated on female infantry as having to be smaller, weaker versions of male soldiers. Be creative, women have their own strengths and abilities that can complement a combat team... faster, more agile, possibly better eyesight and reflexes, stealthier when clearing a building (contrast a female with a 250 pounder crashing up a stairway). Female infantry could very well be better shots, better spotters, and have our own unique mental approach to combat. Lots to explore... it will be interesting if the experiment doesn't run aground on "but she can't throw a hand grenade as far as a man" or "carry a 100 pound pack"... there is a lot more to being a combat infantryman than a couple of specific physical attributes.

One of my female Navajo students went on to high school and JROTC and became the Cadet commander by her senior year. She was, by far, the toughest trooper in the program. Currently completing her degree work at NAU, placed 2nd Nationally in Cross Country, and plans on joining the Marines after graduation. Would probably try for Marine Recon if allowed. To prevent someone like her from being in combat for a couple of physical parameters would be a mistake.

I was just thinking how armored, mounted Knights fell at Agincourt... brought low by archers, men at arms with hooks to pull them off their horses and smash their heads in with hammers. Times change and the nature of warfare changes, we need to be open to new possibilities instead of clinging to traditional mindsets.

Give it a chance [:)]

[MrRoadrunner]

ORIGINAL: Jagdtiger14

Alchenar: No I will not. Black men vs females...apples and oranges. In case you have not followed this thread, we are discussing infantry and reduced standards for women that are putting men in danger. I suppose you think most women are just as capable physically as most men?

This experiment will expire soon.

First of all this is historically inaccurate. It was the Darwinist's in the progressive movement along with the arch progressive Woodrow Wilson who segregated the military. Based on voodoo pseudoscience and base prejudice. Not the same.
When given the opportunity Black units proved they were equal. After completing the same infantry standards as "white" units. There are some who believe they were even driven to higher standards.

Blowing smoke will not prevent seeing that women are held to a lesser standard. Therefore, truly not equal or "worthy".

One question? Did your drill sergeant hump that same pack and fully participate in men's runs?

RR

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn
Be creative, women have their own strengths and abilities that can complement a combat team...

This is all theoretical nonsense. When push comes to shove in violent confrontations nothing else matters except size and strength. This is a video clip from a body cam of a female officer in the UK. She has a prisoner handcuffed in the back seat and is standing in the V of the door to block any attempt at escape (standard police tactical positioning).

Now for this tactic to work, you have to have the size and strength to prevent escape if the suspect tries to flee. At 2:45 the suspect attacks her. By 3:15 she has been critically injured and is possibly unconscious for a while. Once she regains consciousness, she doesn't move, so I assume her injuries are pretty severe.

She lasted less than 30 seconds in a fight with an average to small sized man. Now I'm sure up to the point when the man attacked her she thought like you that she could somehow deal with anything that came her way. I saw this time and time again in Oakland and after incidents like these the women were hidden away in the building somewhere safe. The problem is it always took someone getting hurt before the epiphany came and in combat the 'getting hurt' part of the equation will equal many lives lost.

Warning for those who don't deal well with violence this video can be very disturbing:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6hhv_sEh3-E

Jim

[rhondabrwn]

The woman got sucker punched while writing in her notebook. Bad judgement about how dangerous this young man actually was, I'll concede that. A male police officer caught in the same situation might have been beat down as well.

How many videos have you seen of male police officers getting taken by surprise in a traffic stop and getting beat up? Or having to shoot their assailant?

How many male cops are fat and out of shape? How many small male cops are out there and vulnerable? Do we require all cops to be 200+ pounds and built like a linebacker?

Police rely on procedures to insure their safety, including backup. It's not about physical size and the required ability to be a brawler. Obviously the UK police in this instance need to review their procedures that allows a single officer to stand two feet away from a drunken, hostile, and confrontational offender while writing in a notebook and conducting an interview.

So I get your point... bigger men beat up smaller men... so do we ban anyone from being infantry unless they are 6'2" and 190+ pounds? Yea, a bigger man can beat up a smaller woman in a fist fight (unless she's MMA in which case the assailant gets his ass wiped) [:D].

Got some examples of hand to hand combat in the Middle East? Other than the famous battle where the Taliban were assaulting a hill top position and the US troops ran out of ammunition... so they fixed bayonets and charged down the hill and captured an entire Taliban regiment... yea, I remember that one... or was that back in the 19th centure... hmm... [:D]

Honestly, I don't think we base a modern military with an emphasis on hand to hand combat in the age of assault rifles and machine guns. While it's always possible, it's not very likely. Do our troops even carry bayonets any more? Or commando knives? Do they teach Judo throws in Basic? Can a soldier even fight hand to hand weighted down with 100 pounds of gear and body armor?

Thinking of "Battleship Admirals" back in WWII denying the possibility of air power being a threat...

We're not in an age of broadswords and spears, there are way too many compensating factors to make physical size or strength the primary criterion of combat effectiveness.

[Jim D Burns]

The sucker punch is not what disabled her, she wasn't seriously hurt until you hear her cry out in pain, that's when she was disabled. She did what I saw many female officers do when situations like this occured. She held on to the suspect with all her might. She didn't have the power to overcome him so she grabbed him and tried to hang on in a vain hope help would arrive. He hurt her to get her to let go then he fled.

In police work violence usually doesn't end with death because the suspects are generally trying to flee. In combat they are trying to kill you.

I will repeat myself to get the point I was making across:

Now for this tactic to work, you have to have the size and strength to prevent escape if the suspect tries to flee.

She has neither the size nor the strength to prevent a male from fleeing, she should never have used the tactic in the first place and should have cuffed him behind his back and closed the door. But until she was actually attacked and schooled in the harsh realities of violence and her own physical limitations, I'm sure she thought she could handle it and wasn't going to be told by anyone that she couldn't. That's why I said it always took someone getting hurt before they learned.

Jim

[waltero]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

The sucker punch is not what disabled her, she wasn't seriously hurt until you hear her cry out in pain, that's when she was disabled. She did what I saw many female officers do when situations like this occured. She held on to the suspect with all her might. She didn't have the power to overcome him so she grabbed him and tried to hang on in a vain hope help would arrive. He hurt her to get her to let go then he fled.

In police work violence usually doesn't end with death because the suspects are generally trying to flee. In combat they are trying to kill you.

I will repeat myself to get the point I was making across:

Now for this tactic to work, you have to have the size and strength to prevent escape if the suspect tries to flee.

She has neither the size nor the strength to prevent a male from fleeing, she should never have used the tactic in the first place and should have cuffed him behind his back and closed the door. But until she was actually attacked and schooled in the harsh realities of violence and her own physical limitations, I'm sure she thought she could handle it and wasn't going to be told by anyone that she couldn't. That's why I said it always took someone getting hurt before they learned.


Jim

Had she been trying to kill him, he would have been dead already.[:'(]
So what you are saying, women should be taken out of Law enforcement?

Size and strength of what...her weapon? How does a person with a pick axe charge a trench an kill three troopers-firing a MG at him?
Size does not matter.
I could careless about whether women can keep up with men in training.
I do believe women can be effective on the battlefield.

This really has nothing to do with women in training. Women have already been given permission to enter combat, despite the lack of proper training.
What makes a Hero? Give women a chance to become a Hero[:D]

This discussion is moot. Soon, we will learn the truth.
Military personnel is owned by the Government. They will do what they do (right or wrong)...you best believe.

[rhondabrwn]

ORIGINAL: Jim D Burns

The sucker punch is not what disabled her, she wasn't seriously hurt until you hear her cry out in pain, that's when she was disabled. She did what I saw many female officers do when situations like this occured. She held on to the suspect with all her might. She didn't have the power to overcome him so she grabbed him and tried to hang on in a vain hope help would arrive. He hurt her to get her to let go then he fled.

In police work violence usually doesn't end with death because the suspects are generally trying to flee. In combat they are trying to kill you.

I will repeat myself to get the point I was making across:

Now for this tactic to work, you have to have the size and strength to prevent escape if the suspect tries to flee.

She has neither the size nor the strength to prevent a male from fleeing, she should never have used the tactic in the first place and should have cuffed him behind his back and closed the door. But until she was actually attacked and schooled in the harsh realities of violence and her own physical limitations, I'm sure she thought she could handle it and wasn't going to be told by anyone that she couldn't. That's why I said it always took someone getting hurt before they learned.

Jim

We agree, she made a bad call or they have some bad police procedures... should have cuffed him behind his back and shut the door. Where the heck was her backup? Surely she didn't arrest him by herself?

However, I don't think police are expected to do hand to hand combat with bad guys. They are trained and expected to control the situation not duking it out mano y mano.

[Jim D Burns]

ORIGINAL: rhondabrwn
We agree, she made a bad call or they have some bad police procedures... should have cuffed him behind his back and shut the door. Where the heck was her backup? Surely she didn't arrest him by herself?

However, I don't think police are expected to do hand to hand combat with bad guys. They are trained and expected to control the situation not duking it out mano y mano.

I worked alone most of my career. Contrary to what you see on TV, most departments have 1 man cars. It's simply too expensive to hire enough personnel to keep 2 man cars staffed. The only time I rode with a partner was when working special assignment like the side show at East Mont Mall or Lake Merit festivals (huge crowds of people at both). With an average of 3000-4000 calls for service standing at any one time and only about 40 of us on the streets, 90% of the calls I went to I went in solo.

This will give you an idea of how bad it is. Listen to the size of the "elite gang unit" compared to the number of gang members they are trying to keep in check. It would be laughable if it weren't so sad. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bYOPI29tytE

Believe me when I say it, you have to hold your own in police work, there are no ways around it, and most women couldn't handle it for long and were soon in the building after incidents like the one I linked above.

Unarmed self defense is a mandated course in the academy and took up a huge part of the training course. We actually regularly boxed each other (and knocked each other out regularly) to get used to thinking about the law and working while getting physically pounded on. It is a trained skill that is a huge part of police work. Most people go into shock when physically struck hard with an object or fist and cannot think or act for a while, cops have that trained out of them so they can function under extreme duress, so yes it is an expected part of the job and occurs regularly.

Jim

[rhondabrwn]

I will defer to your expertise, thanks for sharing.

We have one officer cars here and back in Indy, but two cars are generally dispatched, often even for traffic stops. Definitely two officers for a crime or even domestic violence. Of couse that's Snowflake Arizona... not much happening

[Titanwarrior89]

Well...this thread made it to 2016. Happy New Year "Women in the Infantry" thread.[&o][X(] I know "they" have come close to pulling the trigger on this one, a couple of times.[:-]

[Zap]

Unarmed self defense is a mandated course in the academy and took up a huge part of the training course. We actually regularly boxed each other (and knocked each other out regularly) to get used to thinking about the law and working while getting physically pounded on. It is a trained skill that is a huge part of police work. Most people go into shock when physically struck hard with an object or fist and cannot think or act for a while, cops have that trained out of them so they can function under extreme duress, so yes it is an expected part of the job and occurs regularly.

All I can say is that training will probably be criticized as too dangerous. causing concussions. Again, with the movie about concussions In football. I'm surprised liberals have not complained that military training is too violent and it should be changed to only learning about being peacekeepers/social workers

[Aurelian]

ORIGINAL: Zap

Unarmed self defense is a mandated course in the academy and took up a huge part of the training course. We actually regularly boxed each other (and knocked each other out regularly) to get used to thinking about the law and working while getting physically pounded on. It is a trained skill that is a huge part of police work. Most people go into shock when physically struck hard with an object or fist and cannot think or act for a while, cops have that trained out of them so they can function under extreme duress, so yes it is an expected part of the job and occurs regularly.

All I can say is that training will probably be criticized as too dangerous. causing concussions. Again, with the movie about concussions In football. I'm surprised liberals have not complained that military training is too violent and it should be changed to only learning about being peacekeepers/social workers

I'm a liberal, owner of several milsurp rifles, and think training isn't violent enough.

[Kuokkanen]

ORIGINAL: Zap

I'm surprised liberals have not complained that military training is too violent and it should be changed to only learning about being peacekeepers/social workers

It has already happened in Finland. Not without reasons though. I was told about one incident. Recruits were crawling through forest. One instructor pushes his boot on butt of one of the recruits shouting: "Ass down!" As he did so, recruit's belly went through stick in the ground. He died to the injury. My little brother says training is too easy now. They didn't go through obstacle course, just looked at it. He says working on our father's farm is harder than the training he had. I wasn't accepted to service for health reasons.

[Zap]

ORIGINAL: Aurelian

ORIGINAL: Zap

Unarmed self defense is a mandated course in the academy and took up a huge part of the training course. We actually regularly boxed each other (and knocked each other out regularly) to get used to thinking about the law and working while getting physically pounded on. It is a trained skill that is a huge part of police work. Most people go into shock when physically struck hard with an object or fist and cannot think or act for a while, cops have that trained out of them so they can function under extreme duress, so yes it is an expected part of the job and occurs regularly.

All I can say is that training will probably be criticized as too dangerous. causing concussions. Again, with the movie about concussions In football. I'm surprised liberals have not complained that military training is too violent and it should be changed to only learning about being peacekeepers/social workers

I'm a liberal, owner of several milsurp rifles, and think training isn't violent enough.

Curious as to how many in your camp would share your opinion? Can't be many