Panel says women should be allowed in combat units

EnglishLady

Veteran Expediter
AP Jan 15

Associated Press= WASHINGTON (AP) — Women should finally be allowed to serve fully in combat, a military advisory panel said Friday in a report seeking to dismantle the last major area of discrimination in the armed forces.

The call by a commission of current and retired military officers to let women be front-line fighters could set in motion another sea change in military culture as the armed forces, generations after racial barriers fell, grapples with the phasing out of the ban on gays serving openly.

The newest move is being recommended by the Military Leadership Diversity Commission, established by Congress two years ago. The panel was to send its proposals to Congress and President Barack Obama.

It is time "to create a level playing field for all qualified service members," the members said.

Opponents of putting women in combat question whether they have the necessary strength and stamina. They also have said the inclusion of women in infantry and other combat units might harm unit cohesion, a similar argument to that made regarding gays. And they warn Americans won't tolerate large numbers of women coming home in body bags. Those arguments have held sway during previous attempts to lift the ban.

Congress recently stripped the "don't ask, don't tell" ban on gays serving openly, and the Navy changed its rules over the last year to allow women to serve on submarines for the first time. Women are barred from certain combat assignments in all the services but face the broadest restrictions in the Army and Marines.

Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine captain and executive director of the advocacy group Service Women's Action Network, said the prohibition on women in combat "is archaic, it does not reflect the many sacrifices and contributions that women make in the military, and it ignores the reality of current war-fighting doctrine."

Although thousands of American women have served in the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and been exposed to great danger — 134 of them have been killed — they have been largely restricted to combat support jobs such as medics or logistical and transportation officers.

Defense policy prohibits women from being assigned to any unit smaller than a brigade whose primary mission is direct combat on the ground.

The new report says that keeping women out of combat posts prohibits them from serving in roughly 10 percent of Marine Corps and Army occupational specialties and thus is a barrier to advancement.

"The Armed Forces have not yet succeeded in developing leaders who are as diverse as the nation they serve," said the report. "Minorities and women still lag behind white men in terms of number of military leadership positions."

Women generally make up about 14 percent of the armed services. Of the roughly 2.2 million troops who have served in Iraq and Afghanistan, more than 255,000 have been women, said Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez.

Supporters of the change say women essentially have been in combat for years, even if they are nominally removed from it.

"It's something whose time has come," said Lory Manning of the Women's Research and Education Institute. She said ending the ban would be "a logical outcome of what women have been doing in Iraq and Afghanistan, where the Army and Marines have been essentially ducking the policy."

She said, for example, that military officials have employed terms of art to skirt the ban, for example "attaching" women to a combat unit instead of "assigning" them.

The new report says there has been little evidence that integrating women into previously closed units or military occupations has damaged cohesion or had other ill effects. It says a previous independent report suggested that women serving in combat in Iraq and Afghanistan "had a positive impact on mission accomplishment."

Defense leaders have said they see the change coming someday. For example, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in September that he expects women to be let into special operations forces eventually, and in a careful, deliberate manner.

The advisory commission recommends a phased-in approach. The Army is doing its own internal study of women in combat as well.

Pentagon figures show that as of Jan. 3, 110 women had been killed in the war in Iraq compared with about 4,300 men. In the Afghanistan campaign, 24 women have been killed compared with more than 1,400 men.

Lainez said the department will review the recommendations when the report is delivered.

But regardless of what becomes of the policy, she noted that women will continue to be drawn into combat action, "situations for which they are fully trained and equipped to respond."
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
Well I guess that will help the girly boys feel better, or more in touch with the other girls. I wonder if they will make the ones who have a piece of extra (misused) equipment shave their legs when they show up in their skirts for a formation.
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
Defense leaders have said they see the change coming someday. For example, Defense Secretary Robert Gates said in September that he expects women to be let into special operations forces eventually, and in a careful, deliberate manner.

I bet that will make past Special Forces men proud.
 

greg334

Veteran Expediter
Anu Bhagwati, a former Marine captain and executive director of the advocacy group Service Women's Action Network, said the prohibition on women in combat "is archaic, it does not reflect the many sacrifices and contributions that women make in the military, and it ignores the reality of current war-fighting doctrine."

Um ... yeah ... right... Anu, you got your head up your a**.

Regardless what contributions and sacrifices (?) that are made, the one thing that you and others like you miss is the subject of actual combat, the relationship between men and women (you know that animal instinct that drive men to protect women) but more importantly the lack of concern with any enemy about following some guideline or agreement who will see women as a sexual object to be used and killed after they rape her or worst - take the history of Soviet women who fought the Germans and caught alive as the basic example.

If this is so necessary that it has to happen, then there needs to be a change in the world's fighting men to see it happen right. Until that time, there are serious issues that neither a panel of people can cover, or those in charge of the US military.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I wonder, if women are allowed in combat are they finally going to have the same physical requirements in basic and advanced training that men do? Will women finally be required to register with the selective service? I kinda like the idea of, to go along with equal rights, of equal requirements and responsibilities. Any bets that women's groups (not women in general) would fight that part?
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
I can hear it now "Sarge we need to force march the platoon 20 miles and set up for a retrograde action, when can we be in position?" Well sir I'll have half of the platoon there by first light, with the gays and lesbians arriving an hour after dawn, and we will have to wait and see what happens with the three women, but I'm guessing they will be there just before noon."
 
Last edited:

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
I know a couple of gals at Fort Campbell who routinely put the real men to shame.

Of course, they pretty much look like real men, tho.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
There are women who can keep up with the men. Just as there a men who cannot keep up with anyone. We need to RAISE the physical standards for military service AND require men/women and whatevers to meet those standards equally. No more free rides. Equality rules!!
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
I know a couple of gals at Fort Campbell who routinely put the real men to shame.

Of course, they pretty much look like real men, tho.

Reminds me of a 'conversation' I had with my mother years ago. I was making the point that women didn't belong in a combat unit because of their lack of strength. I think it started because of the lowering of the standards for a firefighter. Anyway she made the comment that there were women out there that would be quite capable of woppin my @$$. I dutifully said yes mom..... but I wouldn't date one in ten of them. :rolleyes: It kinda left her speechless for awhile. :cool:
 

Turtle

Administrator
Staff member
Retired Expediter
One of the girls, I saw her prom picture from high school. She looked like Barbie. Now, she looks more like Conan the Barbarian.

Her girlfriend looks like Barbie, tho.
 

Pilgrim

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Here we go with more social engineering in the military. More diversity for diversity's sake, instead of concentrating on what will make the military a more effective fighting force. Granted, there might be a few women that would be capable of serving in combat - anyone who thinks otherwise should tune in to a women's college basketball game this weekend.

However, if they start trying to assign quotas they're going to create more real problems than solve the imaginary ones the politicians think they have. The military would do well to stick with the concept of assigning people to the duties for which they are best suited instead of concerning themselves with being politically correct. Unfortunately, this probably won't happen until they get a new Commander in Chief.
 

jaminjim

Veteran Expediter
Unfortunately, this probably won't happen until they get a new Commander in Chief.
Have to disagree, when we take a serious stomping in a major conflict, then the SE's (Social Engineers) will wonder why the Military failed to follow their orders, you know the one where we told you to properly integrate them.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Have to disagree, when we take a serious stomping in a major conflict, then the SE's (Social Engineers) will wonder why the Military failed to follow their orders, you know the one where we told you to properly integrate them.

Obama and Co. WANT us to lose. They WANT us weak. They WANT a world government to ASSIST them in controlling us. They WANT our Constitution thrown out. So does anyone who supports him or his policies.
 
Top