Bob Schieffer another dumba##

[Soonerjeepman]

good grief...
on Face the Nation...bashing men, women in the front lines is good, they are better then men in everything...blah, blah, blah...:calm:
don't know why I'm watching this crap.:ambivalence:

[sappstuf]

Women are the physical equal of men. We know this because 20% of the players in the NFL are women, where women's physical strength and agressiveness allow them to make millions every year competing on the level as men. These same attributes are instrumental in ground combat.

For goodness sakes, women can't even hit from the same tee box in golf.

Some poor dude is going to have to double up on mortar base plates or we leave one behind. No big deal... Right?

To give a balanced view, I think women can shoot just as good as men and serve in defensive perimeter jobs just as well as men, up until the moment the perimeter is overrun and hand to hand combat ensues(if that were to happen). If you don't believe hand to hand combat has a place in our modern military, then that shouldn't matter to you. You should at least know the definition of ground combat though, which is:


Direct ground combat is engaging an enemy on the ground with individual or crew served weapons while being exposed to hostile fire and to a high probability of direct physical contact with the hostile force’s personnel. Direct ground combat takes place well forward on the battlefield while locating and closing with the enemy to defeat them by fire, maneuver or shock effect.

The first 2 females in Marine Officer Infantry Training failed the physcial endurance test that consists of:


- an 880-yard "Movement to Contact" run in boots and utility pants
- two minutes of lifting a 30-pound ammo can over the head, earning points for the number done in the time limit
- the “Maneuver Under Fire” drill is part obstacle course, part conditioning, and part combat test:
- 25-yard crawl
- hauling a simulated casualty using two different carries: drag and fireman's carry over 75 yards zigzaging through cones
- sprint while carrying two 30-pound ammo cans over 75 yards through the same cones
- throwing a dummy hand grenade into a marked circle 22.5 yards away
- 3 pushups and a sprint with the ammo cans to the finish line.

26 out of 107 of the men failed as well.

I'm not questioning the patriotism or courage or anything like that of these 2 females or any others. But is it any wonder that they failed? A Presidential Commission looked at female strength and conditioning back in 1992 and here is what they found:


From the report of the Presidential Commission on the Assignment of Women in the Armed Forces dated November 15, 1992, it states in part:The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength. An Army study done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer fractures as men. Further, the Commission heard an abundance of expert testimony including:- women’s aerobic capacity is significantly lower, meaning they cannot carry as much as far as fast as men, and they are more susceptible to fatigue.- in terms of physical capability, the upper five percent of women are at the level of the male median. The average 20-to-30 year-old woman has the same aerobic capacity as a 50 year-old man. After a study was conducted at the U.S. Military Academy at West Point, one expert testified that:- using the standard Army Physical Fitness Test, the upper quintile (top 20%) of women at West point achieved scores on the test equivalent to the bottom quintile (bottom 20%) of men.- only 21 women out of the initial 623 (3.4%) achieved a score equal to the male mean score of 260.- on the push-up test, only 7% of women can meet a score of 60, while 78% of men exceed it.- adopting a male standard of fitness at West Point would mean 70% of the women he studied would be separated as failures at the end of their junior year, only 3% would be eligible for the Recondo badge, and not one would receive the Army Physical Fitness badge.

What has changed in regards to women's fitness and strength compared to men's? The honest answer is not much.

[okie52]

I don't know how much longer you're going to be able to make it in the military, Sapp. You dont seem to be a good fit for the party and "Military" of science.

Retirement near?

[sappstuf]

I don't know how much longer you're going to be able to make it in the military, Sapp. You dont seem to be a good fit for the party and "Military" of science.

Retirement near?

I could have retired this year, but decided to take orders to Europe, so I'm in until at least 2015. This decision doesn't really change anything with what I do.

Physical requirements will be dropped. You don't make this decision knowing that women cannot physically qualify and plan to do nothing about it. You make this decision knowing that down the line standards will be dropped to be fully inclusive.

I do find it amusing that most of the women interviewed for the articles in support of the decision that I have read are in the Air Force.

[okie52]

I could have retired this year, but decided to take orders to Europe, so I'm in until at least 2015. This decision doesn't really change anything with what I do.

Physical requirements will be dropped. You don't make this decision knowing that women cannot physically qualify and plan to do nothing about it. You make this decision knowing that down the line standards will be dropped to be fully inclusive.

I do find it amusing that most of the women interviewed for the articles in support of the decision that I have read are in the Air Force.

Are you going to be in Italy that whole time (2015)?

Women pilots might make it given "cockpit" advancements.

[sappstuf]

Are you going to be in Italy that whole time (2015)?

Women pilots might make it given "cockpit" advancements.

I will be unless I'm deployed again...

[okie52]

I will be unless I'm deployed again...

Crap...hope that doesn't happen again. Hopefully they'll be finishing up by the end of 2014.

[sappstuf]

Crap...hope that doesn't happen again. Hopefully they'll be finishing up by the end of 2014.

And starting up in Iran and/or Syria... ;)

[okie52]

And starting up in Iran and/or Syria... ;)

And Libya.

[cleller]

Its a huge can of worms. We all know that women (in most cases) are unable to handle extreme physical environments the way men can. Nature did not intend that. No matter how you study it, they will not admit that women will slow units down. An exhausted female will have to be "carried" in one way or another by her male counterparts.

My daughter was a superior athlete in high school. A runner. She'd also been camping with me since she was a little girl. Still, when she and her husband took a 3 day hike thru the Peruvian Amazon a few years later, she almost broke down over the rough conditions. Her husband, just an average guy, got thru OK.

This is not even mentioning the biggest can of worms, sex. It will bring lawsuits, fights, anger. This is "progress" only for progressives.

[Soonerjeepman]

nice point of view Sapp...

yeah he started on the military thing then went on to everything else. I'm all for equality but he actually went on to say women are better at everything...course what do you expect from an old geezer.

[Curly Bill]

I'm not a fan of this, but if we're gonna make it fair and all then females should have to register with selective service and be eligible for the draft, right?

[Midtowner]

I'm not a fan of this, but if we're gonna make it fair and all then females should have to register with selective service and be eligible for the draft, right?

I've always been torn on this. I think that national security would be best served if we had (as in WWII) a large segment of the population which was exempt from war to keep the home fires burning, to raise young children, etc. I realize this happens sometimes in the military, but imagine if we were involved in a war large enough to require a draft and we were deploying both parents at the same time in millions of households? Families wouldn't recover for at least a generation.

[Curly Bill]

I've always been torn on this. I think that national security would be best served if we had (as in WWII) a large segment of the population which was exempt from war to keep the home fires burning, to raise young children, etc. I realize this happens sometimes in the military, but imagine if we were involved in a war large enough to require a draft and we were deploying both parents at the same time in millions of households? Families wouldn't recover for at least a generation.


Yeah, but fair is fair! And if we're gonna give females equal rights to serve in combat, then they deserve equal rights to be drafted!

...and I think allowing the drafting females is a terrible idea, but so is this latest piece of social engineering.

[Midtowner]

Yeah, but fair is fair! And if we're gonna give females equal rights to serve in combat, then they deserve equal rights to be drafted!

...and I think allowing the drafting females is a terrible idea, but so is this latest piece of social engineering.

I don't think it'd be fair to the kids involved to potentially have both parents deployed for extended periods of time. A lot of military families don't have close access to extended family because they're forced to relocate so often.

As for the overall idea, I'll wait to see how it's implemented. The way we fight our wars now, there really is no front line and our women have served just fine in support capacities. They've been in gunfights with insurgents and done just fine. If they implement this and the physical requirements for women are exactly the same as for men, I might buy it. If not, I can think of more reasons why this is a bad idea than a good one.

[KABOOKIE]

There are plenty of military families with both spouses deployed. We're talking about young fertile womenz registering for the selective service.

[Midtowner]

There are plenty of military families with both spouses deployed. We're talking about young fertile womenz registering for the selective service.

Sure, but there's a big difference in families where both parents volunteered for that service. Generally, folks who volunteer have some sort of support structure to fall back on if both parents are deployed, and even then, it's not a really great deal.

[cleller]

I'm not a fan of this, but if we're gonna make it fair and all then females should have to register with selective service and be eligible for the draft, right?

No way; never. Too many would be unsuitable for military service. A small percentage of female draftees could make it thru. Would be a huge waste of time and money, and an unnecessary source of anxiety.

[Curly Bill]

No way; never. Too many would be unsuitable for military service. A small percentage of female draftees could make it thru. Would be a huge waste of time and money, and an unnecessary source of anxiety.

So what?! This isn't being done to make us a better military, it's being done for social engineering. So, if we're gonna jack up the military in the name of fairness or equal opportunity or whatever, let's go all the way!

[rock on sooner]

On another thread I posted that the requirements should be exactly the same,
not dumbed down or watered down. Sapp mentioned the Marine test..that is
precisely the way it should be. CB sez register for the draft..sure, why not? The
likelihood of a draft is remote, at best, but, oughta be there.

Back when I was in AF basic, there were two flights of women going thru training,
my understanding was that the physical requirements were different, but, based on
what I could hear, the DI's (female) were just as crude and, verbally, pretty vicious.

It'd be interesting to know about the Israelis and their female training, because their
military is strong.

[tator]

Would be a huge waste of time and money, and an unnecessary source of anxiety.

That settles it, it'll definitely happen.

[cleller]

It'd be interesting to know about the Israelis and their female training, because their
military is strong.

I've been thinking on that topic, too, as the Israelis are famous for including women in its compulsory service. I think the Israelis in general have a different mindset on military service, and they rise to the expectations. Don't believe it would fair as well here. Also, they call their army a "defense force", and it seems like they stay much closer to home and established bases most of the time, unlike American combat units.

According to Wikipedia, only 3% of the IDF's combat soldiers are women.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_the_Israel_Defense_Forces

[StoopTroup]

So what?! This isn't being done to make us a better military, it's being done for social engineering. So, if we're gonna jack up the military in the name of fairness or equal opportunity or whatever, let's go all the way!

Sure seems like I mentioned that in one of the older Draft Threads we had on here. I think the consensus was that none of this would happen in our lifetime. Now not only should Women be drafted....IMO so should every LGBT and every person that hides behind something that makes them to special to serve.

With all of the Stop Loss that went on...there should be an automatic Draft in place as soon as the first Stop Loss is invoked on any branch of the military.

[XingTheRubicon]

I just want to know when women start taking out the trash.

[Lott's Bandana]

20 years on submarines and my counter to any argument about women serving was simply this:

If I have to do 50 pushups to pass my physical readiness standards, then the woman carrying my unconscious body out of a burning compartment better damn well be able to do more than 18.

At the time, those were the PRT equivalents. I got lucky and never had to deal with the issue first-hand. But it's creeping into the world of the Trident and all I can say is, good luck Shipmates.

[StoopTroup]

20 years on submarines and my counter to any argument about women serving was simply this:

If I have to do 50 pushups to pass my physical readiness standards, then the woman carrying my unconscious body out of a burning compartment better damn well be able to do more than 18.

At the time, those were the PRT equivalents. I got lucky and never had to deal with the issue first-hand. But it's creeping into the world of the Trident and all I can say is, good luck Shipmates.

50 push ups? I think I had to do at least 50 in High School. Last week I heard one of the branches was looking for 73 Sit ups in 2 minutes, 71 push ups in 2 minutes and to be able to run 2 miles in less than 13 minutes. Now that was the minimum and the better you do in each of the events....the higher your score. Meeting the minimum gets you like 60 points in each event and 180 points is the required total points, 300 the max.

I've seen different requirements for Army Ranger where they require a 5 mile run in less than 40 minutes.

I guess it just depends on which branch and what duty/job you are given?

[Turd_Ferguson]

50 push ups? I think I had to do at least 50 in High School. Last week I heard one of the branches was looking for 73 Sit ups in 2 minutes, 71 push ups in 2 minutes and to be able to run 2 miles in less than 13 minutes. Now that was the minimum and the better you do in each of the events....the higher your score. Meeting the minimum gets you like 60 points in each event and 180 points is the required total points, 300 the max.

I've seen different requirements for Army Ranger where they require a 5 mile run in less than 40 minutes.

I guess it just depends on which branch and what duty/job you are given?


I don't think women have any business on the "front line". There are going to be certain positions that women are better at than men, and I'm quite sure the military knows exactly what positions those are.

Take police women for example. I don't think the majority of them should be out patrolling like men. I'm quite sure that there are women/police women out there that can kick some mans ***, however it is a very small percentage. Quit all this burning braw stuff and take your rightful position...

[StoopTroup]

I don't think women have any business on the "front line". There are going to be certain positions that women are better at than men, and I'm quite sure the military knows exactly what positions those are.

Take police women for example. I don't think the majority of them should be out patrolling like men. I'm quite sure that there are women/police women out there that can kick some mans ***, however it is a very small percentage. Quit all this burning braw stuff and take your rightful position...

I don't doubt that you are right but I think it's going to happen and no amount of belly aching is going to change it. What will change it possibly is Statistics and Body Count. Once there are real Stats to back up your worries...I'm sure the Women will get moved to higher ranks where they can send squads of tough, qualified killers to handle the situations that Stats proved they were failures and made the Frontlines dangerous and risked more lives by being on the Frontlines instead of War Rooms where they can use their mental capacity to out smart the enemy.

[Curly Bill]

I don't think women have any business on the "front line". There are going to be certain positions that women are better at than men, and I'm quite sure the military knows exactly what positions those are.

Take police women for example. I don't think the majority of them should be out patrolling like men. I'm quite sure that there are women/police women out there that can kick some mans ***, however it is a very small percentage. Quit all this burning braw stuff and take your rightful position...

Making sammiches? ;)

[Turd_Ferguson]

Making sammiches? ;)

Surely there's got to be some vacuuming or dish washing needing to be done some where's.. :biggrin:

[Curly Bill]

Surely there's got to be some vacuuming or dish washing needing to be done some where's.. :biggrin:


In the military? Oh yeah! Bunks to be made, floors to be mopped, it's a long list. :)

[Lott's Bandana]

50 push ups? I think I had to do at least 50 in High School. Last week I heard one of the branches was looking for 73 Sit ups in 2 minutes, 71 push ups in 2 minutes and to be able to run 2 miles in less than 13 minutes. Now that was the minimum and the better you do in each of the events....the higher your score. Meeting the minimum gets you like 60 points in each event and 180 points is the required total points, 300 the max.

I've seen different requirements for Army Ranger where they require a 5 mile run in less than 40 minutes.

I guess it just depends on which branch and what duty/job you are given?

It was a minimum standard, Greg. Of course there are tiers that elevate your overall score. In my burning compartment analogy, I was at least demanding the minimum male measure of strength so I wasn't endangered by social experimentation and political pandering.

[sappstuf]

Over/under on if this General retires within 6 months.


The Marines will not lower physical standards for certain specialties, Gen. James Amos told USA TODAY. "We can't afford to lower standards," he said. "We can't make adjustments on what's required on the battlefield.

"That's not why America has a Marine Corps," he said.


"If the numbers are so small with regards to qualification, then there very may well be (job fields) that remain closed," Amos said. "Those will be few and far between."

Deploying only one or two female servicemembers in a unit, for example, would make it difficult for the women to succeed. "You want to have assimilation … so our females can mentor one another," Amos said.


"We've got too much combat experience for me to even suggest lowering the standards," Amos said. "So I'm not going to do it."

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/29/marine-corps-women-combat/1873753/

I'll go under.

[Curly Bill]

Definitely under

[okie52]

Under.