Extremely debatable topic: Female soldiers on front lines in wars?

Do you think women should be allowed on the front lines in wars?

The reason some people say no is because women DO lack the upper body strength to pull an injured comrad back, and that does make a lot of sense.

Others say yes because they think it isn't fair.

I'd be pretty ticked if the only person there to pull me back couldn't because she wasn't strong enough, and I've got a bullet in my chest.

It is touchy. It depends.

They should be put to the same physical tests as men if they truly want such a position. They should just have to bodybuild really hard.

Yes. Man and woman have same rights. If a girl wants to go to frontlines, why not let them?

I'd be pretty ticked if the only person there to pull me back couldn't because she wasn't strong enough, and I've got a bullet in my chest.

It is touchy. It depends.

They should be put to the same physical tests as men if they truly want such a position. They should just have to bodybuild really hard.

-TheSecondSign-

Yes. Man and woman have same rights. If a girl wants to go to frontlines, why not let them?

curono

I think the idea is that when you compare a male soldier to a female soldier, chances are the male will be considerably stronger physically.

I don't care if they can do the job, but I can see where someone would be ticked if they get shot, scream for help, and the only person there is someone who can't drag them back. But again, there are a lot of ways that can be spinned, and I don't particularly feel like arguing anymore tonight.
I quit back in the draft thread even though I had already made a counter to every arguement made against me.

I'm ready for comedy now. :P

So that's why the Iraq War is the only war we've lost to. Cause women on the frontlines.

Witchking111111

Only one, huh?

[QUOTE="Witchking111111"]

So that's why the Iraq War is the only war we've lost to. Cause women on the frontlines.

Dark__Link

Only one, huh?

I was joking :|

Vietnam too.

Yes i dont find anything wrong with it, I understand some of the arguments against it but if women want equal rights then they should be made to risk their lives as well. Combat isnt as physically strenuous as it used to be with more mobile, strategic warfare.JackMcSexbeard

And robots. We have robots now.

how many studies have confirmed that women are incapable of carrying wounded comrades back to a field hospital?notconspiracy

IDK about that but I know that to become a firefighter women do not have to prove themselves physically as far as men do, which is kind of scary b/c their letting more physically weaker women into actual action where they have to break down doors and pull people out when the test is made easier for them.

[QUOTE="notconspiracy"]how many studies have confirmed that women are incapable of carrying wounded comrades back to a field hospital?JackMcSexbeard

IDK about that but I know that to become a firefighter women do not have to prove themselves physically as far as men do, which is kind of scary b/c their letting more physically weaker women into actual action where they have to break down doors and pull people out when the test is made easier for them.

I think that's the problem

The tests are made easier but they want to be treated the same.
I don't think the military works that way.

Yes i dont find anything wrong with it, I understand some of the arguments against it but if women want equal rights then they should be made to risk their lives as well. Combat isnt as physically strenuous as it used to be with more mobile, strategic warfare.JackMcSexbeard

wow. :lol:

No, a woman on the front line is bad news waiting to happen, not because of the fact they are for the most part weaker than men but for the fact that most have a tendencies to break down in high stress situations which would not only would endanger themselves but others.

Combat is something were if your not in control you/your team is dead and one person can do that

They should have to complete the same training and tests as any other soldier.

If they can do that, then they're alright.

Part of the problem stems from the lesser load women have to carry to ENTER the military.

As an example, the passing test of BT requires men to do 42 push ups.

The passing test for women requires them to do 19.

Thats just an example. I don't care if they do or don't, but I'm certainly against them being required to do less if they want it.

When they request such a position, they should just bodybuild.

[QUOTE="curono"]

Yes. Man and woman have same rights. If a girl wants to go to frontlines, why not let them?

-TheSecondSign-

I think the idea is that when you compare a male soldier to a female soldier, chances are the male will be considerably stronger physically.

I don't care if they can do the job, but I can see where someone would be ticked if they get shot, scream for help, and the only person there is someone who can't drag them back. But again, there are a lot of ways that can be spinned, and I don't particularly feel like arguing anymore tonight.
I quit back in the draft thread even though I had already made a counter to every arguement made against me.

I'm ready for comedy now. :P

Hey you didnt make a counter to my counterponit we had at the end where you said I wear a tinfoil hat and im a pacifist.

But I felt bad afterwords b/c it was kind of mean spirited and you seem like a good guy even if I did disagree with you somewhat. I didnt mean any disrespect I was just a little upset and passionate at the time.

Oh and you said you were joining the Navy? Good luke if you do ,I think my cousins is joining too.

Part of the problem stems from the lesser load women have to carry to ENTER the military.

As an example, the passing test of BT requires men to do 42 push ups.

The passing test for women requires them to do 19.

Thats just an example. I don't care if they do or don't, but I'm certainly against them being required to do less if they want it.

When they request such a position, they should just bodybuild.

-TheSecondSign-

men and women should be treated the same in training/field ops.

most have a tendencies to break down in high stress situations which would not only would endanger themselves but others.

Buyugold

There is no evidence for that. Thanks for sounding so sexist though.

If a woman can prove herself to be physically and mentally capable enough to complete the training and duties necessary for an infantryman, she should be allowed to fight.

As a whole, women are not phsiologically capable of completing the actions required for frontline combat. But there are women who are plenty capable of pulling their fair share of the load and then some.

No.

Natural Male Instict is to defend the female, and this can get in the way of combat situations. Also there is more chance of abuse (verbal and physical) from the men. There is obvously the attraction between man and woman that can get both distracted. Also, If captured by the enemy, Women face more horrible torture (ie Rape) than Men Would.

Strength is not a problem as many women are stronger than men.

And in actual fact. If the requirments were EXACTLY the same, they should be allowed, but they shouldnt get it any easier

[QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"][QUOTE="curono"]

Yes. Man and woman have same rights. If a girl wants to go to frontlines, why not let them?

JackMcSexbeard

I think the idea is that when you compare a male soldier to a female soldier, chances are the male will be considerably stronger physically.

I don't care if they can do the job, but I can see where someone would be ticked if they get shot, scream for help, and the only person there is someone who can't drag them back. But again, there are a lot of ways that can be spinned, and I don't particularly feel like arguing anymore tonight.
I quit back in the draft thread even though I had already made a counter to every arguement made against me.

I'm ready for comedy now. :P

Hey you didnt make a counter to my counterponit we had at the end where you said I wear a tinfoil hat and im a pacifist.

But I felt bad afterwords b/c it was kind of mean spirited and you seem like a good guy even if I did disagree with you somewhat. I didnt mean any disrespect I was just a little upset and passionate at the time.

Oh and you said you were joining the Navy? Good luke if you do ,I think my cousins is joining too.

I did. I just didn't post it, because I was tired. I figured we could end it on more friendly accounts than starting to act like asses.

No.

Natural Male Instict is to defend the female, and this can get in the way of combat situations. Also there is more chance of abuse (verbal and physical) from the men. There is obvously the attraction between man and woman that can get both distracted. Also, If captured by the enemy, Women face more horrible torture (ie Rape) than Men Would.

Strength is not a problem as many women are stronger than men.

And in actual fact. If the requirments were EXACTLY the same, they should be allowed, but they shouldnt get it any easier

PerilousWolf

Main reasons behind the policy, besides physiological differences.

[QUOTE="JackMcSexbeard"]Yes i dont find anything wrong with it, I understand some of the arguments against it but if women want equal rights then they should be made to risk their lives as well. Combat isnt as physically strenuous as it used to be with more mobile, strategic warfare.Frattracide

wow. :lol:

What was the wow part?

I think its fine for a women to want to join the military if she wishes and she should be able to go to the frontlines as well, I dont see how they would be a burden, women can be just as courages as men and excell in a situation like that if given equal training.

Also by what I meant w/ combat being so less physically intense is that the strength and endurance meant to carry on in battle isnt the same as using swords and shields and doing hand to hand combat for long hours. This is when human kind became indoctinated with the idea that women should stay off the battlefield.

With modern warfare soilders only carry a gun and equipment the upperbody strength is important but not needed as much b/c it is not as strenuous, also the addition of aircraft and navies using advanced computerized weapons have med war less personal and roles can be found for anyone either women can succedd on the front just like men as long as they are kept to a high standard just like men.

What was so silly about my post?

No.

Natural Male Instict is to defend the female, and this can get in the way of combat situations. Also there is more chance of abuse (verbal and physical) from the men. There is obvously the attraction between man and woman that can get both distracted. Also, If captured by the enemy, Women face more horrible torture (ie Rape) than Men Would.

Strength is not a problem as many women are stronger than men.

And in actual fact. If the requirments were EXACTLY the same, they should be allowed, but they shouldnt get it any easier

PerilousWolf

[QUOTE="JackMcSexbeard"][QUOTE="-TheSecondSign-"][QUOTE="curono"]

Yes. Man and woman have same rights. If a girl wants to go to frontlines, why not let them?

-TheSecondSign-

I think the idea is that when you compare a male soldier to a female soldier, chances are the male will be considerably stronger physically.

I don't care if they can do the job, but I can see where someone would be ticked if they get shot, scream for help, and the only person there is someone who can't drag them back. But again, there are a lot of ways that can be spinned, and I don't particularly feel like arguing anymore tonight.
I quit back in the draft thread even though I had already made a counter to every arguement made against me.

I'm ready for comedy now. :P

Hey you didnt make a counter to my counterponit we had at the end where you said I wear a tinfoil hat and im a pacifist.

But I felt bad afterwords b/c it was kind of mean spirited and you seem like a good guy even if I did disagree with you somewhat. I didnt mean any disrespect I was just a little upset and passionate at the time.

Oh and you said you were joining the Navy? Good luke if you do ,I think my cousins is joining too.

I did. I just didn't post it, because I was tired. I figured we could end it on more friendly accounts than starting to act like asses.

agreed

[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]

No.

Natural Male Instict is to defend the female, and this can get in the way of combat situations. Also there is more chance of abuse (verbal and physical) from the men. There is obvously the attraction between man and woman that can get both distracted. Also, If captured by the enemy, Women face more horrible torture (ie Rape) than Men Would.

Strength is not a problem as many women are stronger than men.

And in actual fact. If the requirments were EXACTLY the same, they should be allowed, but they shouldnt get it any easier

Wetall_basic

Ok if you were on the frontlines, would you rather have a man fighting by your side or a woman. Let's just say they have equal strength.

[QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]

No.

Natural Male Instict is to defend the female, and this can get in the way of combat situations. Also there is more chance of abuse (verbal and physical) from the men. There is obvously the attraction between man and woman that can get both distracted. Also, If captured by the enemy, Women face more horrible torture (ie Rape) than Men Would.

Strength is not a problem as many women are stronger than men.

And in actual fact. If the requirments were EXACTLY the same, they should be allowed, but they shouldnt get it any easier

Wetall_basic

Almost everyone knows that woman have less upper body strength then men, and that would allow them to be raped more easily. And male rape really isen't... ya...

As for attraction,in a combat situation where your getting shot at,I doubt your thinking, "Damn,Mary looks hot right now". Wetall_basic

[QUOTE="Wetall_basic"][QUOTE="PerilousWolf"]

No.

Natural Male Instict is to defend the female, and this can get in the way of combat situations. Also there is more chance of abuse (verbal and physical) from the men. There is obvously the attraction between man and woman that can get both distracted. Also, If captured by the enemy, Women face more horrible torture (ie Rape) than Men Would.

Strength is not a problem as many women are stronger than men.

And in actual fact. If the requirments were EXACTLY the same, they should be allowed, but they shouldnt get it any easier

luckystar23

Ok if you were on the frontlines, would you rather have a man fighting by your side or a woman. Let's just say they have equal strength.

[QUOTE="Frattracide"]

[QUOTE="JackMcSexbeard"]Yes i dont find anything wrong with it, I understand some of the arguments against it but if women want equal rights then they should be made to risk their lives as well. Combat isnt as physically strenuous as it used to be with more mobile, strategic warfare.JackMcSexbeard

wow. :lol:

What was the wow part?

I think its fine for a women to want to join the military if she wishes and she should be able to go to the frontlines as well, I dont see how they would be a burden, women can be just as courages as men and excell in a situation like that if given equal training.

Also by what I meant w/ combat being so less physically intense is that the strength and endurance meant to carry on in battle isnt the same as using swords and shields and doing hand to hand combat for long hours. This is when human kind became indoctinated with the idea that women should stay off the battlefield.

With modern warfare soilders only carry a gun and equipment the upperbody strength is important but not needed as much b/c it is not as strenuous, also the addition of aircraft and navies using advanced computerized weapons have med war less personal and roles can be found for anyone either women can succedd on the front just like men as long as they are kept to a high standard just like men.

What was so silly about my post?

Have you ever participated in armed conflict?