The picture that August posted is somewhat accurate I did have a few parties like that one time in tech school though it was Air Force,Marines and women sorry Navy and Army.

Sorry, it was hard to articulate exactly what i meant.

It is clear that right now, in the past 20 years, and in the future, assuming that the major powers dont come into conflict, navy and USAAF will be playing solely support roles for troops on the ground (after any kind of air force is taken out ,as with the Iraqi airforce). As with most support roles, this is somewhat less dangerous overall than frontline combat troops on the ground.

As you said, most of the USAAF is comprised of everyone else, maintenance, flight control, operations. All needed to keep the flyboys in the air when we need them. That means that most of the USAAF is not anywhere near the frontline, and therefore mainly out of danger from their enemies. the navy is nowhere near the frontlines. Most navy personnel are, obviously, on our vast fleet of carriers, frigates, subs, and missile cruisers. In this war, they have extremely low chances of getting hit by the enemy.


the USAAF and Navy also have superb supply lines. Every week, ships arrive to resupply most carriers with food and rid them of waste products.

The USAAF operates out of bases, and supplies are usually brought in these bases, so they are supplied well also.

So in reality, the Air force and Navy have it much better off in these wars in afghanistan and Iraq, as These countries arent modernized and hardly a threat.

They do have gratuitous amounts of IEDs and Ak-47s however. Army and marine GIs are pretty much the only ones taking casualties at this point. Many troops can and have gone on for weeks on rations, without batteries for night vision, no lube for their weapons, getting shot and by RPGs and AK-47s.


As far as this war is concerned, yea, the USAAF and Navy are in much better conditions than Marines and the army. Thats the way its been for nearly 100 years.

This isnt WW2, or vietnam. Our airforces arent engaging in mass dogfights and taking heavy losses. Our ships arent taking fire whatsoever from torpedo planes. But troops are getting shot up. Troops are facing the constant threat of an ambush or an IED.


No military field is easy, and none are any less vital to the overall war machine. But in every way, the marines and Army are currently the MOST dangerous field. And certainly more taxing in some areas. Sailors work all day to keep their ship combat fit, working hard and long, launching planes off, but they can go to bed at night and feel alot safer than the guy sleeping in a ditch. They didnt have to see first hand what their contribution ended up doing to some guy somewhere. How many sailors or pilots you see coming home with PTSD?


But anyway, as long as that tangent is out of the way, i was saying that woman who want to serve in the thick should absolutely be able to. But not if that means compromising standards. If they cant serve their country in that way, oh well, go join something less overall physically demanding. Youll still be doing a great service to the war effort, no doubt about it. But you cant just let them serve just like that. You need to ease them in, and make sure that abuse, as so often seen, does not occur.

What is the USAAF?:hmmm: are you stuck in 1946 or something? It has been the USAF since September 18, 1947 United States Air Force,USAAF was the United States Army Air Force that was from 1941-1946.The change actually began in July of 1947.

I say this because you have typed USAAF in two different posts called it the USAAF several times in your last post.

The reason that the Navy and Air Force does suffer a few hundred KIAs are the ones that killed by IED attacks (truck drivers between bases) and attacks on the base by rocket or mortar fire or Navy Shore Patrol or Air Force Security Forces getting killed by attacks on the gates or base perimeter this is also where the majority of Army and Marine non combat units also happen to be staying in the generally much safer rear it should come as no surprise that they as a result have lower lose rates by the same also applies to rear line Army and Marine jobs.If you said Army and Marine Infantry,tankers,forward observers,combat engineers,medics, corpsmen(a Navy job by the way) I would agree with you but you lump all of the Marines all of the Army as taking far more risk this is not correct.

I and other airmen might not have seen first hand what we did to the enemy by I have seen first hand what the enemy did to our troops most Air Force members are lucky not to have but if you work on the flight line you will see the wounded and dead being loaded and off loaded from mostly cargo planes.You also do not need to tell me what Afghanistan is like I have been to Bagram AB I have a brother that is Army infantry officer I have another step brother that is a Marine Recon I know quite well from my brothers what goes on much more very clearly than you do.

The US Navy and USAF also have very important roles that do not involve the support of ground forces the Navy controls the seas and the Air Force and Navy with smaller aircraft have a very powerful strike capacity not related directly to ground support.You still consider the Army and Marines as lumped into only being combat troops there are just as many rear in the rear as AF or Navy members of the Army and Marines for every infantryman like August there are easily 100 non combat duty Army members in support of him.
You need to understand that in every branch the direct combatants are the smallest percentage of that branch and the supporting troops are in much less danger than the front combat troops often times they are in the exact same base the airmen are on.

I was never supporting having women serve "just like that" either as I said before the integration process been going on since 1974-75 that is close to 40 years now some people like it some people dont but it is only a matter of time before they allow women to do most every job.

The labels can be turned around and applied to any branch. Not everyone in the Army or Marines is a front line trigger puller, and lives in a mud hole. I had a female friend from high school that i was sweet on. The guy she married joined the Marines and became a firefighter. You know what the highlight of his military service was? Sitting in a firehouse on Okinawa. yeah thats right, Mr from the halls of montozuma saw less crap then i did in the air force.

In my job, often enough, the only people i saw that were not in my unit, was Army. I had friends in the army, we'd party and go out drinking when off duty. I've eaten at Army chow halls, ive worked in areas where i was told to slow down when driving dump trucks because i was dusting the Army pukes too much with all the dirt i was kicking up. Hell, ive worked my ass off in a central American jungle long enough to have my legs took like rasberrys from chigger bites, a bad case of immersion foot, and a newfound appreciation for light switchs and flushing toilets. At one point I had to sleep on the ground with just a piece of plywood between me and the mud filled with ringworms because we didn't have enough cots.

All branch's have many of the exact same jobs when you think of it. From Pencil pushing clerks, to medical, to Motor pool mechanics, to military police, to Engineers.

QFT my friend very QFT and everyone that served knows it.Same with having friends from other branches I had quite a few good friends that where part of "Old Iron Sides" the armored brigade when I was in Germany I was also good friends with several US Army supply troops that prepped Army gear for deployment by aircraft they lived in the exact some dorms as we did a million miles away from a fox hole.

In fact most jobs are so similar that they go to the same base and school for training most motor pool and heavy equipment operators go to Fort Lost in the I mean Fort Leonard Wood so on so forth

"Old Ironsides" is the nickname for the First Armored Division. I was a soldier in that division for three years. Where did you say you met those guys?

They where stationed at few bases in Germany mostly tankers and motor pool troops that I knew from Wiesbaden, Mannheim and Heidelberg in the old day70's 80s I think they where in Ansbach of course there are several small army posts all over Germany seems they got moved to Fort Bliss in 2011.I also knew a aircraft maintenance (Army MOS?) they cane to our shop to use or load machine to test out helicopter jacks that is a 60 mile drive both ways guess the Army forgot to give them a load tester they did not wear the Iron Sides patch though I don't recall what their unit was.

You where in Germany?

Also looking there where also 3rd Armored Division troops in Germany when I was but they where located a bit farther away near Frankfurt no reason to drive to a small city when you have huge one to hang out in.

http://www.army.mil/article/56568/1s...to_Fort_Bliss/

Absolutely. It is a very human thing to consider that to which you belong superior to that to which the other belongs. One of our uglier sides.

I see it as a double edged sword pride in ones group is actually a good thing to some extent it can make you want to strive to do your best for your group.A nation should have pride in itself to some extent if it does not sooner or later it will crumble.It can be both a positive and negative quality. Military wise it is also good(with in reason) not only between branches but between separate units you want your company or your squadron to be the best that makes the others want to be the best and as a result they will perform better.

Back in the 50's 60's American made cars had excellent fit and finish for the most part this was because the workers had pride in their company in their work they wanted to make the most well crafted car cars today they just dont have the look that someone that really had pride in their work put it together that is why cars generally look the same nowadays I suppose.

Sure, there is nothing wrong with esprit de corps. The problem comes when that esprit begins to blind oneself. We see that a lot in GT.

Well you have pride and then you have hubris.I would say that hubris would require a little blindness.

I thought you meant GT as in Grand Touring racing at first blindness there would be really bad.:haha:

Oh, the last part of my comment wasnt directed at your statements, sorry for the confusion.

And yes, i agree, that the USAF (sorry ,my mind has been deadlocked on WW2 these past few days, my bad) does unfortunately get to see firsthand what our troops are going through. And yes, i certainly know that behind every soldier fit for duty theres a hundred working to supply, rearm, and provide him medical care.

But this is a thread that focuses on what woman are going to be able to do, many more jobs that get ever closer to the frontlines, and eventually get stationed on the frontlines themselves. So while a large portion of people in the army arent frontline troops, i am not addressing them specifically here. I was trying to infer that i was talking about troops on the frontline, combat troops, rather than their support, such as supplies, medics, and other roles.

i also am not trying to tell you specifically what its like all that much, more trying to prove a point, as im not presuming to lecture people on exactly what goes on or exactly what it feels like, because i dont know.
people have told me their firsthand stories however. My Uncle served in vietnam, my other uncle joined the air force in 1977, still flies drones out in arizona, and my grandfather was a flight engineer aboard a C-47, who was about 1 form away from getting transferred to the 8th airforce, which couldve been horrific.

Now that is just hilarious. :har:

It happens to be spot on, the recent episode over troops pissing on corpses showed the blindness very well.

Now, you can do better than that, sport. Maybe some more logical fallacy? C'mon, I need a laugh today. You're like arguing with a child.