Should females be allowed in the millitary
 

Well should they be allowed in, but just not in combat areas, or not at all?

The daughtor of a friend of mine serves in combat with the RAF. she has been on
deployment twice and seen action as the gunner on a helicopter; the same job her
farther had in the RAF in Vietnam. (I didn't know the RAF was in 'nam either!).

Tell her se can't do her job?
I like the way my bones are all internal and my jaw connects to my face too much to do that. :huh:

Last time this came up for review in the UK (where there is a ban on front-line fighting for women, but not on combat):

"Mr Hoon said the key issue was not whether women could cope physically, but how their presence affected the cohesion of teams in "high intensity close combat"
"To admit women therefore, would involve a risk without any offsetting gains in terms of combat effectiveness.""

"As part of the review, field exercises were conducted with about 50 men and women soldiers.
Although mixed teams performed no differently from single-sex teams, officials said the tests did not adequately replicate the stress of actual combat."


I'm with Germany on this one. If all applicants are up to standard and there is no
effect on performance, then by all means, let everyone fight and kill. If some guys
can't "cohese" with women then that is their problem. This isn't the Scared Band ffs!

As long as they aren't forced to serve and choose it voluntarily I don't see any reason to deny them something that men are allowed to do.

If they can do the job then fine ,Russians already proved that in ww2.

Exactly. Like most men, I have arguments against if, but the fact is that if there is even a question of "allowed", then you're society is not free, no matter how much you argue to the contrary.

sure. Just their fellow male soldiers should respect them, and not try to rape them.

:rotfl:

After ending up through the windscreen of a womans car i feel a poll "should women be allowed to drive" to be a good suggestion

They have lower inurance for a good reason you know. ;)

Im my experience over 90% women cant cut it in the infantry, other combat roles are possible.

I agree that Infantry would be the toughest for women to handle. Carrying a 100lb rucksack, or a 200lb casualty, for any distance is beyond most womens capabilities. Beyond a fair amount of mens as well.

However if a women can handle that, all other considerations, affecting morale, being raped if captured, etc aren't valid reasons to prevent them from serving.

My only concern is that physical standards always end up getting lowered because somebody doesn't like the higher washout rate of females who can't hack it.

Im my experiance that about matches the ammount of men who can't cut it.

But even if 99.9% of women could not "cut it", that should not stop the 0.01% from getting in.

Thats why we have lowered physical tests in most jobs. They are the same with fighter pilots and SF, i know of one female pilot, and i know that no one has passed SF tests. We had a unofficial ban in the recon unit, we were told that women will not be taken when we were giving our points after basic training. Remember the Israeli study that men could risk their unit and mission if women are on the battlefied?

It worked for the Soviets,it worked for Israel,it even worked for some "special" units the Japanese used in Burma...an entire brigade of Female Indians who wanted to fight the British...from what I understand they were absolutely nuts in combat...total fanatics...sheesh.

If anything women should raise standards.
Allowing women will raise applications and give the selection people a wider choice to
cream off the best.