FredHayek wrote: Seperate but equal? Will they put women in combat units or create women only combat units. I think women only units would work better. Did the navy start out that way, with women only ships?
Yea, I think it was the Phoenician navy in 16 BC. They called it whores with oars.
I can see a Spec Ops unit that is female,I can understand why women would like to "push" the
paradigm.....IF the woman can pass the physical requirements and gain a sense of parity with the male,then why not? HERE'S what I do NOT understand......the rape/assault WITHIN the
ranks has gone off the charts/there is NO accountability nor follow thru on this problem and to
then create ANOTHER set of circumstances that will exacerbate the issue is beyond my
comprehension. JMO
Will the new uniforms will still be made in Bangladesh?
How is it unisex if the ACU (A) is for women and the ACU is fit for men?
Or are the items in ACU-A interchangeable with ACU?
Will males with different body types that need to wear ACU-A fatigues be ridiculed?
Other than that, pretty classy posts there Bob.
Archer, Good answer.
Otis, chill dude.
Homeagain, we always hear from the people that were against gays troops in combat because they felt that gays in foxholes wouldn’t be able to control themselves. When the truth is that it is the straight troops who cannot control themselves from assaulting females.
Photo-fish wrote: Will the new uniforms will still be made in Bangladesh?
How is it unisex if the ACU (A) is for women and the ACU is fit for men?
Or are the items in ACU-A interchangeable with ACU?
Will males with different body types that need to wear ACU-A fatigues be ridiculed?
Other than that, pretty classy posts there Bob.
Archer, Good answer.
Otis, chill dude.
Homeagain, we always hear from the people that were against gays troops in combat because they felt that gays in foxholes wouldn’t be able to control themselves. When the truth is that it is the straight troops who cannot control themselves from assaulting females.
otisptoadwater wrote: Or start from the beginning; you don't know what you are talking about and you never did and you never will. Shut up, you never killed anyone face to face. I have. Want to compare notes? It's a memory I'd rather not revisit but if you want to go there I'll talk with you face to face about how it went down.
I wouldn't meet with you for any reason, anywhere....you are obviously out of control. You are the one who brought up why people go to war, I have no idea what your reasons were, and I don't want to know. I simply suggested one answer to your question of why people would willingly go into combat.
What is with you anyway......do you miss LJ and are actively looking for a replacement? Your recent posts are openly hostile to me, and I do not recall inviting such hostility. I will avoid responding to anything you post going forwards and perhaps your blood pressure will benefit from that.
Photo-fish wrote: Will the new uniforms will still be made in Bangladesh?
How is it unisex if the ACU (A) is for women and the ACU is fit for men?
Or are the items in ACU-A interchangeable with ACU?
Will males with different body types that need to wear ACU-A fatigues be ridiculed?
Other than that, pretty classy posts there Bob.
Archer, Good answer.
Otis, chill dude.
Homeagain, we always hear from the people that were against gays troops in combat because they felt that gays in foxholes wouldn’t be able to control themselves. When the truth is that it is the straight troops who cannot control themselves from assaulting females.
[/b]
I understand the bolded,what I do NOT understand is the LACK of responsibility/accountability
from the chain of command. It's as if there is a "wink and nod" attitude when it come to COMPREHENSIVE corrective measures.....case in point, the authority figure who headed the
supposed solution/educational program that addressed this epidemic problem.....
otisptoadwater wrote: Or start from the beginning; you don't know what you are talking about and you never did and you never will. Shut up, you never killed anyone face to face. I have. Want to compare notes? It's a memory I'd rather not revisit but if you want to go there I'll talk with you face to face about how it went down.
I wouldn't meet with you for any reason, anywhere....you are obviously out of control. You are the one who brought up why people go to war, I have no idea what your reasons were, and I don't want to know. I simply suggested one answer to your question of why people would willingly go into combat.
What is with you anyway......do you miss LJ and are actively looking for a replacement? Your recent posts are openly hostile to me, and I do not recall inviting such hostility. I will avoid responding to anything you post going forwards and perhaps your blood pressure will benefit from that.
UNFORTUNATELY, this board has a preponderance of posters who have tilted the balance
of debate (the right wing constituency seems to be "settling" into a majority).....there is NO
balanced debate......the reason why many have left/taken a brake from the board.....what a
sad state of affairs....JMO
otisptoadwater wrote: Or start from the beginning; you don't know what you are talking about and you never did and you never will. Shut up, you never killed anyone face to face. I have. Want to compare notes? It's a memory I'd rather not revisit but if you want to go there I'll talk with you face to face about how it went down.
I wouldn't meet with you for any reason, anywhere....you are obviously out of control. You are the one who brought up why people go to war, I have no idea what your reasons were, and I don't want to know. I simply suggested one answer to your question of why people would willingly go into combat.
What is with you anyway......do you miss LJ and are actively looking for a replacement? Your recent posts are openly hostile to me, and I do not recall inviting such hostility. I will avoid responding to anything you post going forwards and perhaps your blood pressure will benefit from that.
UNFORTUNATELY, this board has a preponderance of posters who have tilted the balance
of debate (the right wing constituency seems to be "settling" into a majority).....there is NO
balanced debate......the reason why many have left/taken a brake from the board.....what a
sad state of affairs....JMO
archer, I thought you had thicker hide. Or is this just another way to wiggle out of answering a question; pull the "I'm offended by anything you say and the fact that you live and breathe" card. Consider the issue closed, I'll ignore you and you can return the favor.
Homeagain, if you feel so strongly about the lack of balance on this site invite your buddies to come over and defend their positions and pipe up yourself. I'm not going to stop posting here because a few people choose to be offended by what I post.
I can explain it to you but I can't understand it for you.
"Any man who thinks he can be happy and prosperous by letting the Government take care of him; better take a closer look at the American Indian." - Henry Ford
Corruptissima re publica plurimae leges; When the Republic is at its most corrupt the laws are most numerous. - Publius Cornelius Tacitus
otisptoadwater wrote: Or start from the beginning; you don't know what you are talking about and you never did and you never will. Shut up, you never killed anyone face to face. I have. Want to compare notes? It's a memory I'd rather not revisit but if you want to go there I'll talk with you face to face about how it went down.
I wouldn't meet with you for any reason, anywhere....you are obviously out of control. You are the one who brought up why people go to war, I have no idea what your reasons were, and I don't want to know. I simply suggested one answer to your question of why people would willingly go into combat.
What is with you anyway......do you miss LJ and are actively looking for a replacement? Your recent posts are openly hostile to me, and I do not recall inviting such hostility. I will avoid responding to anything you post going forwards and perhaps your blood pressure will benefit from that.
UNFORTUNATELY, this board has a preponderance of posters who have tilted the balance
of debate (the right wing constituency seems to be "settling" into a majority).....there is NO
balanced debate......the reason why many have left/taken a brake from the board.....what a
sad state of affairs....JMO
They were a majority elsewhere also. It was just hard to tell because of the posting volume of a few over there.
The board actually reflects the community it serves. (which is still predominately conservative.)
