I believe the push is to allow women to serve in specific, direct combat-oriented military occupational skills such as infantry, armor and field artillery....combat units. Women are clearly already serving with great distinction in combat support and combat service support units. They are ending up in the fray because they are fighting a counterinsurgency on a non-linear battlefield (there is no front line). I suspect there will be a push to allow women in special operations units too such as the Rangers and Special Forces.
I would only add two caveat. If the study wants TRUE equality, then they should also recommend that all women born on December 31st, 1959 or later be required to register for the draft. They should level the playing field on the physical fitness test and body fat standards too. One standard for all..not one standard for women and another, more difficult standard for men.
I'm all about a "level playing field" as long as they "level" all aspects of that playing field, aren't you? Please bring on that true equality....the sooner the better.
LH, great point, in the wars we have been fighting, the front line and combat roles can be a little hazy. When ambush IED's kill as many as enemy rifle bullets, just driving down the road is dangerous.
And I also agree about the same physical standards for men and women in combat roles.
Thomas Sowell: There are no solutions, just trade-offs.
I served our Nation for nearly three decades and rose to the rank of Colonel. I know a little bit about combat and unit combat readiness. Social engineering has no place on the battlefield yet that is exactly what we are embarking on here with the push to overturn DADT and now the female combat MOS exclusion.
The flag and general officers who are giving this stuff a nod are being intellectually disingenuous and placing the readiness of our military forces in grave danger...and they know it. They are allowing themselves to be pressured by political forces when they ought to know better and stand up for what is logical. History will not be kind to these guys for being weak when they needed to lead.
The social engineers are messing with things they have NO understanding of and our Nation's military fighting force will suffer the consequences. Ultimately these policy changes threaten our Nation's security.
However, you can only tell a child so many times not to touch the stove. You probably knew kids like that. You told them a hundred times, "don't touch the stove...it's hot"...but they had to touch it anyway. It's the same here....we are going to have to let some people "touch the stove".
Here is another one for you. Imagine the treatment of captured western female combatants by unethical foes. Picture your daughter, wife, sister or mom in that situation if you can bear to think about it for a moment. After you have that image clearly in your head you come and tell me what a great idea this is.
Call me old fashioned but this stuff is Unbelievable!
Have you also taken into account the effect on the male counterparts related to the male instinct to protect the female of the species. Imagine a male soldier having to endure the humiliating screams of a woman soldier being raped or tortured. Can you imagine what that could mean pertaining to security and/or psyche? Might it endanger more troops? How about the propaganda effect?
No one is denying that women should be allowed to compete equally with men. It is not gender bias, but there are other factors to be considered regarding combat besides the equality issues.
:thumbsup:
