mystical shadow angel

A major source of debate surrounds the controversial issue regarding the role of women in the military, particularly in units like the infantry where they are required to directly engage the enemy in combat. Although many countries actively recruit women to serve in the armed forces, only a few will allow women to fill active combatant roles. Australia does not permit women to serve in direct combat military positions, but I’m not entirely sure about other countries.

After some poking around for some updated information, the main argument against the involvement of women in these roles seems to be the physical concerns. Biologically women are not built for combat; generally denser skeletal systems make them more prone to breakages; less upper-body strength; generally smaller torsos and thus less endurance. All of these factors could prove critical on the front-line.

Many soldiers have also remarked that they could not trust a woman to carry out her duties in a situation where trusting their fellow soldier would be critical. Placing women in combat where they are at risk of being captured and tortured and possibly sexually assaulted is also unacceptable to the society at large.

Women began serving in the Israeli Defence Force combat units on an experimental basis, and the reason for removing female soldiers from the front lines was no reflection on the performance of female soldiers, but rather, that of the male infantrymen after witnessing a woman wounded. The IDF saw a complete loss of control over soldiers who experienced an uncontrollable, protective, instinctual aggression.

In recent years, having female soldiers within a combat unit has the advantage of allowing for searches on female civilians, causing less offence amongst the occupied population. Female US military personnel are specially selected to participate in patrols and raids for this purpose. However, Australian soldiers have voiced concerns saying that US soldiers "are reluctant to take women on reconnaissance or special operations, as they fear that in the case of combat or discovery, their priority will be to save the women and not to complete the mission. Thus while men might be able to be programmed to kill, it is not as easy to program men to neglect women."

While the majority of people are against women serving in active combat roles, a minority believe that if a woman can satisfy the physical requirements and dutifully complete all set tasks, then she should be allowed to serve as men do.

These are all very valid arguments. Personally I believe that everyone should be given a choice. Some women do have the capabilities to serve in active combat roles like men do, and thus should be allowed if they can satisfy the same requirements that men do. However, I believe that the majority of women are just not cut out for this type of work. Heck, even men are not cut out for it sometimes. There are some places that I just wouldn’t venture into, and this is definitely one of them.

__________________

Scourge

All these facts which you have stated are true, and any hinderence to the effectivness in performince in combat could and would get the person killed and possible cause even more casualties. As a soldier you must be capable to reley on your fellow soldiers to support you and trust in them. If you are unable to trust your fellow soldier then there are some rather big problems which raises concerns.
If any individual is unable to prove they are physicaly and mentaly able to meet the chalange and succed, then they have no buisness being there.

__________________

Peach_follows

I am pro-choice.

I know that term is mainly used to refer to abortions. But it applies here also. I support a woman's choice to do with her person as she pleases. This would include serving her country by fighting and risking her life. Women die in war all the time, especially as civilian casualties. So why shouldn't a woman be allowed to go out on the front lines.

Besides, not to be sexist or generalize... But I think, overall, women have a different way of going about things. Perhaps this could be an asset in battle where strategy is concerned.

Give the art of battle a woman's touch <<< Just Kidding

Seriously though, women kick @ss.

__________________

Cresent Knight

well i believe if some women what to join the armed force its their choice to but it is true that some women and men are not cut out for it.if they can pass the requirments then they should be able to but then again women are more emotional then men they would cause a problem espessally in combat so i do agree but i dont so im gonna just stay in the middle of this cuz there are some people in this world that can be in the armed force but many can.

__________________
I've lost everything I once held dear to me all i have felt is hope and with it I''ll push myself forward and follow the even ending stream of life.....

POOHEAD189

I don't know if girls should be allowed. I know its mainly the man's fault for this, but women would be a little distracting in the field to the men. even tho thats a small fault, along with not made for combat like men are, I still think we could look past that and allow women to fight if they are ready for it. There are some pretty fierce women out there. But idk about soldiers. Idk

__________________
Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner.

beast

I am against it from experience. One reason is that most of the women I have worked with were fairly lazy, though that is not the experience with all of them it is my experiance with most. Another reason is that lets say you have four women in a group of 100 just an example they will want their own facilities. Which means 50% of everything is going towards 4% of your actual warriors, though I speak for American Forces and that is not the way it is in other places. I know from coalitions some forces use the same facilities and such. Not to mention morale is hire at all male commands. I'd take all-male over integrated anytime.

Plus lets say you get a woman who has crack skills that are absolutely awesome, and she gets pregnant two months into a projected 6 month deployment or one projected longer. Okay you have to bring someone else in and train them. Now of course in the case of death that happens anyways but we need to control what we can as much as possible. Now two points I want to dismiss as being incorrect, I am sure that Mystical Shadow Angel read them somewhere but I would argue the initial publicatioin was made for someones agenda and have little to no truth. It concerns this:

"Thus while men might be able to be programmed to kill, it is not as easy to program men to neglect women." and
"The IDF saw a complete loss of control over soldiers who experienced an uncontrollable, protective, instinctual aggression."
I can only speak for myself and assure you that that is not the case with me, heck I had to try really hard suppressing the urge to slit their throats myself and would not have been torn to pieces if the Filippinos or Iraqis did it for me.

POOHEAD189

well I agree with beast, hed be the guy to know, I was just thinking on it in a perspective I'd see it as. I didnt think of the reasources, military deduction, etc.

__________________
Crazy people don't know they're going crazy. They think they're getting saner.

Zev

Women can do anything better.

Honestly, its prolly not for most women. However there are some women out there who just plain kick butt and they deserve a chance to show it! And those are my beliefs. In the end we are all people, if someones going to be tortured, it doesn't matter if its man or woman.

__________________