Women to be cleared for combat roles (Page 6)

People, do not mistake "combat" and the "battlefield" for what this order is dealing with. It is NOT dealing with the idea of keeping women OUT of or IN combat, it is about opening up certain job specialities for women that weren't previously open. it wasn't even "unofficial" that we were in combat before, but rather the job specialities I just mentioned. Those specialities happen to be ones with the explicit missions of "closing with and destroying the enemy." HOWEVER, that doesn't mean you haven't had thousands of women in direct combat roles in Iraq and Afghanistan already. As a Military Police officer, my primary mission was not to close with and destroy the enemy. BUT, if in the course of securing roads, identifying IEDs, operating checkpoints, and serving as a quick reaction force for logistic units caught in an enemy attack, we would and DID encounter the enemy on SCORES of occassions. Those bullet holes in my truck were real. Those slivers of AK-47 rounds I pulled out of my pant leg (but thankfully NOT my leg) were real. The bullets I sent downrange at the enemy were real. The rounds my soldiers fired at the enemy when I told them to were real. The 4 Purple Heart my 2 male and 1 female (she got two) Soldiers received were real. The Bronze Star with V device for Valor that our medic (SHE) received was real. The combat actions badges that we wear, with pride, on our uniforms are real.  Women HAVE been in the thick of combat for the past 11 years. I have seen more combat than some of my male counterparts who have served in Infantry, Armor, and Field Artillery units.  And while, previously, we couldn't be directly assigned to Infantry units, you COULD be "attached." Just like my platoon and I were from Oct-Dec '04 during the offensive in Fallujah. There we did counter mortar/counter rocket patrols with a heavy infantry platoon and cav scout platoon. I am a woman. I have been in combat, HEAVY combat. And I am not expection to that and have many a close female friends who saw more than I did.

Most of the conjectures in this thread about military life are just that, conjectures. Does sexual assault happen in the military? Unfortunately. You know what helps prevent that--the command climate and leadership that is in the place. In my 35 months as a Platoon Leader and 19 months as a Company Commander, my unit did not have ONE case of sexual assault of any type.  We did have a couple of dirt bags that may have been capable of such, but we didn't let them remain in the Army--and by we, I mean my male First Sergeant and I. 

Allowing women in combat is not the issue the order addressed, it's allowing women in combat designated roles. The switch wasn't suddenly turned on yesterday and women aren't in the infantry today. Significant study and work has yet to be done on how to implement it, and the current timeline for full implementation appears to be 2016.  I did not advocate one way or the other for it because, frankly, I was already doing everything like that as an MP. Are there significant implementation implications that the military must address?  Yes, but I have already seen some of the work that they are doing on such. And you know what, UNLIKE when they first allowed women into the Academies in the mid 70's, they actually have women leaders working on these issues (alongside men) to address the totality of it.  And do not assume that just because a woman volunteered to be in the military that it makes them a hard left leaning feminist.  Some are, some are not. Most are just patriots who want to serve their country, be leaders, and provide for their families. We come from all sides of the political spectrum, and our primary goal is serve, NOT make a statement.    

And shame on some of you for stereotyping the type of male soldiers we have. Are there some knuckle dragging, testosterone driven yahoos that make life for everyone hard? YES, there are. But there are also many of the finest gentlemen with character unlike what you often see in the civilian world and who have no issue working with their female counterparts and crushing the idiots who act otherwise.  The view from my foxhole is that the good outnumber the bad, and the more of the good we get into leadership positions, the better the command climates will be and the less any of the bad stuff against male or female will occur.  But do not think the military can ever become immune to societal ills.  There is nothing that we are faced with that isn't reflected in greater numbers and scope in the civilian world.  Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen, and Marines come from that society. So before questioning the military as the root of why some of the ills in the military happen--question society and address that first.  We can always be better as a military. We are always striving to be better. We will never be perfect. But find me somew workplace that is. I have always felt safe because of two things: the great people I have served with whom I knew had my back (male and female), and the knowledge that is anyone tried anything with me, they were going to regret it.

In the meantime, as an officer in this United States Army (not as a male or a female, but as an officer) with 11 years of commissioned service and 15 total years in uniform, I will continue to do my best to lead properly, to impact my sphere of influence the best that I am able, to create command climates and work enviornments that foster ingenuity and creativity, to grow leaders of character who excel in peacetime and war, to demonstrate how developing trust and cohesion amongst each other in units leads to greater success both collectively and individually than pursuing personal ambitions (be they worthy or criminal), and to always lead by example. My current position gives me access to many of America's future leaders, and I can assure you that those of us officers that are here are pouring our heart and souls into mentoring, molding, and shaping them into the they type of leader of character that will best serve this country and who will take the mantle of honor of leading America's Sons and Daughters with the utmost seriousness and committment to doing the right thing.

I will not debate with anyone here. This is my statement on this. Do not speculate upon what you do not know, and newspaper articles are not the fullness of information.

It's controversial for a few simple reasons.

1) It's never been done

2) From a male perspective - I personally struggle with it because I still think a man should open doors for women, walk on the street side of the sidewalk and always step between danger and his female companion. I taught, or at least tried to teach, my sons the same things.  All of those ideas create conflicting issues in combat zones.  That's my failing though, not a womans.

3) It's never been done before

Someone mentioned Israel--although Israel's security and defense situation is unique in many ways, including that women are conscripted for service and always have been--but if the only argument (other than personal feeling, which several respondents have admitted) is that women in active duty in combat roles are going to get raped (more than in the armed services generally), then shall we go ahead and admit that straight Israeli men serving in combat roles are morally and occupationally far superior than straight U.S. men in similar ones?

Also, it's pretty common in Europe for athletic and swimming facilities to have one big common changing room.

I still do all of that and will, and think you should too.  Shouldn't stop them from being allowed the opportunity to serve in combat roles.

Don't take this as an argument, just a clarification.  And yes, I will not stop and probably couldn't stop even if I wanted to.

I am going to butcher this thought but...

My point is this, in the infantry you are taught how to function with no emotion, no moral compass and no thought of ethical behavior.  Please do not mistake this for lack of morals, disregard for ethical behavior or complete lack of emotion.  Everything you do you do because it's what is required and you want to make sure your brothers come home, even if they just got done telling fat jokes about your mother or were giving you a hard time about your wife/girlfriend putting a broom on the front porch.  It's where training and instinct supersede everything.  My actions I mentioned in the previous post are instinct and that could endanger my comrades.  Again, this is a personal failing, not the fault of a female.

I'm moving to Europe!

Total off topic, but the last time I was in Vegas there was a European family lounging in the chairs in front of me at the pool.  They finished swimming and got out of the pool and changed from their swimsuits to their street clothes right out in the open.  Mom, Dad (in their 30's) and their teenage daughters fully nude. 

I seriously felt like I was witnessing a crime, it was very awkward.  My how our cultures are different. 

I don't have a problem with this news and was actually surprised to hear it on the news this morning, I figured it was a given that if a woman can qualify for a job she can have the job.

As far as the rape goes, there are risks in life and there are choices in life. If a woman decides to join the military she knows there is a statistically higher chance of her being sexually assaulted. She knows that and gets to make her choice from there, I don't see how anyone should make that choice for her. And as TexasMP alluded to, the frequency of sexual assault is a leadership problem more than a woman being available to be assaulted problem IMO. The leader of whatever the group is should be able to recognize a neanderthal and deal with them appropriately.

As far as the physicality. Yes, I agree with what was said earlier that in individual sports women don't want the equality they say they do. Which is why we separate the women and men in tri. Can some women compete with men? Of course and if they want to join the male class, let them.

But combat is not an individual sport, it is all about the team. When they test they don't just take the top 5, they have a minimum and anyone who meets the minimum passes. Like Trin said, the woman might be working harder to perform on the same level, but if she is meeting the level, she passes. I know plenty of women I would rather have on my team than some guys I know.

Anyway. I am surprised this has just now happened and I am glad it did. If a woman can pass the training for a specific job, give her the job. Measure a woman's ability side by side with the men and if she keeps up I don't see why she shouldn't get the job, makes no difference to me what is between the legs.

The pregnancy thing is something to think about, hard to train to be a cohesive group and then have someone leave. But I have no experience there and I am betting that woman who are trying for the special forces jobs are not interested in getting prego at the same time.  

Like it or not this is will happen at some point, planned or not.  That potential is not a reason to keep women out of those roles.

Dear people equal means equivalent not identical

2+2=4 but 3+1=4 as well.

The difference is that combat roles require a certain amount of physicality that is attainable be a large portion of the populace be they male or female.  In a head to head competition where our physicality is the purpose you will have an edge physiologically that I do not.  Just because you are a ferrari and I am a Shelby mustang does not mean we cannot travel at 120 mph together but if we are going head to head, flat out, you are going to beat my tires off.

So then is that not a fine example of the 3 having to do more work picking up the slack for the 1? That has been one of the arguments.

and here's one for our Canadian friends.

For what it's worth, I had the opportunity to train with some of the Canadian military and they were great.  We traded a lot of stuff, most of which I won't mention because I don't know what the statute of limitations is in regards to that kind of stuff.

So then is that not a fine example of the 3 having to do more work picking up the slack for the 1? That has been one of the arguments.

I have no idea how the heck you got your hands on classified designs of our most top secret boat...but the black choppers are circling...

A question to all you Americans...when women became Fire Fighters, Police, etc....was there this much controversy?

For some, yes.

I have no idea how the heck you got your hands on classified designs of our most top secret boat...but the black choppers are circling...

A question to all you Americans...when women became Fire Fighters, Police, etc....was there this much controversy?

Yes.  Just like when they first ran in the Boston Marathon, or voted, or did any other number of things that previously excluded them.

And in the end...how did it work out?  did civilization end in the US?  Were Women able to do the job of a fireman or policeman?  Or did they fail miserably and society has never attempted it again?

People, do not mistake "combat" and the "battlefield" for what this order is dealing with. It is NOT dealing with the idea of keeping women OUT of or IN combat, it is about opening up certain job specialities for women that weren't previously open. it wasn't even "unofficial" that we were in combat before, but rather the job specialities I just mentioned.