Women sue US goverment to allow women in combat

Discussion in 'Americas' started by average american, Nov 29, 2012.

  1. average american

    average american Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    434
    WASHINGTON: As the military plans to cut thousands of troops and the military experiments with opening combat training to women, the American Civil Liberties Union has joined four female servicemembers -- two in the reserves (one Army, one Marine Corps), one in the Air National Guard, and one on active duty in the Marines -- in a lawsuit filed in Northern California aimed at prying open all combat posts to women.
    The ACLU provides a fine summary of the non-legal argument for these women on its website:

    "The four servicemembers have all done tours in Iraq or Afghanistan--some deploying multiple times -- where they served in combat or led female troops who went on missions with combat infantrymen. Their careers and opportunities have been limited by a policy that does not grant them the same recognition for their service as their male counterparts. The combat exclusion policy also makes it harder for them to do their jobs."

    Historically, the military tried to protect women by restricting them to supporting roles safely in the rear while manning frontline combat units, like infantry and tanks, exclusively with men -- but the chaos of modern warfare puts all forces at risk. Women argue they're in danger already, so why can't they serve in combat jobs?

    The issue's especially sensitive because competition for promotions will intensify as the ranks shrink and women currently are barred from competing for many combat jobs by policy. However, the services have been pressing ahead in their usual careful, slow and stodgy fashion to give women who can qualify the same chances as their male colleagues to win promotions that often depend on combat qualifications and service.

    For example, the Marines recently asked for female volunteers to take on their demanding 13-week infantry course. Two women stepped forward. Both failed last month - along with one third of the 107 men.

    The head of the Army, Gen. Ray Odierno, said a few months ago he would consider opening elite Ranger training to women. Being a Ranger is a sine qua non for many senior Army positions and is also usually the first step in qualifying for the various elite Special Operations positions. Half of the men who volunteer for Ranger training fail it the first time. But Odierno said he knew the Army had to consider opening it up to women because 90 percent of senior infantry officers are Rangers. So, if you want to become a senior officer in the most important jobs in the Army, you pretty much have to wear a Ranger tab. A final recommendation on whether to open Ranger training to women is expected soon.

    Odierno also noted back during his May press conference that more than 200 women began reporting to maneuver battalions in nine brigade combat teams as a result of a change in Army policy opening 13,000 positions in six military occupational specialties and 80 units to women.

    The Army Chief of Staff said the Army was "collecting information" and "setting a course forward" on how to move women into additional specialties in infantry and armored units. These jobs are not combat positions, but they would be serving with combat units.

    The ACLU's own statement notes that the four women named in the lawsuit "served in combat or led female troops who went on missions with" the infantry. They are already on or near the front lines but aren't doing combat jobs yet. The closest the new Army policy got to opening true combat positions was allowing women to serve as tank mechanics and rocket launcher crew.

    If the courts act as they usually do on such matters that go to the core of military operations and expertise, the judges are likely to defer to the Pentagon on a matter such as this. Several attorneys I spoke with said they would be surprised if the case was even heard, let alone decided against the military, especially given the fact that the military is already experimenting with opening some combat training to women.
    Regardless of how the case turns out, the brutal truth is that relatively few women will serve in combat jobs, for the same reason many men don't. They will fail the rigorous physical training required to qualify for regular combat units such as the infantry, let alone to qualify for elite Special Operations units. As long as combat training places an emphasis on the combination of upper body strength and stamina, that will remain the case.

    Should combat positions be open to women? If they can pass the tests, then I think they should have the same rights to fight for their country as anyone else.

    ACLU, Four Women Sue Pentagon To Open Combat Roles To Females
     
  2.  
  3. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Your country sure has some crazy women. We'd understand a scenario in which all men are being conscripted. But in peace time? :laugh:
     
  4. JBH22

    JBH22 Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 29, 2010
    Messages:
    3,620
    Likes Received:
    2,389
    Emotive issue to have women in the hands of Talibans.. Jessica lynch episode is quite fresh

    if they want to fight let em go i say but forgive me for my so called "backward" thinking i still believe women have no place in armed forces except medical units :)
     
  5. average american

    average american Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    434
    Remember movie starship trooper, I say lets go all the way.
     
    Dovah likes this.
  6. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    I wonder if the ACLU specifically asks for women to hold infantry MOS (11B).

    11B--Infantryman
     
  7. Bangalorean

    Bangalorean Stars and Ambassadors Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2010
    Messages:
    6,207
    Likes Received:
    6,497
  8. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Now many will paint me a sexist for saying this, and I have no problem with that tag.
    But women belong in homes, with their children and taking care of the family.
    Shame on the man who asks his woman to work up the corporate ladder just so that he won't have to spend his money on her.
    As for women in battlefields, that is to happen in an exceptional condition. Society should never allow it to become a norm. Shame on the country which allows its women to go to battle when there are enough men alive to take care of the job.
     
    Razor and W.G.Ewald like this.
  9. roma

    roma NRI in Europe Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Messages:
    3,248
    Likes Received:
    1,862
    i think there is an interesting difference between ALLOWED to play a combat role and REQUIRED to be in a combat role

    so when those certain women in the usa are asking for a position in a combat role , they know the risks and they are ASKING to be deployed as such - to DENY the opportunity then become a matter akin to repression and that category of the suppression of women

    OTOH - if women were t o join the military and then be ASSIGNED a combat role - they should have the right or opportunity to reject such an offer without prejudicing their future promotional prospects

    if those two combinations of opportunities are open to women i.e they CAN choose to be in combat but they cannot be COMPELLED ( as men can ) to be in combat - then we have an ideal situation and women shouldn't have ANY reason whatsoever to complain or seek legal action as is the case in the lead article.
     
  10. W.G.Ewald

    W.G.Ewald Defence Professionals/ DFI member of 2 Defence Professionals

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2011
    Messages:
    14,140
    Likes Received:
    8,528
    Location:
    North Carolina, USA
    ^^
    In either of two "opportunities" are to exist, women must be able to hold an MOS in a Combat Arm (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Engineers). Just a fact.
     
  11. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,125
    Location:
    EST, USA
    First, women press the government to pass laws to protect them from violent men, because they cannot defend themselves, and then they sue the government because they want to defend the country from violent men.

    I guess that makes sense in a woman's mind!
     
    W.G.Ewald and Known_Unknown like this.
  12. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
    Watch out Talibans big Mama is going to whoop your asses!

    [​IMG]
     
    parijataka likes this.
  13. pmaitra

    pmaitra Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    Mar 10, 2009
    Messages:
    31,640
    Likes Received:
    17,125
    Location:
    EST, USA
  14. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976
  15. Known_Unknown

    Known_Unknown Devil's Advocate Stars and Ambassadors

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2009
    Messages:
    2,632
    Likes Received:
    1,664
    Location:
    Earth
    What BS man. Shouldn't women be allowed to choose what they want to do? This patronizing attitude towards women telling them that they can or cannot do certain things because men think so belongs in the 18th or 19th century, not today.

    If women want to take part in combat, let them do so. As long as joining the armed forces is voluntary, if a woman does decide to join a combat arm knowing full well the consequences if she fell into enemy hands, then who are the generals to stop her?

    Of course, she must meet the same standards of fitness and physical ability as the men, there shouldn't be separate standards just to let women in.
     
    parijataka, Dovah and pmaitra like this.
  16. asianobserve

    asianobserve Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2011
    Messages:
    7,308
    Likes Received:
    2,976

    This may be a game changer for women desiring to taste the ultimate adrenaline fix...

    [​IMG]
     
  17. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Told you you'll paint me as a regressive sexist.

    You see, a man is no one to tell a woman what she should be doing or not doing. That's her own business. But as it happens, the army is run by men not women. So if they want combat, they should just raise their own army. I know it sounds silly, because women in combat sounds similarly silly if you ask me.

    Do you believe in God? If yes, good, if not even better, that means you believe in science. Both say clearly that men and women were not built for the same thing originally. There's a reason you've got a pole and she's got a hole. Neither God nor Evolution is stupid enough to create copies of same things in different sexes.

    In any case, the majority of women, even if they pass the test, won't be able to handle the heat of the battle. Their brains and bodies aren't wired to do so. These are not my words. It's our job to protect our women and children first and foremost and not theirs. This is the way it has been intended. You can deny all you want to, but I welcome you to back it up with facts to the contrary.

    In any case combat is a mark of masculinity. Why would feminists judge a woman through the prism of masculinity?
     
    mikhail likes this.
  18. average american

    average american Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2012
    Messages:
    1,540
    Likes Received:
    434
    You are a sexist.
     
    parijataka likes this.
  19. spikey360

    spikey360 Crusader Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2011
    Messages:
    2,285
    Likes Received:
    2,116
    Location:
    The Republic of India
    Thank God. I don't propose to push women into combat, if that's what you mean to say.
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.
  20. Dovah

    Dovah Untermensch Senior Member

    Joined:
    May 23, 2011
    Messages:
    4,754
    Likes Received:
    3,273
    Location:
    Modindia
    Exoskeleton? :bplease:

    Anyway, there should be a common minimum criteria doesn't matter if you are a man or a woman. You can't deny someone freedom of choice because of their sex.
     
  21. indian_sukhoi

    indian_sukhoi Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2009
    Messages:
    957
    Likes Received:
    224
    Location:
    Hyderabad, India
    No offence

    It seems everyone in US sues somebody. They only need a reason, No matter how small it is
     
    W.G.Ewald likes this.

Share This Page