Indian Woman for Combat Duties

[Aspirant847]

I told you to refute me with hard scientific data and facts and not the pseudo hippy bs. You have a lack of understanding of issues and a utopian idea to have women in combat.
Even Army chief General Rawat acknowledged that women are not ready to enter combat roles. He has very reasonable grounds to make this statement. Your incohorent fallacy dont matter. Unless you claim to be more qualified than Army chief himself lulz.Also there are certain school yard outcasts who also demand feminists fundamental rights to go into mens toilet. Hell... I will never piss in a ladies toilet . Is it gender discrimination? It is not. It is common sense.
> women wants to be stronger than average man LOL
The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t even meet them.
In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

Male officers spend most of their time in frontline positions along the LoC in direct combat, in places like Siachen where the temperature goes below -50 degrees, and in counter-terrorism and insurgency operations in places like Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast.After such difficult postings, away from families, officers look forward to coming back to peace stations where they can take up command positions.
Now, if these positions are given to women officers, where would the male officers go? Should they remain in hard postings? Is this not counter discriminatory to the officer, his wife, children and parents?




Most Female Recruits cant even Meet New Pullup Standard and you are talking about giving them oppurtunity.Half of female Marines fail 3-pullup assignment. Simply because men and women are naturally born unequal.

What liberals did in Europe was legalizing “freedom, equality, fraternity” without having them in reality. They want just put an ape together with a human being and legalize their “equality” without making them equal. Equality is the last thing such act results in. If you grant equal rights to a human and to an ape, it ends with an ape having all rights and a human having no rights – no right even to survive, since after some time an ape will want to eat and to fuck somebody.



AHAHAHAHAHAHHA . Tennis doubles is similar to war now. You know what Playing hearts of iron 4 has more similarities too. It also requires tactical strategic planning and teamwork. Now you can conquer Russia in just 3 hours.



In Siachen, there are posts with only four soldiers. They sleep and share the same cramped post to attend nature’s call. Can one imagine a female soldier there?
Soldiers undertake patrols that last for over 20 days at times. During this period, the men sleep and bathe together, and do the morning chores in open, often with another team keeping a watch for a possible ambush. There can be no separate arrangements for women.One can go on and cite numerous examples. It is important to stop pushing the romantic notion of women in combat roles and start thinking from a practical point of view, keeping the reality in mind.
There are many more examples that prove beyond doubt that your paranoid fallacy flinging about women entering combat roles in army will only cause more problems rather solutions

The Modi government told the Supreme Court that women may not be able to meet the challenges and hazards of military service due to their “psychological limitations and domestic obligations”.
It also said that male troops, who are predominantly drawn from rural backgrounds, may be unwilling to “accept” a woman commander. They have raised reasonable arguments.


BS.And the family structure gets cucked . Kurds women are fighting because they have no choice left. 5 million syrian children have suffered as a result in absence of mothers. They are fighting because they are facing existential crisis. They are fighting not because of women empowerment and that they want to fight. The war has been forced upon them. Their homes are already destroyed.In Israel, too, women are mostly deployed in the military police and perimeter security rather than in actual combat. You are comparing two different scenarios which doesnt make any sense.
Your shitty social experiment will only be a waste for resources.



Men and women are naturally born unequal. But through division of their efforts in organized civilization – women giving their all in feminine jobs, that have a lot of use without breaking women’s delicate bodies, and men concentrating in masculine ones – their income (and therefore quality of life) equalizes because all services are needed, while their impact grows maximum because everyone is realizing their best talent. What feminists did was destroying natural division so that women break their spine gold mining, while men stagnate, their masculine character softens and effeminizes until they are no more suitable for their natural role – protection of nation .



Your argument is based on pure bs. I ask again. Why all civilizations saved women and kids?Man are disposable.100 men are enough to repopulate with 1000 women, not other way around.



Are you dyslexic too ? 40% women diagnosed with sever mental health conditions. YOur social experiment to invite women into comat roles has not been successful in west.
I can quote you hundreds of failed examples. Heres one -
In fall 2012, only two female Marines volunteered for the 13-week infantry officers training course at Quantico, Va., and both failed to complete it. Also all female Marines were supposed to be able to do at least three pullups on their annual physical fitness test and eight for a perfect score. The requirement was tested in 2013 on female recruits at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, S.C., but only 45 percent of women met the minimum.



Now you are a confirm dyslexic. Heres my original argument. Which you havent bothered to read . The injury rate is higher not because of difference in regiment you donkey nicompoop.
I post it again.Many studies reveal women are two to four times more likely than men to tear the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in their knee. so even if they pass the same studies they are still much more prone to injuries than men due to physical diff, which is net loss to army .



LOL quantum mechs has been invoked. This is common tactic of quote whoring is used extensively by pseudo intellectuals. Nothing says "smart" quite like being a pretentious jackass full of other people's ideas and creativity! The discerning pseudo-intellectual will be sure to use really obscure quotes that nobody probably haven't heard of in order to really show off just how well read and book learned they are to all those who are beneath them and their Brobdingnagian sagacity.
Tu Kharcha karega kya be all adjustment ka aab? Capital requirements aur projects k liye khoob costing hoti h. Tera chutiyapa k chakkar mein koi beda garak nhi karega uska



LOL yet It's also not clear whether 85 percent of women could complete basic training. This is what happens.



This is a yet another attempt to sound like you are techies, but you have wound up coming out as nothing more than misguided hipsters repeating everything apple's ads said.
Trying to lead 18 to 20 year olds with all the hormones and bravado that comes with them one can not see adding females into the mix. The fact is that modern military operations are not an individual endeavor, it is always a group effort. The effect of placing women in a combat unit, even if one could be found who was as capable as the man she would be replacing, would cause problems in esprit-de-corps, or male-bonding, which is the glue that holds these units together. Placing women into ground combat units would cause problems in real or perceived favoritism, attempts to protect the weaker sex, sexual liaisons, sexual harassment, sexual assaults, pregnancies, privacy, and a general weakening of the combat unit in conducting its mission.



AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.Suka blyat those army groups lost stalingrad because of cominterim womensniper. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAA


Good joke buddy.



BS. It requires a societal change first with most terrible repurcussions. Even countries such as the amreeka have only recently started inducting women in infantry combat roles. There is no evidence of its success.Subhumans tortured Saurav Kaaliya. Imagine the outpouring of emotions nationally if this was a women.

The simple question is this, why would we take a woman when there are far better men who would give far better results

 

[srevster]

I told you to refute me with hard scientific data and facts and not the pseudo hippy bs. You have a lack of understanding of issues and a utopian idea to have women in combat.
Even Army chief General Rawat acknowledged that women are not ready to enter combat roles. He has very reasonable grounds to make this statement. Your incohorent fallacy dont matter. Unless you claim to be more qualified than Army chief himself lulz.Also there are certain school yard outcasts who also demand feminists fundamental rights to go into mens toilet. Hell... I will never piss in a ladies toilet . Is it gender discrimination? It is not. It is common sense.
> women wants to be stronger than average man LOL
The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t even meet them.
In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

Male officers spend most of their time in frontline positions along the LoC in direct combat, in places like Siachen where the temperature goes below -50 degrees, and in counter-terrorism and insurgency operations in places like Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast.After such difficult postings, away from families, officers look forward to coming back to peace stations where they can take up command positions.
Now, if these positions are given to women officers, where would the male officers go? Should they remain in hard postings? Is this not counter discriminatory to the officer, his wife, children and parents?




Most Female Recruits cant even Meet New Pullup Standard and you are talking about giving them oppurtunity.Half of female Marines fail 3-pullup assignment. Simply because men and women are naturally born unequal.

What liberals did in Europe was legalizing “freedom, equality, fraternity” without having them in reality. They want just put an ape together with a human being and legalize their “equality” without making them equal. Equality is the last thing such act results in. If you grant equal rights to a human and to an ape, it ends with an ape having all rights and a human having no rights – no right even to survive, since after some time an ape will want to eat and to fuck somebody.



AHAHAHAHAHAHHA . Tennis doubles is similar to war now. You know what Playing hearts of iron 4 has more similarities too. It also requires tactical strategic planning and teamwork. Now you can conquer Russia in just 3 hours.



In Siachen, there are posts with only four soldiers. They sleep and share the same cramped post to attend nature’s call. Can one imagine a female soldier there?
Soldiers undertake patrols that last for over 20 days at times. During this period, the men sleep and bathe together, and do the morning chores in open, often with another team keeping a watch for a possible ambush. There can be no separate arrangements for women.One can go on and cite numerous examples. It is important to stop pushing the romantic notion of women in combat roles and start thinking from a practical point of view, keeping the reality in mind.
There are many more examples that prove beyond doubt that your paranoid fallacy flinging about women entering combat roles in army will only cause more problems rather solutions

The Modi government told the Supreme Court that women may not be able to meet the challenges and hazards of military service due to their “psychological limitations and domestic obligations”.
It also said that male troops, who are predominantly drawn from rural backgrounds, may be unwilling to “accept” a woman commander. They have raised reasonable arguments.


BS.And the family structure gets cucked . Kurds women are fighting because they have no choice left. 5 million syrian children have suffered as a result in absence of mothers. They are fighting because they are facing existential crisis. They are fighting not because of women empowerment and that they want to fight. The war has been forced upon them. Their homes are already destroyed.In Israel, too, women are mostly deployed in the military police and perimeter security rather than in actual combat. You are comparing two different scenarios which doesnt make any sense.
Your shitty social experiment will only be a waste for resources.



Men and women are naturally born unequal. But through division of their efforts in organized civilization – women giving their all in feminine jobs, that have a lot of use without breaking women’s delicate bodies, and men concentrating in masculine ones – their income (and therefore quality of life) equalizes because all services are needed, while their impact grows maximum because everyone is realizing their best talent. What feminists did was destroying natural division so that women break their spine gold mining, while men stagnate, their masculine character softens and effeminizes until they are no more suitable for their natural role – protection of nation .



Your argument is based on pure bs. I ask again. Why all civilizations saved women and kids?Man are disposable.100 men are enough to repopulate with 1000 women, not other way around.



Are you dyslexic too ? 40% women diagnosed with sever mental health conditions. YOur social experiment to invite women into comat roles has not been successful in west.
I can quote you hundreds of failed examples. Heres one -
In fall 2012, only two female Marines volunteered for the 13-week infantry officers training course at Quantico, Va., and both failed to complete it. Also all female Marines were supposed to be able to do at least three pullups on their annual physical fitness test and eight for a perfect score. The requirement was tested in 2013 on female recruits at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, S.C., but only 45 percent of women met the minimum.



Now you are a confirm dyslexic. Heres my original argument. Which you havent bothered to read . The injury rate is higher not because of difference in regiment you donkey nicompoop.
I post it again.Many studies reveal women are two to four times more likely than men to tear the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in their knee. so even if they pass the same studies they are still much more prone to injuries than men due to physical diff, which is net loss to army .



LOL quantum mechs has been invoked. This is common tactic of quote whoring is used extensively by pseudo intellectuals. Nothing says "smart" quite like being a pretentious jackass full of other people's ideas and creativity! The discerning pseudo-intellectual will be sure to use really obscure quotes that nobody probably haven't heard of in order to really show off just how well read and book learned they are to all those who are beneath them and their Brobdingnagian sagacity.
Tu Kharcha karega kya be all adjustment ka aab? Capital requirements aur projects k liye khoob costing hoti h. Tera chutiyapa k chakkar mein koi beda garak nhi karega uska



LOL yet It's also not clear whether 85 percent of women could complete basic training. This is what happens.



This is a yet another attempt to sound like you are techies, but you have wound up coming out as nothing more than misguided hipsters repeating everything apple's ads said.
Trying to lead 18 to 20 year olds with all the hormones and bravado that comes with them one can not see adding females into the mix. The fact is that modern military operations are not an individual endeavor, it is always a group effort. The effect of placing women in a combat unit, even if one could be found who was as capable as the man she would be replacing, would cause problems in esprit-de-corps, or male-bonding, which is the glue that holds these units together. Placing women into ground combat units would cause problems in real or perceived favoritism, attempts to protect the weaker sex, sexual liaisons, sexual harassment, sexual assaults, pregnancies, privacy, and a general weakening of the combat unit in conducting its mission.



AHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH.Suka blyat those army groups lost stalingrad because of cominterim womensniper. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAA


Good joke buddy.



BS. It requires a societal change first with most terrible repurcussions. Even countries such as the amreeka have only recently started inducting women in infantry combat roles. There is no evidence of its success.Subhumans tortured Saurav Kaaliya. Imagine the outpouring of emotions nationally if this was a women.

• I told you to refute me with hard scientific data and facts and not the pseudo hippy bs. You have a lack of understanding of issues and a utopian idea to have women in combat.

What is pseudo hippy bs? Are you stating that there are no women that are stronger than men that exist in the world? Scientifically prove what you are saying or STFU. Are you stating that there are no women on the planet that can potentially take down or fight toe to toe with any Indian army soldier in deployment today. Unless you can explicitly prove this, you have no grounds for banning women from service. What you are stating is probabilistically impossible. You can't make claims with absolutes without scientific evidence. People's strength is on a spectrum. That spectrum will see outliers that have women who are stronger than men. If they want to serve, who are you to stop them? You are just a keyboard warrior who likes to massage his ego. You aren't running the Indian army, and I'm happy that they are opening it up and dumping antiquated bullshit that you are spewing.

• Even Army chief General Rawat acknowledged that women are not ready to enter combat roles. He has very reasonable grounds to make this statement. Your incohorent fallacy dont matter. Unless you claim to be more qualified than Army chief himself lulz.Also there are certain school yard outcasts who also demand feminists fundamental rights to go into mens toilet. Hell... I will never piss in a ladies toilet . Is it gender discrimination? It is not. It is common sense.

The Army Chief can be wrong. His statement was that women need to be cocooned and protected from fellow subordinate soliders. You can bitch and moan, but the army will eventually cave and adjust it's policies. Why is this going to happen? UCC. Uniform Civil Code. If you want people to take UCC seriously, then you need to give equal criteria for qualifications without any bias. Bias means disqualification on the basis of sex instead of performance.

• The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t even meet them.
  In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

Okay, let's say they have to work harder than a man. That's not grounds for a disqualification. Once again going back to the principles of UCC, you have to provide every citizens with intrinsic rights to pursue life, liberty, prosperity and happiness, Create a criteria for qualification for admittance, if a women passes that exam, she gets the acknowledgement and post. Anything other than this process is bullshit. All you are spouting is what abouttery.

• The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t even meet them.
  In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

The question isn't about most female recruits but whether females should be allowed to participate. Pick a topic that you are debating, don't change the topic. Allowing women to participate is different than making a statement that most women won't do well. There is no reason to disallow them if they qualify. And the whole thesis on them needing more protection than a man is bullshit.

• Male officers spend most of their time in frontline positions along the LoC in direct combat, in places like Siachen where the temperature goes below -50 degrees, and in counter-terrorism and insurgency operations in places like Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast.After such difficult postings, away from families, officers look forward to coming back to peace stations where they can take up command positions.
  Now, if these positions are given to women officers, where would the male officers go? Should they remain in hard postings? Is this not counter discriminatory to the officer, his wife, children and parents?

UCC doesn't see sex. Whoever makes it makes it. A women officer won't be able to make it to an officer position if she can't climb the same ladder as men. Any posting should be open for competition from both sexes. It's not counter discriminatory if the women officer attains that position with merit.

• Most Female Recruits cant even Meet New Pullup Standard and you are talking about giving them oppurtunity.Half of female Marines fail 3-pullup assignment. Simply because men and women are naturally born unequal.

We aren't talking about most women but women who qualify. They shouldn't be barred. Do you not have reading comprehension?

• What liberals did in Europe was legalizing “freedom, equality, fraternity” without having them in reality. They want just put an ape together with a human being and legalize their “equality” without making them equal. Equality is the last thing such act results in. If you grant equal rights to a human and to an ape, it ends with an ape having all rights and a human having no rights – no right even to survive, since after some time an ape will want to eat and to fuck somebody.

What are you talking about? Off-topic, this is a convoluted rant that doesn't make sense. Not something a rational person will write if they want to be taken seriously. It's very hypocritical to ask someone to be scientific and write something stupid like this.

• In Siachen, there are posts with only four soldiers. They sleep and share the same cramped post to attend nature’s call. Can one imagine a female soldier there?
  Soldiers undertake patrols that last for over 20 days at times. During this period, the men sleep and bathe together, and do the morning chores in open, often with another team keeping a watch for a possible ambush. There can be no separate arrangements for women.One can go on and cite numerous examples. It is important to stop pushing the romantic notion of women in combat roles and start thinking from a practical point of view, keeping the reality in mind.
  There are many more examples that prove beyond doubt that your paranoid fallacy flinging about women entering combat roles in army will only cause more problems rather solutions

Yes, I can imagine that. What's so crazy about this. This is how expeditions get to Mount Everest. Have you ever been camping in the woods? It's fairly common on back packing trips to do what you are describing. What's so crazy about this?

• The Modi government told the Supreme Court that women may not be able to meet the challenges and hazards of military service due to their “psychological limitations and domestic obligations”.
  It also said that male troops, who are predominantly drawn from rural backgrounds, may be unwilling to “accept” a woman commander. They have raised reasonable arguments.

And this doesn't seem contradictory to UCC to you? Something the Modi government wants to bring to the table. You can't be hypocritical and ask for UCC and put exceptions on the rights each gender receives.

• Men and women are naturally born unequal. But through division of their efforts in organized civilization – women giving their all in feminine jobs, that have a lot of use without breaking women’s delicate bodies, and men concentrating in masculine ones – their income (and therefore quality of life) equalizes because all services are needed, while their impact grows maximum because everyone is realizing their best talent. What feminists did was destroying natural division so that women break their spine gold mining, while men stagnate, their masculine character softens and effeminizes until they are no more suitable for their natural role – protection of nation .

So you are too insecure to do household chores or share labor in the house with a spouse. And believe in convoluted bullshit like this to justify your behavior.

• Your argument is based on pure bs. I ask again. Why all civilizations saved women and kids?Man are disposable.100 men are enough to repopulate with 1000 women, not other way around.

All life is important. "Man are disposable", WTF?

• BS.And the family structure gets cucked . Kurds women are fighting because they have no choice left. 5 million syrian children have suffered as a result in absence of mothers. They are fighting because they are facing existential crisis. They are fighting not because of women empowerment and that they want to fight. The war has been forced upon them. Their homes are already destroyed.In Israel, too, women are mostly deployed in the military police and perimeter security rather than in actual combat. You are comparing two different scenarios which doesnt make any sense.
  Your shitty social experiment will only be a waste for resources.

I can't take you seriously after your previous rants. Lot of humbug and conjecture on what a women is meant to do.

• Are you dyslexic too ? 40% women diagnosed with sever mental health conditions. YOur social experiment to invite women into comat roles has not been successful in west.
  I can quote you hundreds of failed examples. Heres one -
  In fall 2012, only two female Marines volunteered for the 13-week infantry officers training course at Quantico, Va., and both failed to complete it. Also all female Marines were supposed to be able to do at least three pullups on their annual physical fitness test and eight for a perfect score. The requirement was tested in 2013 on female recruits at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, S.C., but only 45 percent of women met the minimum.

So let the 45 percent participate, you just shot yourself in the foot. You are stating that 45% of women candidates are qualified to participate in the armed forces. This isn't a pissing contest. It's a measurement of whether an individual is qualified and can participate in an activity.

• Now you are a confirm dyslexic. Heres my original argument. Which you havent bothered to read . The injury rate is higher not because of difference in regiment you donkey nicompoop.
  I post it again.Many studies reveal women are two to four times more likely than men to tear the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in their knee. so even if they pass the same studies they are still much more prone to injuries than men due to physical diff, which is net loss to army .

What do you have against Dyslexic people? You just seem angry and upset. Lot of whatabouttery and bullshit to justify your behavior.

• LOL quantum mechs has been invoked. This is common tactic of quote whoring is used extensively by pseudo intellectuals. Nothing says "smart" quite like being a pretentious jackass full of other people's ideas and creativity! The discerning pseudo-intellectual will be sure to use really obscure quotes that nobody probably haven't heard of in order to really show off just how well read and book learned they are to all those who are beneath them and their Brobdingnagian sagacity.
  Tu Kharcha karega kya be all adjustment ka aab? Capital requirements aur projects k liye khoob costing hoti h. Tera chutiyapa k chakkar mein koi beda garak nhi karega uska

You are the pseudo intellectual making unwanton statements without scientific evidence to back up anything that you say. You are asserting that women should be denied their rights of participation even if they qualify because they can potentially get hurt and become a liability. Ignoring the fact that it is their individual decision

 

[DocK]

• I told you to refute me with hard scientific data and facts and not the pseudo hippy bs. You have a lack of understanding of issues and a utopian idea to have women in combat.

What is pseudo hippy bs? Are you stating that there are no women that are stronger than men that exist in the world? Scientifically prove what you are saying or STFU. Are you stating that there are no women on the planet that can potentially take down or fight toe to toe with any Indian army soldier in deployment today. Unless you can explicitly prove this, you have no grounds for banning women from service. What you are stating is probabilistically impossible. You can't make claims with absolutes without scientific evidence. People's strength is on a spectrum. That spectrum will see outliers that have women who are stronger than men. If they want to serve, who are you to stop them? You are just a keyboard warrior who likes to massage his ego. You aren't running the Indian army, and I'm happy that they are opening it up and dumping antiquated bullshit that you are spewing.

• Even Army chief General Rawat acknowledged that women are not ready to enter combat roles. He has very reasonable grounds to make this statement. Your incohorent fallacy dont matter. Unless you claim to be more qualified than Army chief himself lulz.Also there are certain school yard outcasts who also demand feminists fundamental rights to go into mens toilet. Hell... I will never piss in a ladies toilet . Is it gender discrimination? It is not. It is common sense.

The Army Chief can be wrong. His statement was that women need to be cocooned and protected from fellow subordinate soliders. You can bitch and moan, but the army will eventually cave and adjust it's policies. Why is this going to happen? UCC. Uniform Civil Code. If you want people to take UCC seriously, then you need to give equal criteria for qualifications without any bias. Bias means disqualification on the basis of sex instead of performance.

• The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t even meet them.
  In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

Okay, let's say they have to work harder than a man. That's not grounds for a disqualification. Once again going back to the principles of UCC, you have to provide every citizens with intrinsic rights to pursue life, liberty, prosperity and happiness, Create a criteria for qualification for admittance, if a women passes that exam, she gets the acknowledgement and post. Anything other than this process is bullshit. All you are spouting is what abouttery.

• The military is watering down fitness standards because most female recruits can’t even meet them.
  In September 2015 the Marine Corps released a study comparing the performance of gender-integrated and male-only infantry units in simulated combat. The all-male teams greatly outperformed the integrated teams, whether on shooting, surmounting obstacles or evacuating casualties. Female Marines were injured at more than six times the rate of men during preliminary training—unsurprising, since men’s higher testosterone levels produce stronger bones and muscles. Even the fittest women (which the study participants were) must work at maximal physical capacity when carrying a 100-pound pack or repeatedly loading heavy shells into a cannon.

The question isn't about most female recruits but whether females should be allowed to participate. Pick a topic that you are debating, don't change the topic. Allowing women to participate is different than making a statement that most women won't do well. There is no reason to disallow them if they qualify. And the whole thesis on them needing more protection than a man is bullshit.

• Male officers spend most of their time in frontline positions along the LoC in direct combat, in places like Siachen where the temperature goes below -50 degrees, and in counter-terrorism and insurgency operations in places like Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast.After such difficult postings, away from families, officers look forward to coming back to peace stations where they can take up command positions.
  Now, if these positions are given to women officers, where would the male officers go? Should they remain in hard postings? Is this not counter discriminatory to the officer, his wife, children and parents?

UCC doesn't see sex. Whoever makes it makes it. A women officer won't be able to make it to an officer position if she can't climb the same ladder as men. Any posting should be open for competition from both sexes. It's not counter discriminatory if the women officer attains that position with merit.

• Most Female Recruits cant even Meet New Pullup Standard and you are talking about giving them oppurtunity.Half of female Marines fail 3-pullup assignment. Simply because men and women are naturally born unequal.

We aren't talking about most women but women who qualify. They shouldn't be barred. Do you not have reading comprehension?

• What liberals did in Europe was legalizing “freedom, equality, fraternity” without having them in reality. They want just put an ape together with a human being and legalize their “equality” without making them equal. Equality is the last thing such act results in. If you grant equal rights to a human and to an ape, it ends with an ape having all rights and a human having no rights – no right even to survive, since after some time an ape will want to eat and to fuck somebody.

What are you talking about? Off-topic, this is a convoluted rant that doesn't make sense. Not something a rational person will write if they want to be taken seriously. It's very hypocritical to ask someone to be scientific and write something stupid like this.

• In Siachen, there are posts with only four soldiers. They sleep and share the same cramped post to attend nature’s call. Can one imagine a female soldier there?
  Soldiers undertake patrols that last for over 20 days at times. During this period, the men sleep and bathe together, and do the morning chores in open, often with another team keeping a watch for a possible ambush. There can be no separate arrangements for women.One can go on and cite numerous examples. It is important to stop pushing the romantic notion of women in combat roles and start thinking from a practical point of view, keeping the reality in mind.
  There are many more examples that prove beyond doubt that your paranoid fallacy flinging about women entering combat roles in army will only cause more problems rather solutions

Yes, I can imagine that. What's so crazy about this. This is how expeditions get to Mount Everest. Have you ever been camping in the woods? It's fairly common on back packing trips to do what you are describing. What's so crazy about this?

• The Modi government told the Supreme Court that women may not be able to meet the challenges and hazards of military service due to their “psychological limitations and domestic obligations”.
  It also said that male troops, who are predominantly drawn from rural backgrounds, may be unwilling to “accept” a woman commander. They have raised reasonable arguments.

And this doesn't seem contradictory to UCC to you? Something the Modi government wants to bring to the table. You can't be hypocritical and ask for UCC and put exceptions on the rights each gender receives.

• Men and women are naturally born unequal. But through division of their efforts in organized civilization – women giving their all in feminine jobs, that have a lot of use without breaking women’s delicate bodies, and men concentrating in masculine ones – their income (and therefore quality of life) equalizes because all services are needed, while their impact grows maximum because everyone is realizing their best talent. What feminists did was destroying natural division so that women break their spine gold mining, while men stagnate, their masculine character softens and effeminizes until they are no more suitable for their natural role – protection of nation .

So you are too insecure to do household chores or share labor in the house with a spouse. And believe in convoluted bullshit like this to justify your behavior.

• Your argument is based on pure bs. I ask again. Why all civilizations saved women and kids?Man are disposable.100 men are enough to repopulate with 1000 women, not other way around.

All life is important. "Man are disposable", WTF?

• BS.And the family structure gets cucked . Kurds women are fighting because they have no choice left. 5 million syrian children have suffered as a result in absence of mothers. They are fighting because they are facing existential crisis. They are fighting not because of women empowerment and that they want to fight. The war has been forced upon them. Their homes are already destroyed.In Israel, too, women are mostly deployed in the military police and perimeter security rather than in actual combat. You are comparing two different scenarios which doesnt make any sense.
  Your shitty social experiment will only be a waste for resources.

I can't take you seriously after your previous rants. Lot of humbug and conjecture on what a women is meant to do.

• Are you dyslexic too ? 40% women diagnosed with sever mental health conditions. YOur social experiment to invite women into comat roles has not been successful in west.
  I can quote you hundreds of failed examples. Heres one -
  In fall 2012, only two female Marines volunteered for the 13-week infantry officers training course at Quantico, Va., and both failed to complete it. Also all female Marines were supposed to be able to do at least three pullups on their annual physical fitness test and eight for a perfect score. The requirement was tested in 2013 on female recruits at Marine Corps Recruit Depot, Parris Island, S.C., but only 45 percent of women met the minimum.

So let the 45 percent participate, you just shot yourself in the foot. You are stating that 45% of women candidates are qualified to participate in the armed forces. This isn't a pissing contest. It's a measurement of whether an individual is qualified and can participate in an activity.

• Now you are a confirm dyslexic. Heres my original argument. Which you havent bothered to read . The injury rate is higher not because of difference in regiment you donkey nicompoop.
  I post it again.Many studies reveal women are two to four times more likely than men to tear the anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) in their knee. so even if they pass the same studies they are still much more prone to injuries than men due to physical diff, which is net loss to army .

What do you have against Dyslexic people? You just seem angry and upset. Lot of whatabouttery and bullshit to justify your behavior.

• LOL quantum mechs has been invoked. This is common tactic of quote whoring is used extensively by pseudo intellectuals. Nothing says "smart" quite like being a pretentious jackass full of other people's ideas and creativity! The discerning pseudo-intellectual will be sure to use really obscure quotes that nobody probably haven't heard of in order to really show off just how well read and book learned they are to all those who are beneath them and their Brobdingnagian sagacity.
  Tu Kharcha karega kya be all adjustment ka aab? Capital requirements aur projects k liye khoob costing hoti h. Tera chutiyapa k chakkar mein koi beda garak nhi karega uska

You are the pseudo intellectual making unwanton statements without scientific evidence to back up anything that you say. You are asserting that women should be denied their rights of participation even if they qualify because they can potentially get hurt and become a liability. Ignoring the fact that it is their individual decision

You live in a rosy world. Congratulation.
By the way, thank you for leaving Stalingrad. UCC is new so congrats on new catch phrase.
Remaining people let's give this person a wide berth and let this person's rosy world remain untainted by our worldly reality.

 

[srevster]

You live in a rosy world. Congratulation.
By the way, thank you for leaving Stalingrad. UCC is new so congrats on new catch phrase.
Remaining people let's give this person a wide berth and let this person's rosy world remain untainted by our worldly reality.

If you don't have anything constructive to add to the conversation, next. There were several women ace fighters in Stalingrad. Don't get your smug point. Like I said, the bullshit here won't age well. Lots of insecurity and whatabouttery. Also a lot of unwarranted misery and anger. I wonder what people might be frustrated about.

Soviet Union/Russian Federation, Women Heroes of the (Military Awards)

(1938-1995) The highest Soviet military award, introduced on April 16, 1934. After August 1, 1939, the title was accompanied by the Hero of the Soviet Union Medal. As of October 16, 1939, the full name of the award was changed […]

what-when-how.com

 

[vampyrbladez]

If you don't have anything constructive to add to the conversation, next. There were several women ace fighters in Stalingrad. Don't get your smug point. Like I said, the bullshit here won't age well. Lots of insecurity and whatabouttery. Also a lot of unwarranted misery and anger. I wonder what people might be frustrated about.

Soviet Union/Russian Federation, Women Heroes of the (Military Awards)

(1938-1995) The highest Soviet military award, introduced on April 16, 1934. After August 1, 1939, the title was accompanied by the Hero of the Soviet Union Medal. As of October 16, 1939, the full name of the award was changed […]

what-when-how.com

Repeating same debunked points and deflecting 'feelings' to counterparts.

Typical 'Comrade Commisar' behavior.

I am now convinced this is some Quint or BuzzFeed chick who is writing a piece on DFI.

 

[DocK]

If you don't have anything constructive to add to the conversation, next. There were several women ace fighters in Stalingrad. Don't get your smug point. Like I said, the bullshit here won't age well. Lots of insecurity and whatabouttery. Also a lot of unwarranted misery and anger. I wonder what people might be frustrated about.

Soviet Union/Russian Federation, Women Heroes of the (Military Awards)

(1938-1995) The highest Soviet military award, introduced on April 16, 1934. After August 1, 1939, the title was accompanied by the Hero of the Soviet Union Medal. As of October 16, 1939, the full name of the award was changed […]

what-when-how.com

Are you here to play the devil's advocate?
Because nearly everyone has told you that women participate and are glorious in EXISTENTIAL Wars. History has many occasions full of it but they go forth as existential crisis to nation or as Diplomatic tactics when Ahilyabai Holkar took on the Peshwa army with women soldiers. The Peshwa army refused to fight.
There were, are and will be several ace women fighters but that doesn't make them the norm. Like you said they are OUTLIERS.
I agree that I am a keyboard warrior and will never be selected in the forces but does that make me the norm for all males in the world?
Maybe there is frustration in the members of the board because some WOKE decided that what they decided is the final truth and will not accept reason in any form.

 

[DocK]

Indian Woman for Combat Duties

defenceforumindia.com

@srevster since you want to fight on Emotional pitch. Maybe you can give rebuttal or refute the above.

 

[srevster]

Indian Woman for Combat Duties

defenceforumindia.com

@srevster since you want to fight on Emotional pitch. Maybe you can give rebuttal or refute the above.

First give me a Stalingrad rebuttal

 

[DocK]

First give me a Stalingrad rebuttal

Ok, Woke (no Mr Ms or Mz as your affiliation is unknown and I would hate to Hurt your rosy world) here is your rebuttal.
1 Battle of Stalingrad started More than 1 year after Operation Barbarossa which lead to loss of large areas of agricultural and fertile russian land. Also there was loss of soldiers on both sides but more so Russia as they were ill prepared.
2 Both sides considered Stalingrad as crucial and decided to fight for it instead of withdrawal. This is especially important as Hitler himself ordered the besieged army to fight for Stalingrad rather than break through and attack later.

Now that you may have understood that it was an EXISTENTIAL Battle for the Russians, read my post again. Women have, are and will have roles in Existential Battles. You can always ask me to refute or rebutt Mulan or The First Cave Woman to take spear against the Saber Tooth tiger but it remains the same.

Ending with a quote that is well known but only in half,
Fools don't read History AND HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF.

I hope you will reply to my earlier post now instead of more whatabouterry.

 

[vampyrbladez]

Mods please give this @srevster dude/chick a one day ban. Shit up this whole thread with flamebait.

@ezsasa @tarunraju

 

[srevster]

Ok, Woke (no Mr Ms or Mz as your affiliation is unknown and I would hate to Hurt your rosy world) here is your rebuttal.
1 Battle of Stalingrad started More than 1 year after Operation Barbarossa which lead to loss of large areas of agricultural and fertile russian land. Also there was loss of soldiers on both sides but more so Russia as they were ill prepared.
2 Both sides considered Stalingrad as crucial and decided to fight for it instead of withdrawal. This is especially important as Hitler himself ordered the besieged army to fight for Stalingrad rather than break through and attack later.

Now that you may have understood that it was an EXISTENTIAL Battle for the Russians, read my post again. Women have, are and will have roles in Existential Battles. You can always ask me to refute or rebutt Mulan or The First Cave Woman to take spear against the Saber Tooth tiger but it remains the same.

Ending with a quote that is well known but only in half,
Fools don't read History AND HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF.

I hope you will reply to my earlier post now instead of more whatabouterry.

so were women capable soldiers or not. Simple question

 

[srevster]

Mods please give this @srevster dude/chick a one day ban. Shit up this whole thread with flamebait.

@ezsasa @tarunraju

Very mAture, suppress opinions that differ from yours

 

[DocK]

so were women capable soldiers or not. Simple question

Indian Woman for Combat Duties

defenceforumindia.com

Just rebut my opinion before I reply to your "answer your question with another goalposts shifting question"

Note to self
Never argue with an idiot, they will bring you to their level and beat with EXPERIENCE.

 

[srevster]

Ok, Woke (no Mr Ms or Mz as your affiliation is unknown and I would hate to Hurt your rosy world) here is your rebuttal.
1 Battle of Stalingrad started More than 1 year after Operation Barbarossa which lead to loss of large areas of agricultural and fertile russian land. Also there was loss of soldiers on both sides but more so Russia as they were ill prepared.
2 Both sides considered Stalingrad as crucial and decided to fight for it instead of withdrawal. This is especially important as Hitler himself ordered the besieged army to fight for Stalingrad rather than break through and attack later.

Now that you may have understood that it was an EXISTENTIAL Battle for the Russians, read my post again. Women have, are and will have roles in Existential Battles. You can always ask me to refute or rebutt Mulan or The First Cave Woman to take spear against the Saber Tooth tiger but it remains the same.

Ending with a quote that is well known but only in half,
Fools don't read History AND HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF.

I hope you will reply to my earlier post now instead of more whatabouterry.

Indian women always had a martial culture. If you are knowledge about ancient Indian culture and history. They played active roles in soldiering and combat. This changed after Mughal and British arrived. I’m well versed in Indian history

Mauryan kings had female bodyguards. Lots of well versed in art of combat and played active roles in combat. They were suppressed because of Mughali and later Victorian cultural changes and domesticated and confined to the kitchens to suppress India. If you can’t see past that, then you are a victim of colonialism

 

[srevster]

Indian Woman for Combat Duties

defenceforumindia.com

Just rebut my opinion before I reply to your "answer your question with another goalposts shifting question"

Note to self
Never argue with an idiot, they will bring you to their level and beat with EXPERIENCE.

Or maybe you should instead say ignorance is bliss. You are having a meltdown since I’m deconstructing your wrong perception of woman’s role in society.

 

[DocK]

Indian women always had a martial culture. If you are knowledge about ancient Indian culture and history. They played active roles in soldiering and combat. This changed after Mughal and British arrived. I’m well versed in Indian history

Good God!!
You know that matrilineal inheritance and rules existed where in people like Queen Abbakka Chowta ruled and defeated Portuguese Colonial powers at their height.

But alas my question was something else. As per Your wisdom any female OUTLIER who performed equal to male counterparts should have the chance to join Galwan Clash type melee. My question (just reminding) is not their ability to fight as equal or better but response of the TEAM and NATION AT LARGE should one of these Female Warrior die.

Kindly spare my Brahaminical Patriatchial Chavunistic Cavemanish sensibilities and return to the Present Indian Society. Not the glorious past or the Shimmering Shining Future, just the nitty gritty present day ordinary citizen who still give up their bus seats for ladies without asking.

 

[srevster]

Are you familiar with Bharatvarsha culture?

do you know who these women were?

look up Vishpala

Do you know who were Lankini and Shikhandi

read up on Queen Pramila

Queen Rudrama Demi

Rani Abbakka

Keladi Chennamma

Kittur Chennamma

Rani Durgavati

Rani Padmini

Tarabai

Laxmi Bai

Raziya Sultana

Chand Bibi

onake obbava

Harriyaka

Uniyarcha

Mai bhago

uda devi

Mahabiri devi

Asha devi

Bhativari

Habiba

Bhagwati Devi tyagi

Indra kaur

Jamila khan

Man kaur

Shoba Devi

 

[DocK]

Are you familiar with Bharatvarsha culture?

do you know who these women were?

look up Vishpala

Do you know who were Lankini and Shikhandi

read up on Queen Pramila

View attachment 80443
Queen Rudrama Demi

Rani Abbakka

Keladi Chennamma

Kittur Chennamma

Rani Durgavati

Rani Padmini

Tarabai

Laxmi Bai

Raziya Sultana

Chand Bibi

onake obbava

Harriyaka

Uniyarcha

Mai bhago

uda devi

Mahabiri devi

Asha devi

Bhativari

Habiba

Bhagwati Devi tyagi

Indra kaur

Jamila khan

Man kaur

Shoba Devi

Again

I accept and agree that Bharatvarsha has a great culture and was more advanced than any other of the time. I also believe that Mohammed prophet wrote Gazwa E Hind as we were the richest. In today's world he would have happily written us off and said Gazwa E Amrika.

But alas, my question was (I know I have to keep repeating)
Are PRESENT DAY Indian citizen culturally willing to accept Female warriors returning (Raped in case of both Paki and Chinese capture and) Maimed covered Tricolour in Body Bags.

Like you said, it's a simple question.
No need to extrapolate Future or read Great Glorious Past.

 

[srevster]

Giving up bus Seats lol. Can’t you see Indian culture today is watered down By Victorian and Mughal bullshit about the role of women. This is stockhome syndrome. You start loving the oppressors culture. Fuck that. I prefer the India with women warriors and greater freedoms.

 

[srevster]

Again

I accept and agree that Bharatvarsha has a great culture and was more advanced than any other of the time. I also believe that Mohammed prophet wrote Gazwa E Hind as we were the richest. In today's world he would have happily written us off and said Gazwa E Amrika.

But alas, my question was (I know I have to keep repeating)
Are PRESENT DAY Indian citizen culturally willing to accept Female warriors returning (Raped in case of both Paki and Chinese capture and) Maimed covered Tricolour in Body Bags.

Like you said, it's a simple question.
No need to extrapolate Future or read Great Glorious Past.

Ancient india was comfortable with the idea of female body bags. That’s my culture and my history