Women in CombatRegister Today!
- by Medic2RN Asst. Admin Jan 24The U.S. military will formally end its ban on women serving in front-line combat roles, officials said on Wednesday, in a move that could open thousands of fighting jobs to female service members for the first time.
Well, this will be an interesting national debate.
Print and share with friends and family.
Compliments of allnurses.com.
http://allnurses-breakroom.com/showthread.php?t=810771©2013 allnurses.com INC. All Rights Reserved.
- 1,521 Views
- Jan 24 by tewdlesThere was a report on this subject on NPR this morning...
It should be an interesting debate.
- Jan 24 by PedsHopefulI dont understand why this was necessary.
- women are already IN combat,
women are already dying in combat,
women are coming home injured from combat.........
but, because of the old rules, these women can't use that combat experience to get promotions, (since "women are not in combat")
are passed over for the highest of all medals,
or hindered in their ability to move to other branches which prefer to promote soldiers who HAVE combat experience, like some of the positions in the CIA for example.
This is ALREADY going on...it's just now, women who are doing combat, can receive the same benefits and opportunities for advancement that combat experience affords those who DO want a career in the military.
Me, i'd rather not see any human doing combat, but, for those who do want a military career, not being recognized as having done combat, can hinder their career advancement.
- Quote from PedsHopefulI dont understand why this was necessary.
Maybe this video will help you gain new insight, the way it helped me. The part i am talking about, doesn't start til about 3 minutes into the video:
The Rachel Maddow Show: Lift on combat ban for US women opens door to recognition, opportunity on MSN Video
- Jan 24 by HM-8404I have no problem with lifting the ban and allowing women to serve in combat roles such as infantry, artillery, etc. The only problem I would have is if women are given special considerations like they already get in the military. To serve in a combat arms MOS they need to meet the same physical standards as the males do. Reducing standards to allow weaker people to serve only weakens the ability of the unit.
- I think the problem of rape needs to be addressed before putting women if officiel combat positions.
- Quote from HM-8404this is a valid point,I have no problem with lifting the ban and allowing women to serve in combat roles such as infantry, artillery, etc. The only problem I would have is if women are given special considerations like they already get in the military. To serve in a combat arms MOS they need to meet the same physical standards as the males do. Reducing standards to allow weaker people to serve only weakens the ability of the unit.
as women do meet all the same physical requirements, except they only have to only do 50 pushups and men have to do 80 pushups, and women are given an add'l 120 seconds to complete the 2 mile runs.
both genders have to do the 80 sit ups, climb the same featureless walls, run with the same giant huge duffel backpack on, long list of things one has to do in training, that is the same for either gender.
but, i'm not as sure being able to hike and shoot the weapons requires the add'l upper body strength. I'm not as sure that THAT is req'd for today's warfare,
but, i don't know if having larger shoulders is really req'd to shoot at people, or how much hand-to-hand type of fighting is done anymore...
but, there are many small sized females whose units would deny that soldier is "weakening the unit" cuz her arms aren't as big. There are long lists of female heros, who have done amazing things in combat, even though they only had to do 50 pushups to pass training instead of 80.
- but, herring_Rn is so so right.