Pages Menu
TwitterRssFacebook
Categories Menu

Posted by on Jan 15, 2011 in Army/DOD | 5 comments

Military: Let Women Serve In Combat Units

Share

Updates

Thursday, January 24 2013 –

At a Pentagon ceremony remembering civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr, outgoing Defence Secretary Leon Panetta said every member of the US military should have the opportunity to pursue “every avenue of military service for which they are prepared and qualified”.

He also acknowledged a complaint frequently voiced by women denied combat roles – that military careers are hindered by a lack of combat experience.

“Our military is more capable, and our force is more powerful, when we use all of the great diverse strengths of the American people,” Mr Panetta said.

Source: BBC News


Wednesday, January 23 2013 –

Defense secretary Leon Panetta is going to formally announce the opening of all currently restricted jobs to women including the infantry and the special forces tomorrow. According to a Pentagon source the individual branches of the military will have until 2016 to fully develop plans to integrate women into all areas of the currently restricted jobs with the general assessment being it will take longer for the infantry and SF roles to adapt. The new rule will overturn a 1994 rule that banned women from front line combat jobs and it will expand on a move Panetta made last year that opened almost 15,000 off limits jobs to women. The new openings will open up over 200,000 jobs to women including the Navy SEAL teams, Delta Force, Army Rangers and regular infantry units. If you haven’t seen the movie G.I. Jane it might be time. The announcement is going to be the last major policy shift for Panetta who is expected to depart his post at the Pentagon in mid-February.

Women currently account for %14 of the 1.4 million strong active duty force.

Source: USA Today


The Defense Department has decided to allow women into jobs within the military that would put women closer to the front line however they will still be banned from infantry fighting units, armor and special forces; for now.

But the proposed regulations, expected to take effect this summer, would allow women to serve in non-infantry battalion jobs, such as radio operators, intelligence analysts, medics, radar operators and tank mechanics. They could be placed together with combat forces, such as supply convoys in areas of fighting. Source: LA Times

Since the creation of the United States military women have been banned from any role that involves direct combat but that seems to be changing. Since the military has been waging war in Afghanistan and Iraq women have been fighting alongside men and dying beside them. Women still are banned from infantry units and specialized units but with combat today it’s impossible to keep women out of the line of fire. The Military Leadership Diversity Commission, created by Congress, is expected to submit its proposal to the President in the spring along with the Army who is conducting a similar study on allowing women to serve in combat. Approval would mean that you would start seeing women in infantry units and the special forces.

The report which was put together by retired and current military officers said that keeping women out of the roughly 10% of combat roles limits advancement and promotion. It’s creating an unfair balance within the military and the ranks are not as diverse as the nation they serve. With women making up roughly 14% of the military and 225,000 seeing combat it does not come as a surprise.

However many are against the thought of women in a dedicated fighting unit. They question if women have the physical strength and stamina that a combat MOS requires. Most see a woman as unfit to carry a wounded man wearing full combat gear and militaries who have allowed women in combat have noticed a more severe mental affect upon men when a woman is killed. They noticed that men would linger over the dead female longer than they would a male and thus putting them at greater risk. Only 110 women were killed in Iraq compared to the over 4,000 men and many feel that the nation would lose support for a war much faster if thousands of daughters are coming home in bags.

Supporters of a repeal reject those criticisms and instead say that women have proved themselves in today’s combat and are willing to fight. The current policy “represents a huge glass ceiling for servicewomen,” Anu Bhagwati, former Marine Captain and executive director of the rights group Service Women’s Action Network, said. “It is archaic, it does not reflect the many sacrifices and contributions that women make in the military, and it ignores the reality of current warfighting doctrine.”

The new report challenges predictions that a change would have ill effects on the units. “To date, there has been little evidence that the integration of women into previously closed units or occupations has had a negative impact on important mission-related performance factors, like unit cohesion,” the draft says. This is true although we have never put women into the infantry or special forces where killing and hand to hand combat is more prevalent and the man next to you relies on you to kick ass.

Top defense leaders have said they see the change coming someday. In answer to a question, Defense Secretary Robert Gates in September, for instance, told Reserve Officer Training Corps students at Duke University that he expects women to serve in special operations units, the kind of commando teams known for stealth missions. Gates said he expects women eventually will be allowed into special operations forces in a careful, deliberate manner. The new report is suggesting a phased introduction of women. They would first start advancement and schools in their current specialties and then they would likely be phased into a combat unit. This will be the second major policy change to the military since President Obama took office and I truly think it is for the better. It may have an adverse affect on those who do not want to see women in the same capacity as they do fighting men and it may affect the public’s view of a potential war. Then again having women serve in combat and dying right alongside men may make politicians think twice before sending sons and now daughters into harms way. The times are a changing.

Source: MSNBC

  • Meowth

    How about you serve with a woman who is on her period, under stress and can hardly move, now put that same woman in a combat situation and see how easily she keeps up with me. Women in combat? fuck that shit.

    • James

      People like you made the exact same argument about homosexuals in the military when homosexuals were serving silently beside you.

      I'm also fairly certain you do not know much of the female body because when a woman is under high stress, is frequently active and physically fit her periods are light or nonexistent. Maybe you meant they'd all be bitchy? I'm also fairly certain that when in combat or out on patrol her bitchiness won't have any effect on her ability to do her job or keep you from doing yours.

      Did you mean she'd be emotionally unstable and thus unable to perform her duty? The army has a command a control structure to remove soldiers from units who are unable to perform their required duties. Also I highly doubt that the women making it into the ranks of the infantry would be the type of dramatic, bitchy, needs men for everything women you're thinking of.

      Also it's already been proven that women can carry the same physical load as a man. Women are already combat medics and they often carry more into a combat zone than the average grunt (not shoes and purses either).

      Many of our allies have already opened up combat jobs to women and they haven't had a shortage of tampons or an increase in mission failure.

      I think the problem is that our fearless fighting soldiers think women are their kryptonite. Also, I'm assuming you're military (infantry?), did you never get angry, moody, bitchy or depressed while on deployment? Did it affect how you operated outside the wire?

      Thank you for your comment.

      • JO

        “Also it’s already been proven that women can carry the same physical
        load as a man. Women are already combat medics and they often carry more into a combat zone than the average grunt (not shoes and purses
        either)”. No. PURE LIE.

        “Also I highly doubt that the women making it into the ranks of the
        infantry would be the type of dramatic, bitchy, needs men for everything
        women you’re thinking of.”
        Then can you explain why it they do it all the time in daily civil life ?

        Stop lying to push forward your ideas.

        Less muscular mass, less strength.
        Period. Less strength ?
        Less power to carry , less able to hand-to-hand combat , decreased accuracy when shooting since recoil isnt handed as easily , weaker at physical tasks such as digging trenchs, transporting supplies , etc.

        List is endless.

        And its is not ONLY the problem of strength, it is also the problem of AQUIRING these muscles : men devellop muscular mass far more easily .

        Women have breast ,which is a problem : It is a weak spot, always in plain view, easily touched my melee or ranged attacks.

        Also women are in general more emotionnal a desastrous factor for a soldier since a modern soldier needs calm and self control.

        They have periods which make them even more emotionnal and barely deployable on regular basis.
        They create social troubles with men ,who are distracted from their missions and duty by sexual urges.

        Women in army ?
        It is a very bad decision dictated by political lobbying.

        Whats next ? Children ?

        Concerning homosexual ,the comparison is just intellectual terrorism :
        The reasons for not wanting homosexuals in the army was moral and religion.
        The reasons for not wanting women are logic.

        • http://www.mybloggityblog.com/wordpress/ James

          I have to disagree with you because I’m not sure that you are aware of the modern woman in the military nor the human body.

          Women are currently military police officers, combat medics, helicopter pilots, truck drivers and just about everything except the combat arms. When training many units often have a standardized load-out and there aren’t exceptions for women therefore you’ll have women carrying the same weight as a man in her platoon. Women are also SAW gunners which has them carrying a 30 pound weapon not including ammo, water and all of the other crap that comes with that responsibility. It’s not a lie to say that women carry the same weight and often more than the average infantry grunt when you look at what combat medics carry into combat. More often than not they carry all required medical gear as well as a standard infantry load-out.

          I think your point on women being bitchy is pretty sexist and while there are certainly going to be a few women who meet your requirement for bitchy there will be plenty more men who meet the definitions of egotistical, misogynistic and temperamental which is code for being a dick so maybe bitchy women would offset the ratio of assholes?

          I’m not lying to push forward any ideas but your idea of what a woman is is from right around 1950. Your remarks, save for the period comment, are the same that were said about blacks in the military and I’m sure you’d agree that they certainly can perform above and beyond just cooks and truck drivers right?

          When women are under stress and high physical activity their periods often stop outright just as when the male is under high stress and physical activity it can become much harder to gain an erection. Please show me your statistics that show unit readiness is affected by a woman’s period or any stats that show women are less able to deploy due to a once a month thing.

          We’ve used children in battle before so please refer to a history book that describes what a drummer boy did. Equating women to children is asinine and I’d love to see you say that to a female Marine who has underwent the same training as male Marines. Please say that to the combatives instructors that are female and please have this conversation with any woman before you commit to a second date (friendly advice).

          BTW many of our allies including Israel and Australia allow women to serve in the combat arms and the U.S. Military is opening up training slots for the combat arms to female officers. You’re going to lose this battle.

  • http://yahoo.com fatima alamiri

    i think this website should take a stand of women being in military even though they are in military and they serve .i think they still have some disadvantages for us to help them get better advantages in joining military.WE CAN ALL DO BETTER!!!!!!u should get a fundraiser or something then u could help women for good and maybe some other websites would help ,too!U ROCK BLOGGITY BLOG!!