Originally Posted by TacticalEdge

i am just stating my thoughts of the topic.... i dont use language nor do i need to so i do not understnd the problem....... perhaps you could eleborate as to what i can and cannot do...... i think other people need to be watched more than me such as ben..... sorry though for anything i have done and if you could explain then i may tone it down a bit...... just a bit though because they are still my thoughts.... haha..... thanks

This should be a PM.

women should be allowed to fight but i feel that as an officer in charge of those women it would be morally difficult to order the women into a fighting postiotion with potentially deadly consequences compared to a man..... but this is of course just my point of view..... ohhh and some people have been thinking that i am a thick stupid kid who has no idea what he is talking about..... iwish to eliminate that picture which some of you have(and with just cause)........ due to my past behavior.... and for that i am sorry9i have never really been in a forum before

Taking the opposit opinion to my own, T-edge, is it more moral to send men to their death?

Man,woman or....wtv else exists these days lol a bullet in the head will kill any of them...Yes woman have a physical handicap if you compare them to men...so why not let the woman who can follow the men fight and the others ...wtv they are allowed to do?

Hey who ever wants to fight let them, I mean yes some women will have physical handicaps when compared to men, but their is men out there that are in the same boat. But anyway if a woman or better yet a PERSON wants to go to the front grab a rifle and show them the way. And T-Edge like sherman said I would like to know if it is more MORAL to send men to the deaths?

I believe that it is more moral. I'm a strong supporter of the "women and children first" mentality. It is hard to argue on that point, however, which is why I left it out of any of my previous arguments on this subject, because it is a personal moral judgement.

Originally Posted by TacticalEdge

but this is of course just my point of view..... ohhh and some people have been thinking that i am a thick stupid kid who has no idea what he is talking about..... iwish to eliminate that picture which some of you have(and with just cause)........ due to my past behavior.... and for that i am sorry9i have never really been in a forum before

Sounds good.


I have answered this women in the military/combat arms question several times before in another thread.
I'm too lazy to write my answers here...
So here you go:
http://www.military-quotes.com/forum...opic.php?t=404

Oh yeah redneck most definately you are correct there. It is a personal moral call on that.



HEHE redleg

*sigh* Too lazy to keep retyping. My reply in the other women in combat, thread.

It seems some are getting caught up in the PC argument. The military, where lives are at stake, is not the place for social experimentation.

Let's look at the most obvious issue. There are physiological differences that limit women in the critical area of physical ruggedness. Even if there are some women who can do it, the military still has no obligation to rework the whole logistics chain to accomodate them.
No matter how much you want to argue, men and women are different. Check relative cardiac capacity, erythrocyte counts, muscle-mass-to-body-mass.

1) The male on average has a larger heart than that of the average female. Therefore, is able to pump more blood into the muscles for longer rates of endurance.

2) The average male has a 25% larger lung capacity than that of the average female. Therefore, the male has the ablility to pump more O2 into the body giving males more endurance also. For example, go to any neonatology unit in any hospital and ask a Dr. what type of prematures babies have the best chance of living, and they will say that females do, because the females do not have as large as lungs as that of the males, therefore, thier lungs can develop quicker than the males.

3)3. Body weight, the average males has over 25 lbs on the averagae female. Therefore, providing the male with greater advantage in almost all situations.

4) Hips, on average women have wider hips than males making their center of gravtity lower to the ground and causing them to have more of a sway from side to side when they run. Therefore, making running that much harder on females than on males.

5) Upper body strength, if a women and a male were to stand side by side and both were to put there arms straight out, the males arms would be a straight line, whereas, the females arm would form an "X" like shape. Try this with your wife or girlfriend, females arms bend-in at the elbow whereas a mans does not. This gives the male more leverage and more upper body strength in areas such as pull-ups and push-ups.

There are several more areas that I could go into, such as body fat percentages, muscle mass ratio's, red blood cells, white blood cells, smaller bones, etc. but I think I have made my point.

Now, understand .. I am not against women in the military. While I've never been assigned to any units that allow females, I have worked with, and in some cases against, them in many enviroments under many circumstances. What I am against is women serving in combat arms MOSs. For those of you that support allowing women in combat arms, I pose these questions.

Could you address the dynamics of small units and the manner in which they would be affected by the introduction of females?

Can a unit benefit by their [females] addition?

Are these units handicapped by their absense?

America is not ready to see women come home in body bags or wooden crates. It is not time for a woman to fight. Men fight. Women need to be protected.