Well, In my country, the Government is still in a decision on wheather Females need to go for National Service. When this happens, I believe many females will at first be unhappy, but they must understand that it is for their Country that they are in National Service! Not for FUn!

Originally Posted by godofthunder9010

This is a chick that can kick the crap out of me. I acknowledge that. I'm no wimp but I feel confident that she'd take me. She'll also do more pushups, situps, benchpress ... whatever you like. She'll do more than me. She can likely handle are bigger range of firearms that I can as well.

Now this is a case to the extreme, but I'm just using it to illustrate. There are women out there that are naturally very strong and others that are naturally very driven to become very strong. The point is, if she can do everything that the men are required to do, then she wouldn't likely be any hinderance on the battlefield.

Actually, bodybuilders on average, do not have as much strength as they look like the should. The vast majority of female bodybuilders take some type of supplement, most take steroids.

Are there women that can build mass? Yes, but not to the levels of men. They do not have enough of the needed hormone - testosterone.

It sounds to me as if many of the civilians point of views on allowing women in combat derive from countries other than the US. The US currently allows women in combat we really have no choice given our current engagements, but not in combat arms positions. My argument is not against women in combat, but women in combat arms. I am sure it is frustrating for some of you women not to have the opportunities that our (US) females have in the military.

Well, I was trying to use an exaggeration to make the following point: It is true that, on average, women are weaker than men. That's not being contested. But you are not required to be the strongest man on earth in order to be deployed into combat, right? No, of course not. A broad range of relative physical strength is taken by the combat arms of the military. We have tests that each soldier must pass on regular basis.

Currently, female soldiers in the US Military (and pretty much any military) are given easier requirements on all these tests. If that remains the same, then I'm 100% opposed to any combat deployment for any of them. Simply put, they haven't met the same standards, so we can assume that the average female soldier is not as fit for combat deployment.

But if a woman is absolutely certain that she wants the option of combat deployment, then 1.) She must be required to pass all the same tests as the men, without any special consideration for her gender. 2.) Combat units for women would generally need to be kept separate from units of men. With these two conditions met, they would be no hinderance, and just as qualified to go into combat.

You bet.

Originally Posted by Redneck

I have no problem with females in the military, I have many female friends who are doing excellent jobs defending my nation. That being said, I don't think they should be put in combat situations on the ground (in infantry mainly) simply due to their smaller frames and resultant inability to carry the same weight of equipment, to run as fast, and to defend themselves as well in an unarmed combat situation, among other reasons.

I think this is a stereotype. Not all women are fragile , and many can lift just as much or more then men. I think if a woman is able to do the job she should be allowed to do it.

Originally Posted by canadianpatriot

I think this is a stereotype. Not all women are fragile , and many can lift just as much or more then men. I think if a woman is able to do the job she should be allowed to do it.

I couldn't have said it better myself!

If a woman can prove she is capable of being equal to her male counterparts in any role then why not?
However if any of you have been on a sinking ship(I have),you will see just how many women want to be treated as equals when women and children occupy the lifeboats first!

Originally Posted by sven hassell

However if any of you have been on a sinking ship(I have),you will see just how many women want to be treated as equals when women and children occupy the lifeboats first!

Was that a military ship?

Originally Posted by SilverPhoenix

Was that a military ship?

No. A civilian ferry.

Originally Posted by sven hassell

No. A civilian ferry.

How can you then say that a military women that is up for duty do not wish to be seen as equal? In my opinion, a women who signs up for miltary will also know and be aware of the risks. I do not see why a woman should be the first to enter a lifeboat upon a military ship. Do you?