Thanks FutureRANGER, that was my point.

So what? Psychological and emotional scaring is what matters. Both males and females would have to deal with these issues. There are plenty of good reasons why women should not be allowed in combat arms. This isn't one of them.

I disagree. What will be of the baby? How would you like to raise a baby that has a father that is your enemy?

Gee, Sherman, what makes you think a pregnant soldier would last nine months as a POW? Not to be cold, I just don't see it happening too often.

Sherman, as Jamoni said .. what makes you think either would survive? 9 times out of 10 if a female POW were raped and she did become pregnant, the baby would not survive. Add stress, malnourishment and filthy conditions .. the chances are highly unlikely. That isn't even mentioning the chance of survival for the POW herself. Let us not forget that women have been taken POW before, they need not be in combat arms for that likely hood. Should we take them out of the military altogether because they may be taken prisoner and become pregnant? Should we take all males out of the military because they may be taken prisoner and raped? I would have to say both are equally horrible, but that is a risk all military men and women have accepted, and if they didn't before .. they certainly should now.

This issue has been brought up time and time again in defence of keeping women out of combat arms, and no one with the power to decide buys into it. There are so many good reasons why a female should not be in combat arms MOSs' out there already, and those should be the ones beaten into the PC women's lib supporters heads.

What is this I am hearing? Rape?

Like being in war is easier then rape?

I can't say I agree on that point, and now this rape subject touches me a little.

So don't come and tell me, just because we have a female sexual organ we can't go into combat.

And about pregnancy who said that every woman wants to get pregnant?

And about those who can't get pregnant, should only they be able to join?

I can see your guys point clearly, but you miss out of a lot of positive things we women can do in combat.
So the only thing who actually keeps women from combat is the lack of strength..

But there are things that doesn't require that type of strength.

And we don't have tunnel vision as most men has..

This was discussed in Sweden not that long ago and they come up with the fact that women are really good pilots.. And if it wasn't because of the lack of strength it would be a clearly welcomed job for women.

What's up with the sexistic thing "Women should have kids"-view?

And the rape part.. Well, I only have to say one thing:

I've been there..

And that's all I have to tell..

so don't come and tell me rape is hard to get over.. To see a friend die in combat would be thousands of times harder.

Easy there, troops. Who the heck said anything about the women being a pow for the whole pregnency? Anyways, i never said is to be a huge issue, just one out of many....

Agree Sherman.

Slow down a bit guys and gals..

Read the entire posts before you answer.

I believe that Sherman didn't mean the rape thing to be as big as most of you obviously thinks..

Being raped could be just as bad for a man as it could be for a woman(and it can of course happen to both).
But as Sherman said, in the womans case it could involve a kid with an unvanted father, NOT that it is worse for women to be raped, or that a women would be a pregnant POW for 9 months....

BUT I don't think this is a very good/valid point for not having women in combat arms..

Lets skip this rape thing, and move on now..

I have worked with several very good female leaders and soldiers, both here in Norway and abroad, and I think that women can do just as good a job as a man in the military.
But as I have said earlier, my main consern is the men..
As long as we have a lot more men than females in combat arms, I strongly believe that if a woman got injured or killed in a combat situation, the male soldiers COULD be distracted from their duty and focus too much on that woman.
And I'm afraid that this could create even more dangerous situations...
I have seen this happen in exercises. (luckilly not in real life....)

So the problem, as I see it, with women in combat arms is not the women, but the guys....
The solution could be to have an equal amount of men and women in the units, so us men could get used to the situation.
Or combat units for women only....
But not as it is today, with 1 women pr. 100 men (or something like that), that woman would get WAY too much attention if something happened, especially if she is good looking.
You may say that this is old fashioned, and that we men should know better than this, but I don't think we do....

War is a "primitive" thing, and it can bring out primitive emotions and feelings.
Protecting our women has been a mans "job" for as long as there has been humans around, and I don't that's an instinct that's easilly surpressed during combat, when a LOT of other instincts/feelings are flying through our heads.
(some may do it, but I don't think the majority of us can.. I know I would have problems with it if it was a girl I really liked, or was secretly in love with)


Phew, long post...
I hope you get my point..
(a bit Norwenglish maybe... )

Well, Maybe that is the male hormones that is getting in the way..

again, as i said, the main issue, as i see it, is that so few women are acctually fit for combat service, that there is just no point in making the infrustructure. the army is not a hobby. it has a role. if it is ineffective for some parts of the population to be in certin postions, you dont do it anyways in the nam of equality. I mean, they allowed women into the IAF pilot school about 7 years ago. we now have like 1 female fighter pilot, 1 female chopper pilot and 1 female navigator. whats the point. they had to build the there own showers, barracks, and al...i mean dang...