First of all, I was asked by ABC news my opinion, I'm free to pick an opinion and you get to pick yours, I greatly appreciate the self sacrifice and bravery of anyone who wishes to serve and protect our country, and I'm probably not going to be as knowledgeable with what precise affect Panetta's decision enables, but I'm voting no.
My reasons are that men are biologically designed to want to protect women and this may cause problems in combat. For the retort, I don't want men to lose that. I don't like the dissolving differentiation between men and women; I don't like "every man, woman, child and invalid for themselves" new way of thinking. Another problem is that if rape or sex occurs with men, they don't get pregnant. They don't have periods. Another problem is that this will be used, like eeeverything else, as a means for advancing people based on sex and not qualifications. Women are biologically designed physically weaker. It's just a statistical fact, though I'm sure someone will try to produce some freak of nature, for lack of a better phrase. These men must weigh 180-220 pounds. Can these women carry them or will exceptions be made, now or in the future? There's probably more I could think of with time, but at the moment, I feel that it's dangerous doing this in dangerous foreign countries and could cost lives. Now feel free to attack or contradict me, that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it.
Do You Agree With Defense Secretary Panetta's Decision to Lift the Ban on Women Serving in Combat?
ABC News U.S.
2013/01/23 22:38:50
|
|
|||||
|
6,570 votes
|
|
57% | |||
|
4,956 votes
|
|
43% | |||
Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will lift a longstanding ban on women serving in combat, according to senior defense officials. The services have until this May to come up with a plan to implement the change, according to a Defense Department official. That means the changes could come into effect as early as May. The services will have until January 2016 to complete the implementation of the changes.
Read More: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/women-combat-defens...
Top Opinion
-
Katherine 2013/01/24 02:06:13
Justin.
NO !!!!
As in, not now, not ever. I was raised in a multi-generational Marines infantry family: my brother did 3 tours in Iraq, my father served in Vietnam, my grandfather-WWII and great grandfather in WWI. A male in my family has served in(and survived) every war since the Civil War. I have heard plenty of true war stories so horrific they would make Charles Manson sleep with the light on.
I could fill a book with reasons why this will sabotage our military, nation, our society and our future.
Men and Women are completely different (in most cases, even polar opposites) in every way...men being more suitable for war. This is COMMON SENSE.
Men have the biological advantage of Physical Strength. As women, it's important not to over-analyze this or misinterpret it as an insult; it's not. Men are simply physically stronger than we are. It is what it is
If the situation called for hand to hand combat, we would be overcome by a man everytime. Being on your period in war doesn't sound ideal. There's the sex issue, pregnancy, the fact that we would be the perfect target / hostage. If a female soldier is captured by the enemy she will almost certainly be gang-raped/sexually defiled, which places unfair and unnecessary stress and guilt...
NO !!!!
As in, not now, not ever. I was raised in a multi-generational Marines infantry family: my brother did 3 tours in Iraq, my father served in Vietnam, my grandfather-WWII and great grandfather in WWI. A male in my family has served in(and survived) every war since the Civil War. I have heard plenty of true war stories so horrific they would make Charles Manson sleep with the light on.
I could fill a book with reasons why this will sabotage our military, nation, our society and our future.
Men and Women are completely different (in most cases, even polar opposites) in every way...men being more suitable for war. This is COMMON SENSE.
Men have the biological advantage of Physical Strength. As women, it's important not to over-analyze this or misinterpret it as an insult; it's not. Men are simply physically stronger than we are. It is what it is
If the situation called for hand to hand combat, we would be overcome by a man everytime. Being on your period in war doesn't sound ideal. There's the sex issue, pregnancy, the fact that we would be the perfect target / hostage. If a female soldier is captured by the enemy she will almost certainly be gang-raped/sexually defiled, which places unfair and unnecessary stress and guilt on the men in the unit. Walking for miles with half your body weight in gear on your back is a lot of work.
Since women could not meet the physical demands in ways that men could, would the standard be lowered?
There is no morning shower.
I have heard from the soldiers in my family that once you take a human life, you are changed forever.
What if you had to shoot a child? As a mother, I honestly do not think I could do it.
Also, women are more prone to depression and PTSD.
I am opposed to women going to war, so what happens if there is a draft?
I'm fairly fit, but compared to a man, I feel like I would only get in the way and become a liability on the battlefield.
Will I be expected to sign my daughter up for selective service when she is of age?
And since Leon Panetta thinks this is such a bright idea, is HE encouraging HIS daughter and the women in his family to enlist? If not...why not??
What happens when this femi-nazi war on women results in large numbers of women in combat, and men become so desensitized to seeing men and women fighting as equals that domestic violence becomes the norm? Would the battered wife still have any recourse or will she just be told to man up?
Will the ladies that don't want to be G.I. Jane be persecuted?
Those are just a few of the many reasons I think women in combat is social and physical suicide.
I respect that women are eager to defend our country. But most people in general do not understand why we really invade countries and go to war.
She also needs to come to grips with the fact that the men she is serving with will feel a natural need to try to protect her, it will be a sub-conscience thing, not conscience, that, may result in the men she is serving with being injured, or killed, trying to protect her. These are some of the primary reasons this ban has not been lifted, despite women being equal to men in almost every other way in the military, officially.
That of course was the fate of the Amazons. real shortage of children. Like feminists today. There is I think a story told by Herodotus about the last of the Amazons marrying Scythian men and creating a new Scythian tribe, giving up their warlike ways.
Also, don't we need men as well to impregnate all those women?
Does this mean the end of the double standard, we can punch feminists in the nose now when they get on their obnoxious rampages?
lol, Not that I would. Just a fantasy.
As a combat infantryman I testify that this is not good for the good order and disciplne of the Army. This is a politcal decision reached with little input from field commanders of infantry units.......war is insane - this is just ignorant.