Poll: Should Combat Jobs be Opened to Women?

women-in-combat-570x200

Like Jacey wrote the other day, here at SpouseBuzz we are on the Girl Team. We like the idea of the ban on women in combat being lifted, because we think that women can and should be able to reach whatever heights in whatever profession they choose — and that includes the military.

But we know that many of you do not agree. We know that our readers come from all walks of life, with experiences that we do not have.

We want to know what you think. So we are running a little poll to find out. Do you think women should be allowed in combat? Take the poll and view the results below.

Fill out my online form.

About the Author

Amy Bushatz
Amy is the editor in chief of Military.com’s spouse and family blog SpouseBuzz.com. A journalist by trade, Amy also covers spouse and family news for Military.com where she is the managing editor of spouse and family content. An Army wife and mother of two, Amy has been featured as a subject matter expert on CNN.com, NPR, Fox News, NBC, CBS, ABC and BBC as well as in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal and Washington Post. Follow her on twitter @amybushatz.

94 Comments on "Poll: Should Combat Jobs be Opened to Women?"

  1. These wars are not typical of the true infantry mission. Few lived out of their rucks for months living like animals, no clean cloths, privacy, hot meals. Few in Iraq and Afghanistan lived like that, missions were short dismounts or vehicle patrols. I did 4 tours and had women gunners, drivers, medics and they did great. Yes they can die and get blown up in combat like the restof us, no question, they shot people got decorated and suffered casualties. But these wars are not TYPICAL OF THE COMBAT MISSION OF THE INFANTRY!!!! When the body bags fill up with women because of these plans, the public wioll not tolerate it!! Check the percentages of men in combat zones, dead/wounded to women in the same zones, dead/wounded. I'll bet they are way out of proportion!! This law just get rid of the combat exclusion law, women have been in combat routinly since Desert Storm!!

  2. Sure, some women can do the job but most aren't built for it…..It's not their fault, God made women to be women and not combat ready troops on the front line…………..This is a stupid move made by ignorant so called leaders looking for a vote! Support roles, sure…….and yes, not all men are made for front line troopers…………..This makes me totally sick and this move will cost more lives for both male and female…………….

  3. Being a retired SF and SOG SFC, The problem on any mission, across the fence or otherwise, would never solve anything by having a female as a 10 or 11 which puts the Team leader in a position to have that compassion to basically try to protect her and jeprodize the mission because of the gender difference. God only knows, 99 percent of SF guys do not want to be put in a position to care for female, on any SOG team when running a mission with the closeness of a experience male team who trust each other with their life. Enough said.

  4. Leo Gerald Johnson | January 25, 2013 at 4:44 pm |

    It's about Time we got modern with the rest of the world..China ,russia ,Canada ,Philippines ,Japan South and North Korea,Vietnam,Germanh ,Isrealand the rest of ther world have Women in Combat Unit' why not the United States?.

  5. Joseph McGrath Sr. | January 25, 2013 at 4:58 pm |

    I would hope there are several screening processes to weed out personnel who would not make the grade. This applies to male as well as female personnel. I believe some Army regulations were dumb down to accept GED and some with minor criminal records, so dumbing down is not new. To tweek the system even more equal, have the females sign on with draft registration at 18 years old. Males do not have an option to do or not to do and all is fair, right?
    JPM

  6. Let them have the opportunity to try.

    Based on the sounds of all the "combat arms" complaining the current Infantry Private should be able to take out an enemy company all on their own. Sgts and above should be able to handle Battalions and a Ranger, well he is good for an entire division so I don't see what the problem is.

  7. Being Infantry Ranger I agree with Dshirley somewhat. Women are just as capable as men shooting a lot of the times better. That is not the problem the problem comes in when you are wearing 60 lbs. of equipment and a 80 – 100 lb ruck doing three month movements on foot with re supply by air from time to time no bathrooms no showers. Now throw in all that equipment plus you have to throw a 200 lb man on top of your ruck so he can be picked up for medevac. Now if she is capable of doing it without having to give off weight to other members in the squad have at it. Women have just as much a right to be shot as I do. Give up the female standard pt test follow same requirement as a male and come have some fun. Now this only applies to spec ops and infantry. Don’t know what constitutes combat mos, but women in artillery, or any other direct support mos keep your pt standard have at it same with spec ops aviation women fly just as well as men.

  8. The generals that were asked by the politicians about combat roles for women had to agree with this administrations wishes. If not their careers were over. Simple as that.

  9. I am an x-trooper with the 173rd Airborne, Vietnam. Two tours. 75th Rangers. Having a woman on my patrol? Are you kidding? Even if strong enough, much too great of a distraction for young kids (troopers).

  10. sickunclesam | January 25, 2013 at 6:20 pm |

    The most dangerous thing in the army is a general bucking to be promoted or keep his job. This was proven yet again by Gen. Dempsey and Gen. Odierno who sold out all the grunts so Obama could tell his feminazi supporters tha het unlocked the final door to so called equality. We need to seriously rethink how these top generals are picked for their positions. The fact that civilains seem to have complete control over senior officers career makes these guys absolutely worthless when it comes time to actually say something that might not square with civilain masters latest social experiment.

  11. Women do not belong in combat situations. They are no match in strength against men. God made it that way.

  12. Sexual violence is an on going problem and it will increase in combat situations from both sides. BUT the big concern very few woman can carry the amount of gear needed on any spec ops, as long as the requirements are met OK but if not it will cost lives. And unless troops can quit thinking of them as woman and treat them as troops it will cost lives in the Mud and the Blood

  13. You need another answer in your survey choices.
    You alrealy have "No. This is a political issue, not about what’s right for women."
    How about "No. This is a political issue, not about what's right for our military."
    The difference is significant. After all, what is the objective here? To advance womens careers? to advance a social agenda more favorable to mobility within womens careers? No. The objective is (or certainly SHOULD be) to put forth the best fighting force possible. If that is the objective, then what does "what's right for women" have to do with it, any more than "what's right for men", or "what's right for group X"?

  14. I say get rid of any requirements or qualifications. They discriminate and prevent anyone from being whatever they want to be. All of it, physical standards, etc. If you want to be a Navy SEAL, all you should have to do is sign up and bam! You’re a SEAL.

  15. I say get rid of any requirements or qualifications. They discriminate and prevent anyone from being whatever they want to be. All of it, physical standards, etc. If you want to be a Navy SEAL, all you should have to do is sign up and bam! You’re a SEAL.

  16. Frickin' idiots, instead of NJP's for the regular crap, get ready to start handing out ninja punches for sexual assaults…rapes yea you people are either really ignorant or really really stupidly bliss to think they'll be able to mingle within the grunt life

  17. Mike 'DOC' Simpson | January 25, 2013 at 7:28 pm |

    I served two Tours with the 18th ABN Corp at MACV, as a combat Medic under the great Leadership of Then Lt. COL. Brady, the Father of modern Dust-Off Helo crews, and the most Fearless Huey Medicvac Pilot of the Viet Nam War! I was considered too small but showed good body mechanics when it came to Humping a wounded fellow Mud soldier on a two man litter, sliding Him into a fast loaded position, but at 5'6'' tall and weighing 136 lbs, it was never easy!

    So my gripe is Can a woman of same stature do the same, I am getting Old, and yes women have physically changed and many are stronger now, But then?????What about in The unconventional Warfighting that goes on in The Stan?

  18. GetRidOfThemAll | January 25, 2013 at 9:09 pm |

    There is a physiological difference between men and women. Would we put a man missing an arm in a combat situation and expect him to perform in the same manner a typical man would? No. End of debate. Women are in a sense missing that arm.

  19. American men have always been taught and trained to protect our women. This has been seen in every war, where soldiers die protecting our women. Putting one in the foxhole next to me compromises my valves of protecting them. Many male soldiers will be injuried or killed because instead of staying put, he protected the female. Bad move, another political decision to make some one look good. Wait till we start shipping home our women by the dozens. Hell will be to pay for this one

  20. The poll is inaccurate from the start. You can vote multiple times for the same answer and the poll numbers update based on this. Fix the poll system if you want a real usable number.

  21. "No "On Women in Combat Due to the fact. Not only one getting shot and some fool running out to save her and getting shot them selves.But to the Extent of .Being in a fox hole .IE One Female with Three or four Males for an extended time.Also If Captured The very likely And probability of being raped repeatedly by their captors. Torture would not be the same as for men.Especially if captured by Countries are customs or religions that regard women as second class citizens or as property not as a soldier are person.Remember what happened to the Female that was captured in Iraq. And look at the Storm that would ensue if any of that happened and the civilized world got wind of it. remember the flack from the women and mothers during the Vietnam era on the friendly fire deaths. The Idea is ludacris.Now if the united states was fighting for survival from total invasion,Annihilation,Maybe. But wars in other countries that do not see women in the same light as the American people do (NO).

  22. Very simple when a woman can be on a movement to contact, pee without stopping or getting her pants wet let her in the infantry.

  23. I have no problem as long as THEY carry THEIR own weight, figuratively and literally
    If that is not a reality then they should not be in combat positions.
    I doubt that any man who had served in combat would disagree
    The other night on cable a female pilot was fully supporting combat roles
    HOWEVER, there is a HUGE difference between flying a warthog and humping a 90 pound pack
    and all the other stuff that combat ON THE GROUND entitles
    I respect her service but she is wrong if she thinks there is no difference.

  24. I'm a Vietnam veteran (IV Corps – Cambodian border) and I believe that gender should not determine opportunity in the combat arms. One of the toughest people I've ever known was my Scottish grandmother who served as a nurse in France in WWI and didn't retire until she was 75. Many of the combatants we faced in my war were no bigger than the average American woman and in my humble opinion were pretty good combat soldiers. If you have the qualifications, you should get a chance at the job.

  25. Here’s my 2 cents : Most of the things said are quite biased. 2 times in Iraq and 14 months in the Stan. I was airborne infantry (75th Ranger). Personally I humped over 120-150 lbs. at all times. I rarely got hot chow or personal hygiene time. I have more miles on my legs than most 1990’s used cars. Had to hump out wounded. Resupply from the air made us huge targets. That’s all I have to say on that. Now add a female in this war climate and she wouldn’t last a week. I’d be humping her gear. We’d never be able to keep pace. Her hygiene would be an issue due to the simple fact that women are open sewage systems and men are closed. And, God forbid, she was taken as a POW. The thought makes me sick. So ultimately the men would carry her weight, her hygiene would shut her down and the risk is too great. Combat support roles . . . Yes. Combat Arms . . . NEVER!!!

  26. Good men will die!!! What women is going to carry a man off the battlefield or to safety when hit. This is rediculious. The standards will get lowered and good men will die. When will this country learn. When will women learn they are not equal when it comes to the physical aspects of life. It is what it is get over it ladies and act like ladies, we got your back I bet the activists are not the ones going to combat!!!

  27. MadMaxxx,

    No one was suggesting that standards be relaxed. Your naive assumption that all men are stronger than all women is not substantiated by the facts. Back in my tour in Vietnam, I was 5' 10" and 170 lbs. I still dragged a wounded friend out harms way — I didn't stand up and make us more of a target. When I served, I'd rather work with the smartest, not the strongest. I've seen more casualties from mistakes than most other causes. I have a daughter who's taller and stronger than I was in 'Nam and I'd trust her to do her duty.

  28. What happens to the captured women? We're not fighting by rules.

  29. Mingling the sexes in the Armed Forces has degraded morale and morals since the beginning. The only thing we've been spared so far is fucking in foxholes and now it seems that will become a possibility in the near future. The organization in which I served in the 1960s (UMT for men and the women far removed from operations) was incomparably better than the current or proposed arrangements.

  30. GetRidOfThemNow | January 27, 2013 at 10:15 am |

    I would rather deal with a bunch of homosexuals in my fighting hole then women who are not physically able to put out. They will water down the standards and all males ,gay or straight, will be killed.

    Don't get me wrong I love the women in my life, but even they know they cannot make it. My wife is one tough woman, and I would say I have never met a WM that even comes close to what she can deal with, but there is no way she could pull me out of a fight.

    Moreover, since "equality" reins supreme, I DEMAND REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS EQUALITY! I WANT TO GIVE BIRTH! IT SHE CAN DO IT SO CAN I. I DON'T CARE WHAT THE RAMIFICATIONS ARE I DEMAND IT. WHO'S WITH ME??? LETS GET OUT THE VOTE AND DEMAND US MEN GET THE SAME RIGHTS OUR WOMEN GET. IT IS MORALLY UNJUST FOR THEM TO HAVE ALL THE BABY MAKING RIGHT!

  31. GetRidOfThemNow | January 27, 2013 at 10:21 am |

    Oh by the way a CONVOY op is not combat. Sitting in a FOB is not Combat. If a Convoy is ambushed or takes an IED a QRF is sent out to remove them as quickly as possible. They are not in sustained operations. There Mission is to get the gear to where it needs to go. A Rifle Platoons Mission is the locate and close with the Enemy. That means find the enemy and get the surprise not be surprised. There may be FET's or as Grunts call them VET's (Vagina Engagement Teams) that go on patrols, but they serve as attachements primarily and it is very rare for those VET's to patrol on their own. If they do and they take contact they call a QRF and are withdrawn as soon as possible.

  32. What the hell does the first answer mean? "No this is a political issue not whats right for women" – is that saying your against it or you support it or this shouldn't be on the table or what?

  33. No It is Hard enough for a Young man to be introduced to live fire coming at you ,it is hard enough for a young man or any man to witness his friend just laying down and when he checks him the man is dead,it is hard enough to see your buddies,NCOs,Officers get Blown apart.are see their head disappear in a second and nothing is left..Nothing.It is like there was never an intelligent beaning there a second ago.it is hard enough to see yours friends are your team mates loose their arms and legs and wonder when it is going to be your turn So I say NO to women in combat!!!.40 years after my last tour in Vietnam I still have moments when Friends that I knew .Their faces appear and I still regret the fact that They died so young.In My mind they will always be young.while I grow old and am the Father of 4 the grand father of 6,the great grand father of 4.I don't want my female relation to have to serve in combat.its bad enough when the male relations have too!!!.

  34. Having been in combat myself, I am strongly opposed to women being included in combat operations with men. Here is my reason, but let me first say that my reason is not chauvinistic. In combat instead of mission one being accomplishing what one is ordered to accomplish, a male soldier will instinctively make protecting the women his top priority. However, a full combat team of women would be fine. Undoubtedly the all women team's performance would be exceptionally good, since they would be in the spot light. Let me reiterate that coed combat should never be a reality. Peter Guild, Quincy, MA.

  35. You have got to be joking John D. As an 0311, we lived in a dump for my second tour and that was in IRAQ!! Not to mention the lack the insanely crowded huts we grunts built ourselves with scrap wood, we lived next to 150 IP's. I dont even want to think what would have happened with a couple of women bunking up with us. Not to mention the increased contempt they would have had for us bedding with women freely, detracting from our mission of training a viable security force that trusts us and us them. What would have happened if any of them had assaulted a women? Man love Thursday jokes aside, us as grunts would have slaughtered anyone harming a female, that is what a-type guys like Marine or Army grunts are bred to believe from an early age; protect women and children. I am sorry, but a ban is not going to take away that cultural norm. You must have been an ultra POG. You insult me with that comment about easy living and plush conditions and short patrols. Furthermore, for all the dumps I lived and patrolled in, it is nothing compared to my brothers in Astan! You need to get your head out of your ass John D!

    0311 Semper Fi

  36. Disability claims will skyrocket if women are allowed into all military roles. In their quest to be as good as a male (physically) they will hurt themselves.

  37. When all women must register for the draft when they reach 18 I will be pro women in the front line.
    How will that workout when a real global war breaks out and the ranks must be filled out like wwII or Korea?
    You are on the front line and half of your company is staffed with women who dont want to be there and
    are faceing the prospect of being over run resulting in hand to hand combat.
    I for one do not want my grand daughter put in a certian death situation like that

  38. Homosexuals allowed to openly serve and now women in combat. Can't wait for the pedophiles on Capital Hill to get organized and allow child molesters to serve openly in the military. For all those that spouted how women in foreign countries are allowed to serve in combat roles, in many foreign countries it's not illegal to have sex with a child under the age of 12. Let me know when that polls comes out.

    I left the United states and moved to Philippines two years ago so I wouldn't have to take part in any further decline of civilized norms. Here's one more reason to stay away.

    Every night I watch the news from a far and see more and more the decline of the American dream as 'more decadence' and 'more depravity' become the new battle cries of the American Republic.

    "Land where my father died, shot by the FBI, my mother was a commie spy; I give a <deleted>

    You can have it; I'll watch from here.

    Expatriate – Living large and off the grid

  39. I am a 1st Cav Vet VN 71, and I have two beautiful daughters. Would they make great soldiers…..hell yea! Would I ever want them in harms way….hell no. I want my daughters to live well and be good mothers. Safe and far from harms way. Take us old bastards first!

  40. Wow, well I don't care if women join, as long as they don't complain about sexual harassment., The men sexually harass each other all the time, adding a girl to the mix is just going to make it even more so.

    Plus the fact if they are ever captured the Taliban will keep them as sex slaves for the rest of their lives, they will be so broken by the time that they won't even fight back.

    This isn't going to end well…

  41. Training at Navy Dive school dictates that the group will run no faster than the slowest individual. So, the standard should be: How fast should the group run? Likewise, and we will never know until we try it, How effective is the team at meeting it's mission? There are thousands of variations to missions, and specifically, Navy teams have certain criteria to be met for each. Will we be prepared to re-establish baseline data for teams where US mission capability will be reduced due to the average reduction in the physical elements required to meet our missions? How much less effective will this make our wartime planners when preparing for highly timed missions? Have drills been prepared to measure the mental effectiveness of mixed-gender teams in time critical missions? Can we take advantage of the added flexibility of having a female in covert missions?

  42. For those of you that don't think standards will change, think again! Check out this well researched article: http://www.cmrlink.org/content/home/36488/seven_r….

  43. I hope everyone gets loves menstruation, because you will all get to share it now.

  44. Women r already in combat!!! I’m an M.P. (military police) and we have at least 5 females per platoon who all get the same training as the guys. We train together, we deploy together. We have female gunners, drivers, team leaders, platoon sergeants, platoon leaders, company commanders and first sergeants!!! And I know females right now that I would rather deploy with before most men. Not cuz of their looks or any of that nonsense. But because when shit hits the fan I KNOW I can count on them to watch my six. There r plenty of men in the military who shouldn’t b trusted with a potato gun! Gender is not the issue as far as I’m concerned. As long as they’re willing to do the work and watch my six then they’re good by me. O and by the way, MPs do all the same stuff that infantry does and then some. We do foot patrols, convoy security, QRF u name it. I’ve seen wut women can do in combat roles and honestly impressed.

  45. There should be a poll amongst men who have won the CIB. Other people have very little knowledge of what combat infantry life is like.

  46. I can condone an all female unit, but I can't see the effectiveness a female on an elite special ops team. A female is distracting – by both appearance and odor. It is basic male instinct to protect females more so than another male. Pilot, all female air crew, drone operator, all female tank crew, all female artillery – yes. Frontline – yes – on all female unit only.

  47. Same thing that happens to men. Blue eyed men in Iraq r more desirable then a brunette man

  48. There were female Viet Cong who fought fearlessly and they lived in tunnels. There were females in the resistance all across Europe during WW II. There was a Russian female sniper who out shot even their top male sniper with over 300 kills. I am a *Guardian* with Honor Flight and I met 2 nurses who fought with the guerilla groups in the Phillipines. Is every female capable of handling combat? NO !!! Not every male is capable either. I did all right as a light weapons infantryman, but I KNOW I didn;t have the physical makeup to be in Special Forces or a SEAL. I would not have made the cut. If a woman wants to seek these positions more power to them.

  49. Men and women are equal but not the same! No women I know can carry full gear,plus a 80 mm mortar plate on a 30 mile forced march. Glad to see a few women don’t mind the blood of thousands on their hands just to get a promotion! How about we change the way promotions are given instead!

  50. Are they kidding me ! NO way should a woman be allowed to be in a combat unit ! What happens when aunt flow shows up with the cramps and blood ? Here in Saint Paul Minnesota , the city lowered the P. T. qualifying test to appease the woman that could NOT pass the old test. Dose anyone want a small women crawling into a blazing house fire to pick up a passed out 200-250 pound man or woman to haul them out of the fire? Don't think that would happen. I served with a LRRP/RANGER Co. in Vietnam in 1969 and I guarantee 99% or more of our guys would refuse to go on patrol with the female gender. That's obnoxious , ridiculous , and down right DANGEROUS !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

  51. I am all for equality, but women need to be careful what they wish for. As a combat infantryman in Vietnam, I mostly lived in the jungle, slept on the ground, got a shower and clothing change once every month or two, carried huge loads (sometimes corpses from firefights). I recall as an FNG (F—ing New Guy) , I had to carry a 200lb corpse for several kilometers to get to an LZ for medevac. It was in the monsoon season and the choppers could not fly for several days. The corpses got pretty smelly in the heat and humidity. I am 5' 6" and weighed 130 lbs at the time and was tough as nails, but it still nearly killed me. Perhaps the USA will never be in another jungle war, but don't bet on it. I can't speak for now, but "Infantry " in those days was not for the faint of heart.

  52. I've read multiple comments from numerous people , and I understand the comments by the experienced combat veterans , and I assure all you women that all these men ARE NOT male chauvanists, but reality combat veterans . Why do they have seperate events in the olympics ? Why are there no professional female football players or hockey players, or basketball females on the pro teams. Simple answer, our creator made us different . Even at the high school level , the have different sports programs for the girls . The H.S. boys would go after any females in contact sports . If women want equal everything , then lets allow reporters into female locker rooms , and take it a step further and have bathrooms instead of mens bathrooms and womens bathrooms . We could include , and or start at the high school level and have one big locker room and one big shower. I'll bet the ladies would howell loud then . Let's get back to reality , and all you women that want combat roles , after the mission , provided one makes it back , lets all shower together and debrief each other like we did many times , in the shower. EQUAL IS EQUAL . GOD DID NOT make us that way people .

  53. DaveFromCincy | January 29, 2013 at 10:41 pm |

    It seems odd to me that we separate men and women in sports in order to protect women from the unfair advantage men would have, but we don't seem to have a problem letting women compete against men in a competition where the loser dies.

  54. Donald Steel | January 30, 2013 at 8:59 am |

    I am totally against women in combat! They can do the job I have no doubt. But do we really need husband and wife both having PTSD? That will make good marriages or great parents I'm sure. Then there is the problem of rape and torture if captured. And how many men are going to do things in combat to show their masculinity to impress the lady in uniform and cause them to get killed? It presents a whole new set of problems. Next you will have a woman ex-Marine sharp shooter in the Texas tower picking off students on campus. I was brought up to protect women, not to watch the hand that rocks the cradle in the field of combat killing another mother's son.

  55. I really don't see what the problem is, Canada has had the combat arms open to women for years as have many other countries. The world didn't stop rotating on its axis, the sky didn't fall, life goes on as normal in the Canadian Forces. I have many female friends that are in the combat arms who have deployed and served honourably. one of my friends was KIA in Afghanistan and her unit carried on with the battle, they did not fall to pieces and stop fighting as some of you have suggested will happen. Perhaps some of you should do some research on women in combat and how it is in other countries before you start making wild statements about how this is the end of the world. Not every woman will want to go combat arms, not every woman who wants to will make it through training, just like many of the men don't make it through training either. Not everybody is cut out for the combat arms regardless of gender but why exclude the capable women just because of their gender without even giving them the opportunity to try?

  56. I know many of the women I served with that I would rather have them watch my back than some of the men. I non-combat situations women are on equal footing with the men, as it should be. Physical requirement notwithstanding, most women are fully capable and can do the job in most situations. However the real question is should we as a society, actually be comfortable with with women serving in combat? The question is not can they, the question is should they. As a chivalrous and honorable society, men have always been in the protector role and this really violates the nature and order of our society as a whole.

  57. Retired Navy E6 | January 30, 2013 at 7:15 pm |

    Not being Army or SpecOps .. do know the issue we had in the Navy was .. if the woman didn't want to deploy .. get pregnant!!! Now we have this .. my feelings are .. that if a woman wants to be in combat .. sign a letter saying that you won't become pregnant before your deployment. If you feel you can pull your weight and not slow down your group .. then "By all means!"

  58. why o why did i sign up for updates about this topic opinions are like asshole and elbows everybody has one. My god make it stop already!!! please!!!!

  59. CploftheMarineCorps | January 30, 2013 at 8:02 pm |

    I am a female in the Marine Corps. I absolutely DISAGREE with women being allowed to go into combat. This is just some childish game some feminist decided she wanted to fight for because she didn’t feel it was “right” or “fair”. What’s not RIGHT or FAIR is that women who have never served in the military have a say in what we women in the military should and shouldn’t do.

    I know some very fine women in the military, some harder than a lot of the men I know in the military, but none of them want to be in combat either. We DON’T want to be in combat, not because we don’t think we could deal with it, because some of us could, but because we know that being there in the midst of the action could end up compromising the mission. And mission accomplishment is everyone’s number 1 priority.

  60. George Smith | January 30, 2013 at 8:09 pm |

    Carl is correct. We've all seen it over the years. For instance the Marines made a big to do about making women take the same physcial tests as men. And they did. However the fine print you didnt read is that the women dont have to score as the men do. Men are scored to a higher degree to make 1st class. Women to a lesser degree to make 1st class. SO….is that the same? No of course not. The Marines and Army will do what they're told. In the end it will cost a boatload of money to bring in women into the infantry…………….and in the end the standards will be lowered in order to bring more in. If 1 women out of 100 finally make it that is not a good business model is it? However if 17 out of 100 make it……..we can live with that (that is called ratio folks) once that ratio is setttled thats what the military will shoot for. To do that they will lower standards. Policy is made, signed and documented in DC and the Pentagon. Not at Camp Pendleton or Ft. Bragg.

  61. i can imagine women in the jungles of viet-nam…..rice paddies…..leeches…assault after assault……brains n guts,,missing body parts,,,iam proud to be a viet-nam veteran67-68….but i say NO to women n combat…i dont think i couldve handled that…

  62. Super Snoopy | January 30, 2013 at 9:36 pm |

    My opinion has always been that all jobs (Pararescue, CCT, etc) should be open to women as long as the standards would not be adjusted for them like they are for the PT test. If a woman can make it through indoc and the pipeline while being held to the same standards as men currently are, I would have zero problems seeing a woman coming to extract me from combat. In these undermanned career fields we can use all the qualified applicants we can get. I say it's about damn time.

  63. Claude Stevens Jr | January 30, 2013 at 9:36 pm |

    If this women or these women can meet the same PT/Physical requirements as a male then I say go for it. I have 23 yrs. of active military service, some of that time with SOF. i was there when Col (Ret) Charlie Beckwith started Delta Force and I DON'T believe that ANY women could have or can pass their requirements. I have served with some OUTSTANDING women in uniform, both officer and enlisted and would be happy to serve with them again. So if they (The Women) can pass the requirements to be in any combat and/or special unit then go for it, and be very proud that you made it but you MUST PASS all the male requirements, NO SPECIAL ANYTHING for being a women. No Dumbing down ANYTHING for being a Women. All The Way. OOOOOOAAAAHHHH.

  64. Robert Willey | January 30, 2013 at 9:49 pm |

    This decision will weaken our defense. Because men will defend a woman from harm at the risk his own safety. This is a fact, undisputable!!!

  65. The defeminization of women is one of the big contributors to the moral decline of our country.

  66. Carl Jenkins, Sr. | January 30, 2013 at 10:33 pm |

    What is happening to america as we once knew it. Change is inevitable but even with change some things need remain the same such as frontline in the trenches warfare being waged by our men and not our women. Has america become so feminized and it's men so soft that we cannot still fight our country's wars?
    Our country is becoming a cesspool of wrong thinking and errant decision making for political reasons rather than facing the facts of the chaos being caused by these decisions. Now we want to send women to fight in the trenches knowing that the conditions of battlefield combat is not suited for them and I don't care how tough they are . A woman will always be just that even if she desires to lead an alternative style of life. Let our men fight the wars on the battlefield because that is something that should never change unless we run out of men willing or capable of doing the job.

  67. See if you tell the truth they delete your comment . No wonder were in the situation we are in…PC all the way..

  68. Folks Combat was never intended to be fair, the civilized nations of the world have attempted in vain to enforce rules of war! But nobody ever told the bad guys they had to play by the rules? We don't or haven't gone to war with an honorable nation since our own war for independence. What makes liberals, utopians and the like to think that somehow the Foe's we as a nation will encounter are not going to take our New Women Combat troops into account and try to exploit any weakness no matter how unfair? *if this were ever a business proposal, it would get shot down by stock holders. If this was an education proposal (reduced capability with greater expense) every parent would say not for my children. If this were a Gambling casino, Vegas would not take our odds in our favor because it's not logically sound thinking?
    Respectfully,
    A retired NAVY SEAL with combat experience

  69. Women don't have what it takes to serve in front line combat units. Commanders have already lowered the standards to allow them to participate in some of the elite combat leadership schools such as Ranger School. This is a political joke. If this is allowed the standards will be lowered,which in return with make another wise elite force, not so elite anymore. I haven't met a women yet that can carry a 125 lb ruck sack for days over numerous miles, through rough terrain. Is there any females out there that have done this, and is still combat effective? Will a woman be able to dispatch an enemy combatant by striking him with her fists, wrestle him to the ground and choke him until he's dead? Because this maybe required during times of close combat. Can a women pick up a 200 lb man and carry him to safety? Combat is brutal. You wives and mothers out there, how would you feel if your husband or son was killed because the military lowered the standard? Because you do realize that members of elite combat units rely on each other to survive? Just because you lower the standard to allow women to be successful does mean the threat or risk in a high threat area lowers. It doesn't mean the terrorist is going to say, oh they have women on their team, so lets not try and kill them so aggressively". Enough of the women in combat. I think they are serving very well in the positions they hold now. Why die? Why? That's just crazy!

  70. I agree to some extent there toni, the one thing I've agreed with during this whole thread, If they can hack the same…exact…unchanged…and some, insane standards, traditions, and rituals, then so be it, they've earned it like everyone else. But if anyone thinks that squat pissin and shitin in a ditch isn't going to turn the heads of the horny boys that haven't seen a girl (other than her) in the better part of a year is living somewhere other than reality. I agree with everyone that said women would be distracting, no matter how close or how "Soldier" they are. Sexual assaults already exist out there, with many others around. Now put her by herself with a bunch of jacked up, war hardened cock swingers…

  71. This move has been made by the current administration to destroy our national defense capability and not to support equality for women. HE, the great Mislim president, hates the constitution, hates the military and has done everything he can to diminish the role of the US as a super-power; I think he's doing very well.
    This is a moral issue: an honorable nation does not send its mothers, sisters and daughters to fight its nations battles, to do so is morally abhorrent.

  72. Well, why not have just one Olympics. Let everyone compete on same field. If I am fighting along side someone I do not care what their sex, race, orientation is but I want them to be equally combat ready- same standards for everyone and those standards should be equal or better than the enemy forces.

  73. I was an Army trainer in the Non Commisioned Officer Education System (NCOES). I taught PLDC/BNCOC/ANCOC over a 10 year period and became the NCOES Director. To be in this position you had to be 11B qualitified. Our school ran thousands of soldiers thru our courses. In these courses we teach NCO leadership and basic soldier skills. Thru all of this training we found out that only 10% of the females were able perform to the standards need to be and 11B leader. That was it.
    I have worked with many a fine female Enlisted and Officer but in a combat role there are only 10% can hack it.

  74. Notice that the press still reports that ' X women and children were killed when a …' Even where women serve in their country's combat arms, their press says they are counted differently.

  75. Folks Combat was never intended to be fair, the civilized nations of the world have attempted in vain to enforce rules of war! But nobody ever told the bad guys they had to play by the rules? We don't or haven't gone to war with an honorable nation since our own war for independence. What makes liberals, utopians and the like to think that somehow the Foe's we as a nation will encounter are not going to take our New Women Combat troops into account and try to exploit any weakness no matter how unfair? *if this were ever a business proposal, it would get shot down by stock holders. If this was an education proposal (reduced capability with greater expense) every parent would say not for my children. If this were a Gambling casino, Vegas would not take our odds in our favor because it's not logically sound thinking? It is the liberal Left's agenda to bring the honor, integrity, and self esteem of the nation's military under the heel of "Social Equality".

  76. Women join the army knowing what could happen. I think its great that they are doing this. I just joined the army. women can handle their selves. Its a matter of men learning to ttreat us equal. Dont baby us dont try to save us and dont run out and get shot. just do your job and we will do ours. we are very capable of doing everthing you do.

  77. My view is that women do not belong in combat, but with the way the world sees things our opinion dose not mean a thing. we are wrong for thinking that way because it dose not fit the political agenda of today. Remember what was right and true 40 or 50 years ago are wrong today and what was wrong 40 or 50 years ago are now right. You can't fight it. I agree with many of the comments that were given but the true fact is that requirements will change to accomindate the women and in the end we will have a less effective military. Sorry to say. As far as what happens to the women on the battlefield or if captured that is on them they take the same risk as men and for the body bags of women sent home I will feel just as sad as if they were filled with men.

  78. marinemastersgt1 | January 31, 2013 at 2:53 pm |

    no i dont like idea of woman in combat watching my back

  79. I cannot believe this, if you think women can preform in long engaged combat you are very crazy. I am just glad I spend my 25 years and out . Young males and females soldiers cannot live in a foxhole without things happening. Then what? Tax payers money will be wasted on training these women. All the women I knew did not like the field and always got out of the field with sick call excuse. What has changed? Give me a BREAK!!!

  80. Notice anything ironic in your list of topics in above email???
    ———————————————————-

    Navy Pins 1st Nuclear-Qualified Female Submariners
    Troops Debate Risks, Benefits of Women in Combat
    Navy Seeks to Combat Unplanned Pregnancies
    ———–
    yeah.. stuff boys and girls into a small space for a time, and see what transpires..
    ————

  81. MASTERMECH48 | February 1, 2013 at 9:53 pm |

    Women in Combat, professionally and morally a touchy subject. I'm a retired Viet Nam era Navy O4 LDO Engineer. Back in Viet Nam I was enlisted and NOT at sea. Looking back there was no privacy in the field, we could pee on whatever, how is that going being addressed "NOW"? With the military seemingly becoming fiercely PC, would a fella be so concerned of an article 15 because some female saw his penis in the field, that he looses sight of the battle that he becomes a casualty? Put the females in the same situation, when she has to go it is a longer process, greater potential for physical exposure, and how do they intend to handle the "unaddressed compromising situations". This is the type of situation that I would fear more than being shot at. Holy Crap, Captains mast for seeing her bare ass peeing beside the tree. Can the public and the military face the known torture situations other forces have been known to use??? IT ISN'T REAL PRETTY!! My advice to all is, plan for and expose the worst expected situations/conditions. Place ALL THE POSSIBLES on the situation table to be seen, inhale deeeply and charge on. Good Luck. As an after thought, many of the skinny gals would have made "GOOD TUNNEL RATS". In closing, SEX on the field of engagement is one activity that did not even cross my mind, but that is just me.

  82. eeing as how nother Countries alwo women in combat arms I have no objection as long as they can toe the line in all ways and not expect the standards to be cut for them as in combat thee are no ways to cut standards so step up and accept it as is or don't ask to get in.

    Ret U.S. Army

  83. Retired US Cavelry, This is the liberal agenda .Some one put them in power. God save the USA.

  84. Topic at Hand | February 2, 2013 at 7:38 pm |

    You are so insecure about a female soldier working with your husband that you are going to claim EVERY female soldier plays games and is a "home wrecker"! A home wrecker takes two. Lol, seriously your own insecurities are that big. If your Infantryman has deployed then he has worked or been around females and female soldiers, whether you want to acknowledge that or not. What goes on in your marriage and your insecurities is your problem/ business and has nothing to do with this Topic. There are people who f&@k others over of both genders open your eyes, do a little reading and research. At least develop your own opinion based on information not your lack of self confidence and fear that he would be around other women. Your one insecure opinion is hardly the numbers down the forces, grow up.

  85. As a retired military veteran, I can honestly say I'd never have the confidence in women in a combat role when one's comrades-in-arms are counting on them to engage an enemy combatant with dispassionate use of deadly force and violence. I do not believe women have the psychological makeup to use deadly force and necessary violence required in a combat role under intense enviromental conditions and often encountered under very austere circumstances.

  86. Isn't this page called "SpouseBuzz?" So isn't it supposed to be a forum for the spouses of those who serve so they can have a community and a voice? Because scrolling through the comments that are against women in combat, I notice most of them are from men. So…are all you guys spouses of women in uniform? Or are you in uniform and speaking for your spouses? And, if so, there's something ironically consistent about believing it's proper that men should fight AND speak for their spouses, lol. Donchya think? ;) Kinda says it all right there, when you think about it…

  87. vocalvarieties | February 19, 2013 at 9:10 pm |

    Sounds dandy! By the way, if women can serve in combat, then they should be required to register for the draft. Let's see how motivated people are then…

Comments are closed.