Pentagon to end ban on women in front-line combat

BBC

US Defence Secretary Leon Panetta has decided to lift the military's ban on women serving in combat, a senior Pentagon official has said.

The move could open hundreds of thousands of frontline positions and elite commando jobs to women.

It overturns a 1994 rule prohibiting women from being assigned to small ground-combat units.

But the military would have until 2016 to argue for any specific posts they think should remained closed to women.

The decision is expected to be formally announced on Thursday.

[Osem]

Good. In this age of equality I have no issues with this. It'll be interesting to see how many take up the challenge.

The practical reasons why women where not allowed to serve in front line combat have not disappeared though so i don't really understand the sudden change except to pacify feminist groups

[Osem]

Originally Posted by martyh

The practical reasons why women where not allowed to serve in front line combat have not disappeared though so i don't really understand the sudden change except to pacify feminist groups

Nah they developed smudge proof make-up and unbreakable mirrors years ago matey.

Originally Posted by martyh

The practical reasons why women where not allowed to serve in front line combat have not disappeared though so i don't really understand the sudden change except to pacify feminist groups

there is only the period and it only takes a few seconds to pop a new one in. Women also would make great front line troops specially the week before aforementioned period when they will happily kill anyone. But I guess as long as the military add chocolate to the rations it can be moderated lol

Originally Posted by Osem

Nah they developed smudge proof make-up and unbreakable mirrors years ago matey.

If that was the issue then no problem but camouflaging those handbags can be a bugger

Seriously though ,the very practical reasons why women should not be allowed on the front line are still there and will never go away ,a lot more thought needs to go into this by the US generals

Originally Posted by martyh

If that was the issue then no problem but camouflaging those handbags can be a bugger

Seriously though ,the very practical reasons why women should not be allowed on the front line are still there and will never go away ,a lot more thought needs to go into this by the US generals

a lot of women on the pill or implants have no painters visit or only ones with a matchpot

[Gary L]

Originally Posted by Osem

It'll be interesting to see how many take up the challenge.

Most of the butch ones. and less of the pretty ones.

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

there is only the period and it only takes a few seconds to pop a new one in. Women also would make great front line troops specially the week before aforementioned period when they will happily kill anyone. But I guess as long as the military add chocolate to the rations it can be moderated lol

Totally wrong .Women are not allowed on front line combat duties for a variety of very good reasons .What happens if the woman is in the early stages of pregnancy and doesn't realise it ,what happens if infantry men/women are in a relationship and front line decisions end up being based on what's good for the boyfriend/girlfriend instead of the platoon .These are just some of the more important important reasons why women should never be allowed on front line duties

[Sirius]

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

there is only the period and it only takes a few seconds to pop a new one in. Women also would make great front line troops specially the week before aforementioned period when they will happily kill anyone. But I guess as long as the military add chocolate to the rations it can be moderated lol

There is chocolate in the rations

---------- Post added at 10:42 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------

One reason we were given when i was in the army was the natural reaction of a man is to aid an injured women, this could raise issues in a combat situation where taking out the enemy comes first before medical help.

Originally Posted by martyh

Totally wrong .Women are not allowed on front line combat duties for a variety of very good reasons .What happens if the woman is in the early stages of pregnancy and doesn't realise it ,what happens if infantry men/women are in a relationship and front line decisions end up being based on what's good for the boyfriend/girlfriend instead of the platoon .These are just some of the more important important reasons why women should never be allowed on front line duties

well it's now 2013 what if 2 of the squaddies were in a relationship? pretty much nulls out your reasoning there does it not??

The pregnancy thing would be rare really if she engaged in unprotected sex or any form of sex a simple medical prior to moving to front line will sort that one out.So all women going front line banned from sex for a couple of weeks first then have to have a medical then if they are preggers its just bad luck imo. So its still the period which as I said could be controlled so in reality no reason for them not to fight if they want to

---------- Post added at 10:51 ---------- Previous post was at 10:49 ----------

Originally Posted by Sirius

There is chocolate in the rations

---------- Post added at 10:42 ---------- Previous post was at 10:37 ----------

One reason we were given when i was in the army was the natural reaction of a man is to aid an injured women, this could raise issues in a combat situation where taking out the enemy comes first before medical help.

of all the reasons given so far this one is the only one makes real sense

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

well it's now 2013 what if 2 of the squaddies were in a relationship? pretty much nulls out your reasoning there does it not?

No it doesn't at all .What would you do if your wife/girlfriend was shot in front of you,taken hostage or wounded.The risk of compromising other soldiers is far too great .How would you tell someone you where in a relationship with that they had to go on a mission they may not come back from ?.

The pregnancy thing would be rare really if she engaged in unprotected sex or any form of sex a simple medical prior to moving to front line will sort that one out.So all women going front line banned from sex for a couple of weeks first then have to have a medical then if they are preggers its just bad luck imo. So its still the period which as I said could be controlled so in reality no reason for them not to fight if they want to

Haven't really thought that through have you

same as I would if my boyfriend was shot and I was gay

yes I did tell me where I am wrong

the army would have to be pretty stupid to team up partners anyway.Also you seem to be inferring our soldiers are not very professional

Originally Posted by tizmeinnit

same as I would if my boyfriend was shot and I was gay

yes I did tell me where I am wrong

the army would have to be pretty stupid to team up partners anyway.Also you seem to be inferring our soldiers are not very professional

What about when the relationship starts on a tour of duty ? What about when a man fancies a woman even though there is no actual relationship

Also you seem to be inferring our soldiers are not very professional

We are talking about US soldiers(unless you are a yank) ,the British army rejected equality in the ranks back in 2010 for exactly the reasons i have outlined here .Professionalism only goes so far when your partner has just been blown up

same thing can be said about a man and a man though so again you are wasting your time following that track with me. What about best friend or brother? Sexist mate your saying a man can't love a man the same as a man loves a woman

Then the British Army is sexist everything can be sorted as far as pregnancy is concerned and checking before deployment is not hard to do.