Quizzes & Puzzles6 mins ago
Should women fight on the front line?
65 Answers
http://tinyurl.com/2bxt9ma
The question that should be asked is, do Women really want to fight on the 'front line', or is it just a cop-out because men could charge the MOD with discrimination against men, (why should men put their lives at risk, but not women?
Because of this new ruling, should Male soldiers now be paid more than female soldiers, due to the increased risks that are involved in by the men?
The question that should be asked is, do Women really want to fight on the 'front line', or is it just a cop-out because men could charge the MOD with discrimination against men, (why should men put their lives at risk, but not women?
Because of this new ruling, should Male soldiers now be paid more than female soldiers, due to the increased risks that are involved in by the men?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Women on the Front Line, there are many types of 'front line', but obviously whats being discussed is what I would call 'the fighting front line' and the answer is no, it has to be, for a number of reasons, and this doess not in anway detract from their capabilities or bravery.
In most cases, a womans upper body strength is nowhere near the males, generally, they cannot run as fast as a man, cannot carry the same load as a man.
Sex, regardless of the intentions, a woman in close proximity to a man, sex, in one form or another will rear its head, and a woman will be a distraction, and a big divisive influence, also a man and a woman cannot form the same 'Buddy Buddy' relationship that men can, and do form,
Women do have imprtant roles to play in the forces, but please, not in the fighting front line.
In most cases, a womans upper body strength is nowhere near the males, generally, they cannot run as fast as a man, cannot carry the same load as a man.
Sex, regardless of the intentions, a woman in close proximity to a man, sex, in one form or another will rear its head, and a woman will be a distraction, and a big divisive influence, also a man and a woman cannot form the same 'Buddy Buddy' relationship that men can, and do form,
Women do have imprtant roles to play in the forces, but please, not in the fighting front line.
/// It depends on what is meant by the front line. Very few men serve in the front line and even there physical strength is rarely required.///
So physical strength is really required eh?
Have you ever been in the armed forces let alone on the front line?
Why even as I type there are young men out on exercise in this country, Salisbury Plain, Yorkshire Moors, or Brecon in Wales.
They are sleeping out in the open in all this snow, with little more to keep therm warm except a snow filled sleeping bag, just think of that when you are wrapping your winter weight duvet around you tonight.
Or one could be running, walking, climbing, crawling over various obstacles, carrying nearly 10 stone of equipment in the searing Afghanistan sun.
Yes, not only great physical strength is needed but also great mental strength.
So physical strength is really required eh?
Have you ever been in the armed forces let alone on the front line?
Why even as I type there are young men out on exercise in this country, Salisbury Plain, Yorkshire Moors, or Brecon in Wales.
They are sleeping out in the open in all this snow, with little more to keep therm warm except a snow filled sleeping bag, just think of that when you are wrapping your winter weight duvet around you tonight.
Or one could be running, walking, climbing, crawling over various obstacles, carrying nearly 10 stone of equipment in the searing Afghanistan sun.
Yes, not only great physical strength is needed but also great mental strength.
I get fed up with the media's fixation on 'the front line'. There is no such thing anymore. Afg is a 360deg, asymmetric conflict. Which means everyone who goes outside the wire is on a front line of sorts.
However, in the units designated to close in on the enemy and specifically seek out contacts then women can be a problem. They are (in general) not strong enough or fast enough to keep up. They can also cause rifts in the cohesion of a unit.
Men will instinctively protect women, it's not sexist, it's nature. However, sometimes whilst under contact, you have to ignore the injured screams of your mate in order to accomplish the mission. Having that mate being a young girl makes it even worse.
Sex and attraction will also be a problem, and one that is best avoided.
The risks to the woman are greater if she is captured by the enemy. Rape etc.
The medical risks to a woman if she falls pregnant increase, as well as the risks to the foetus.
Israel tried to include women into combat units a few years back, and the end result was a less-capable but politically correct army. You need to decide what you want. An Army that fulfils employment criteria but is not combat effective; or an army that contravenes equality but is more capable in conflict. You choose, because you cannot have both.
For those that are not aware, men and women have different fitness test, with the womens being a lot easier than the mens.
However, in the units designated to close in on the enemy and specifically seek out contacts then women can be a problem. They are (in general) not strong enough or fast enough to keep up. They can also cause rifts in the cohesion of a unit.
Men will instinctively protect women, it's not sexist, it's nature. However, sometimes whilst under contact, you have to ignore the injured screams of your mate in order to accomplish the mission. Having that mate being a young girl makes it even worse.
Sex and attraction will also be a problem, and one that is best avoided.
The risks to the woman are greater if she is captured by the enemy. Rape etc.
The medical risks to a woman if she falls pregnant increase, as well as the risks to the foetus.
Israel tried to include women into combat units a few years back, and the end result was a less-capable but politically correct army. You need to decide what you want. An Army that fulfils employment criteria but is not combat effective; or an army that contravenes equality but is more capable in conflict. You choose, because you cannot have both.
For those that are not aware, men and women have different fitness test, with the womens being a lot easier than the mens.
Steg, the use of Russian snipers during WW2 is not really a transferable argument. A WW2 sniper in Russia was in a static position, and made use of short movements and cover. No such thing as static nowadays I'm afraid. The other thing with the russians was that everyone fought, not just the infantry. All members of the armed forces (Army, RN or RAF) are taught fieldcraft, can all shoot, and can all operate in a combat enviroment. Difference being that the infantry are taught to a much greater level, and exercise those skills a lot more often than the non-combat arms
Different types of army Everton. VC was a guerilla army, fighting in their own enviroment (ie Jungle). They didn't need to carry much equipment or ammo, and they died in far greater numbers (I can't remember the figures from Vietnam, but the North Vietnamese lost a lot more combattents than the US did. They just had a greater tolerance for casualty figures). The Russians and the Chinese were exactly the same. Soviet doctrine during the Cold War was that you threw men and machines at NATO until you could break through the lines. If you lost thousands of soldiers and vehicles, never mind, because there are thousands more to take their place.
We do not operate like that (thank god!), the West is casualty averse and media-driven.
We do not operate like that (thank god!), the West is casualty averse and media-driven.
Hmm, a soldier knows intheir heart what they want to do, I'm paraphrasing a fine epitaph.
One of my best mates was a gunner in Germany during The Cold War, his standing order was to fight until the Americans arrived, their life expectancy in the event of an invasion was about 40 minutes, or something like that.
Sadly all soldiers are expendable, how expendable is dependent on the war aims or success in the field.
If you look at the casualty figures after D-Day you'll see they're not far off WW1 rates of attrition.
One of my best mates was a gunner in Germany during The Cold War, his standing order was to fight until the Americans arrived, their life expectancy in the event of an invasion was about 40 minutes, or something like that.
Sadly all soldiers are expendable, how expendable is dependent on the war aims or success in the field.
If you look at the casualty figures after D-Day you'll see they're not far off WW1 rates of attrition.
During WW2 we were more similar to the 'modern' Soviet model, and the Germans were more similar to the modern NATO model. IE we threw men and material at the enemy till we overwhelmed them. The Germans used better equipment and soldiering skills to fight. After the war, we went along the route of better but less (ie one Abrams or Challenger tank was equivalant to 3 or 4 Soviet T-62 or T-72s, and one Britsih infantry platoon could muster the same firepower as one Soviet infantry company). That thinking is still central to the NATO model.
We believe in quality over quantity, and that means the best possible scenario. Thus, no place (yet) for women in combat units.
We believe in quality over quantity, and that means the best possible scenario. Thus, no place (yet) for women in combat units.
When I first left school I wanted to join the military but, as a female, was steered away from it. I am glad that I didn't pursue it as a career choice.
Not everybody, male or female, is suited to such a life. The recruits are trained to kill or be killed, to defend their country even if the military strategy is beyond their understanding.
As a female I feel that women who wish to fight on the front line should get to do so.
As a realist I realise that it isn't going to happen in my lifetime. Much has changed for women in the 30 years since I left school but if the fact that women and men are unable to work together on the front line without problem risks people being killed then it should not happen.
There are some scary women out there in the big bad world.
Not everybody, male or female, is suited to such a life. The recruits are trained to kill or be killed, to defend their country even if the military strategy is beyond their understanding.
As a female I feel that women who wish to fight on the front line should get to do so.
As a realist I realise that it isn't going to happen in my lifetime. Much has changed for women in the 30 years since I left school but if the fact that women and men are unable to work together on the front line without problem risks people being killed then it should not happen.
There are some scary women out there in the big bad world.
Wolf, if you want true equality for women in the mob, then the media should be your starting point. Remember a few years back when a group of Sailors and Marines were captured by the Iranians. Who was the media focussed on? The only woman in the group! Never mind the other 11 (i think) blokes who were also in captivity.
A mate of mine was the first woman to die in combat in Afg. Three other blokes died with her. What was the paper headlines?
Why is the death or capture of a woman more significant?
A mate of mine was the first woman to die in combat in Afg. Three other blokes died with her. What was the paper headlines?
Why is the death or capture of a woman more significant?
bobjugs - I admit that the it annoys me when the media highlight a female's involvement in a military incident and ignore all the males.
I am sure that the young women of today can fight the good fight with the government or military if they wish to pursue this issue. Let's face it there are very few areas where women can't work these days and we can't be too greedy.
Personally I don't think that women in general have the aggression or killer instinct to fight on the front line. But as I said - there are some scary women out there!
I am sure that the young women of today can fight the good fight with the government or military if they wish to pursue this issue. Let's face it there are very few areas where women can't work these days and we can't be too greedy.
Personally I don't think that women in general have the aggression or killer instinct to fight on the front line. But as I said - there are some scary women out there!
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles8 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles15 mins ago
Who Provide An Extensive Range Of...
How it Works22 mins ago