Chicks in combat? What's next?

I've been lucky enough to have known strong and capable women over the years. Also blessed to have been twice married to this type of woman. As to physical strength I watched a navy nurse come off the nest boat and grab up a bleeding and unconscious marine in a fireman’s carry and take him off a pbr boat and onto the quay not because she was proving a point but because she got there first and understood the navy phrase "turn to". Also met several nurses from WWII and Korea who were thrown into roles under fire. One of these women had quite a record in WWII but never heard any stories from her. I did hear them from her husband, himself a veteran of the CBI theatre as a army air corp. mechanic. If you look back in history you will find women have been in combat since long before this country was founded. I agree with bfayer, if she wants a chance give it to her. I've known women who I would be happy having on my six and men I would rather shoot myself rather than trust them in a combat situation. Just an old mans opinion.

 

Good points all. I don't advocate preventing women from performing in such roles. I just don't think they fully realize what the consequences can be. Once a few of them do in a very real way, they may go public with it and most who were thinking about it will be dissuaded when given the choice.

 

It's a volunteer army so far so it will still be a matter of choice whether or not to serve. There have been enough female KIA and WIA documented and publicised, that the reality of death, disability or disfigurement ought not be such a surprise to prospective female enlistees...though perhaps 20 something females are not too different to 20 something males...20' tall, bullet proof and immortal. Not many women are likely to take on until recently restricted combat roles, but if they meet the eligibility requirements to the same standards as the men, then they should be given the opportunity to apply and be fairly assessed for the billet.



http://1234marinescorps.tumblr.com/image/43276815500

 

I understand where you're coming from, but what you are talking about has already happened.

You need to make a visit to Bethesda, it will make you cry, but will also change your view. I have talked to women and men there that have only one goal in mind, and that is to get put back together and get back to duty.

Once you talk to one of these women service members with a missing leg and find out their plan is to stay on active duty and get back to their unit ASAP, I think your outlook will change.

 

Point well taken.

I've seen interviews of young men in that situation with that inner strength and great attitude of which you speak. Any woman dedicated enough to do this in the first place would probably take the same stance.

 

Being physically broken by war will undoubtedly crush some....both men, and women...but there are many men and women with fortitude and resiliance that is simply astounding. There are some who would strap themselves to a pogo stick to get back to their unit and their buddies.

 

Wounded Female Soldier | America's North Shore Journal

USATODAY.com - Female amputees make clear that all troops are on front lines

These and many other women have done their duty and continue to do their duty, knowing what the risks and the consequences of their service are. More power to them and their male comrades.

Edit: there was one site containing extremely graphic images of severely wounded soldiers (including at least one female), suffering from gunshot, shrapnel and blast trauma. I chose not to include a link to it, because the soldiers' modesty was not protected, individual soldiers' identities were clearly apparent, and it was not clear that informed consent had been given by the injured for the images to be published publicly. Never the less, the images are a salutary lesson of the harm that soldiers can sometimes come to, and give an insight to the suffering that many have experienced in the service of their country. The web-page in question is not difficult to find using google. The images are not for the faint hearted, and any veteran suffering from PTSD ought seek support before viewing...the images are quite disturbing.

 

How many other things will the Obama administration push past the Rubicon?

Women in Combat: Another Nail in the Coffin - Taki's Magazine

On January 23, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta lifted the ban on women in combat. He gave the generals three years to open up all positions to women, and if any of them think there is a job women can’t do, they’ll have to explain themselves.
The combat arms—infantry, armor, and artillery—are closed to women for good reasons: They can’t do the job, and they keep men from doing the job.
Drones and laser-guided munitions haven’t changed things for a grunt: You still have to run up hills with an 80-pound pack, live in dirt for weeks, and hump 96-pound 155mm artillery shells onto the back of a truck. Your buddies count on you to carry them out of the fight if they are wounded, and they can’t count on someone with half the upper-body strength of a man.
An extensive 1994 Army study of men and women—written by a woman—discovered the obvious: “The average woman does not have the same physical capacity, nor can she be trained to have the same physical capacity as the average man.” There were tests with practically no overlap. On Maximum Lifting Strength, the worst 2 percent of men were at the 92nd percentile for women.
Soldiers may have to kill or be killed at close quarters. All your enemy needs is an extra inch of reach, an extra pound of muscle, or an extra burst of speed, and he will use that advantage to kill you. No one is talking about putting women on professional sports teams—we might lose a game!—but the military is now asking for weak links that could get the whole squad killed.
Last year, a lady Marine captain named Katie Petronio wrote an article for the Marine Corps Gazette called “Get Over It! We Are Not All Created Equal.” She is a pretty tough gal—she says she could bench-press 145 pounds and squat 200 pounds—but when she worked with men in the field, “the rate of my deterioration was noticeably faster than that of male Marines.”
“A soldier’s job is to find the enemy and kill him—yes, him—not to be part of a giant experiment in egalitarian fantasy.”
She writes that if women join up, the infantry is “going to experience a colossal increase in crippling and career-ending medical conditions for females.” Some of these toy soldiers will break before they even see the enemy and then spend their lives drawing disability pay they don’t deserve.
Women in combat? Combat means close quarters. During the 2003 Iraq invasion, Marine Ryan Smith rode in an amphibious assault vehicle designed for 15 men. There were breakdowns and “by the end of the invasion we had as many as 25 men stuffed into the back.” They went 48 straight hours in the vehicle with no sanitation, and men got dysentery. “When an uncontrollable urge hit a Marine, he would be forced to stand, as best he could, hold an MRE [meals ready to eat] bag up to his rear, and defecate inches from his seated comrade’s face.”

When they got to Baghdad:

We had not showered in well over a month and our chemical protective suits were covered in a mixture of filth and dried blood. We were told to strip and place our suits in pits to be burned immediately. My unit stood there…naked, sores dotted all over our bodies, feet peeling, watching our suits burn. Later, they lined us up naked and washed us off with pressure washers.​

Squad Leader Smith does not want women in combat.

As ex-Marine John Luddy explained in a Heritage Foundation report, there are other reasons why women don’t belong at the front:

n the one historical case where women were deliberately placed in combat—in Israel during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War—they were removed within weeks. The reason: It was clear that men reacted to the presence of women by trying to protect them and aiding them when they became casualties instead of continuing to attack. The Israelis also learned that unit morale was seriously damaged when men saw women killed and injured on the battlefield.​

Men take crazy risks to make sure women are not captured and to rescue them if they are. Remember Jessica Lynch, the 100-pound supply clerk who got into a traffic accident during the Iraq invasion and was taken prisoner? The Army told colossal lies about her Rambo-style knife fight with Iraqis—she went down on her knees to pray and never fired a shot—and then went to absurd lengths to get her back. There was a diversionary battle to draw off Iraqi troops, and a joint team of Delta Force, Army Rangers, Navy Seals, and Air Force Pararescue Jumpers—with much better things to do—snatched her from a hospital that turned out to be unguarded.

PFC Lynch was lucky. She fell into the hands of a regular Army that treated her well. But what would the Taliban do with a captured American woman? Gang-rape her, for sure. Then would she disappear into the most wretched brothel in Afghanistan or come back mutilated and pregnant and a psychological wreck?
Finally, there is sex. As one Marine Corps veteran
explains, “Male bonding is what takes the hill. And male bonding just doesn’t happen with women around.”
A soldier recently put it this way on a Web page:

The Infantry squad is, hands friggen’ down, the backbone of any armed conflict. They can do anything, anywhere, anytime—because the lives of their buddies depend on it. The bond between men in an Infantry squad is like no other….The addition of women would utterly turn the squad’s level of cohesion and unity upside-down faster than anything. The female would become the center of attention, and the butt-end of every joke. Morale would be a crushing weight dragging the squad down into the dirt.​

It destroys what the Army calls “group cohesion” if a man has been jilted by the squad tart and then has to listen to her squealing all night in someone else’s foxhole.
The military hands out condoms as if they were candy, but accidents happen. In the 1990s,
Navy Captain Martha Whitehead testified before a military commission that women were three times more likely to be “non-deployable” than men, and that 47 percent of the time it was because they were pregnant.
In 2009, so many pregnant lady soldiers were being evacuated from Iraq that Major General Anthony Cucolo ordered a court martial and possible jail time for any woman in his command who got pregnant—and for the man responsible. “I’ve got a mission to do.” he said. “I’m given a finite number of soldiers with which to do it and I need every one of them.”
There are other problems. From 2006 to 2011, the rate of violent sex crimes in the military shot up 64 percent, with an estimated 19,000 sexual assaults in 2010 alone. Women are 14 percent of Army personnel but are 95 percent of sex-crime victims. (The Army warns there will be more cases of men raping men now that homosexuals don’t have to worry about being kicked out, but that is a different problem.)
General Martin Dempsey, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, says he thinks women in combat will help solve the problem of sexual harassment. He pushed Leon Panetta very hard to lift the ban. “I have to believe,” he explains, “that the more we can treat people equally, the more likely they are to treat each other equally.” This is certifiably insane.

A man in fighting trim runs on testosterone. That is what makes him an effective killer; it also makes him think about sex every minute of the day. Putting women on the battlefield is like shoving the cheerleaders into the locker room with the team after a football game and locking the doors.

Combat troops are young men who kill people for a living. In the all-volunteer Army they are there because they like killing people. The military throws young women at them and is shocked—shocked—to discover that the men don’t always behave like gentlemen. So the Navy has
mandatory anti-sex-assault training for every sailor, and the Army has SHARP (Sexual Harassment/Assault Response & Prevention). They don’t change their idiotic policies; they try to change men.
When Leon Panetta made his announcement, President Obama was delighted:

Today, every American can be proud that our military will grow even stronger with our mothers, wives, sisters and daughters playing a greater role in protecting this country we love.​

He got it exactly backward. Men go to war precisely so that their mothers, wives, sisters, and daughters don’t have to go. War is ultimately about national survival. Half the men could die in combat but if women survive, the men who are left can keep the nation going. A society that sends child-bearers into combat has gone mad.
Secretary of the Army Togo West once said that keeping women out of combat slows their promotions and prevents them “from reaching their full potential.” The only men who talk like that wear ribbons instead of helmets. A soldier’s job is to find the enemy and kill him—yes, him—not to be part of a giant experiment in egalitarian fantasy. Only degenerate countries put women in combat.

Of course, it will work for a while—with higher casualties, grinding inefficiencies, and endless lies and cover-ups. But when the century draws to a close and the Chinese write the history of what used to be the United States, they will note that it was a sure sign the place was doomed when the American soldier became a social worker with a rifle instead of a professional killer.

 

I figure so long as they get rid of differential standards then theres no reason not to let females in any role they can meet standards for. I do however figure that PT standards need to be set based on real world needs, able to carry wounded out of harms way, cover ground with required gear in alotted time, get over obstacles, etc. and male, female or undecided, if you cant meet those standards you dont qualify. To me if you reduce the walls or give boxes for some, reduce loads, increase times etc it either means the qualifications are totaly arbitrary and pointless OR that you are putting those meeting the lowered standards and those serving with them in unreasonable danger by putting unqualifyed individuals in positions where they dont belong.

I know some wemon who I wouldnt hesitate to trust with my back in a combat enviroment but those females also dont need the 'girly' push ups and reduced standards that have been in place up to now.

 

2 female Marines unable to complete demanding officer course

By Courtney Kube, Pentagon Producer, NBC News
WASHINGTON -- Two female officers entered the demanding Marine Infantry Officer Course this week — only the second time in the history of the course that women have been allowed to compete to become ground combat leaders — but neither passed the grueling obstacle course on Thursday, military officials said.

The women made it through the first few days of the course.

Of the 110 students who began the course this week, 96 are still enrolled — the women were joined by 12 of their Marine brothers who also failed to complete the obstacle course entirely or could not complete it in the time allotted.

The Marine Infantry Officer Course is 10 weeks of intense field training at Quantico, Va. Marines are tested to endure rigorous physical tests and written exams with little food or sleep, all of which push the men and women to their physical and mental limits. About 400 Marines take the course each year, and one in four drops out.

In January, former Defense Secretary Leon Panetta directed the U.S. military chiefs to study whether more combat-related jobs could be open to women.

The military services must report back to Chuck Hagel, Panetta's successor, with their findings by May 15.

Months before Panetta’s directive, the Marine Corps asked for women to volunteer to try the course as part of the ongoing effort to open more military billets to women.

So far four women have volunteered, but none have successfully completed the course.

Two female lieutenants entered the course last September — the first women ever allowed to do so. While both women eventually dropped the course, one of them made it well into the second week before an injury forced her out.

The two women who volunteered for this latest round will not likely be the last. A U.S. military official tells NBC News that five more female Marines are already waiting in the wings to enter the course this summer.

 

I fully agree that women should be allowed to do anything that men are, but they should be able to do the SAME JOB. If they can't cut it, they should get out. Part of why I'm working a desk job. Sweating for someone else never appealed to me, but I REALLY should've gone into the service, and not let my aunt talk me out of it.

 

Women Break Ground in Combat Roles

Apr 01, 2013
Fayetteville (N.C.) Observer| by Drew Brooks


The question of whether women can serve in Army roles previously restricted to men is being answered on Fort Bragg, where the male-only world of artillery has opened to female soldiers.

Last summer, the 18th Fires Brigade began a pilot program aimed at introducing female officers to what were once all-male units.

The program began even before then-Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced the repeal of rules against women serving in male-only positions.

Nearly a year later, the brigade is preparing to break ground again when it receives the first female-enlisted soldiers in an artillery unit in May.

Five women officers now serve in the 18th Fires Brigade.

One, 1st Lt. Shannon Syphus, said she fell in love with artillery while at officer candidate school more than three years ago. At the time, Syphus said, she did not know she was barred from commanding a cannon platoon.

But that changed with the 18th Fires Brigade. Syphus took leadership of 1st Platoon, C Battery, 3rd Battalion, 321st Airborne Field Artillery Regiment, in November. "I didn't know prior that it wasn't open," Syphus said. "But I just fell in love. I can get on the radio and call for fire and something explodes. I love the technical aspects -- the math and the precision. You can't find that with any other job in the Army."

Since joining the unit, Syphus said, she has been treated with nothing but respect.
Artillerymen have to be strong enough to lift a 100-pound, 155 mm round.

They also have to know physics, math and meteorology to make the calculations necessary to put a round on target from miles away.

Sgt. Justin Clawson, a gun chief in Syphus' platoon, was convinced she would not be able to cut it. "This is an all-male world," Clawson said. "I really felt a female couldn't do what we do. But she changed the entire battery's mind. "I know she can lead us."

Capt. Rusty Varnado, a brigade spokesman, said Syphus and the other female officers are treated no different than their male counterparts. "She is in the same position I was when I was a lieutenant," he said. "The soldiers just see a lieutenant, and the women do just as well, if not better, than the guys."

Lt. Col. Joe Bookard, commander of the 3rd Battalion, 321st Airborne Field Artillery Regiment, said Syphus is a role model to female soldiers. "We expect her to know her job," Bookard said. "It's a tough certification process. She performs very, very well."

Bookard said there was little concern that problems would arise from having a woman take command of 40 male soldiers used to living in the male-only artillery world. "In my business, we don't work off gut feelings. We work off facts," he said.

The brigade commander, Col. Robert Morschauser, agreed. "There were some integration issues people said we may have, but we've had no issues whatsoever," he said. "They've done very well."

Morschauser, who saw women pulling more than their own weight when called to do so in combat situations in Iraq, said he wants the best soldiers, no matter their gender.
"I'm looking for the best unit," he said. "I don't care what you look like."

Syphus is fit, articulate and smart, officials said.

She's also no stranger to being surrounded by males. One of eight children, the native of Pasadena, Calif., has seven brothers.

She was one of only three women to graduate in her 150-person class at the field artillery basic officer leadership course. "Being around the guys is no big deal," she said. "As long as we don't pay attention to the fact that we're different, the guys don't care."

Syphus credited her command for helping her realize one of her career goals, and she looks forward to having other female soldiers realize they can do anything they want. "I see the artillery world opening up," she said. "Not only artillery, but the Army world."

 

St Barbara would approve!

 

I remember a line from "GI Jane"---they are not the problem(women)--we are". Another from the same movie was "Could you have pulled that 170 man out of that tank when you could not pull your own body weight from the water"? My son was told not to return fire on a RPG location until targets presented themselves--he disobeyed, fired on the smoke trail, and blew several bodies into the air. The Lt. was a woman telling him to hold his fire. If they want to be PC let them stay the hell in the home. If they want to be soldiers then let them cut some throats like we have to. There is no place on the battle field for pansies or those not willing to do what it takes to destroy the enemy.

 

Via: Women to 'try before they buy' combat roles

DSTO > News > Push-ups no match for combat



Female combatives training:

 

Nothing in your story has anything to do with the fact the Lt. was a woman, and most likely everything to do with the ROEs that the Lt. was given by her CO, who was most likely a man.

I could tell the same story and spin it to demonstrate that men obviously don't know how to follow orders and should really stay home if they can't. Following orders is kind of expected in the service.

When junior folks start replacing the judgement of their superiors with their own judgement, bad things almost always happen.

 

First Female Marines to Graduate Infantry Training
Nov 19, 2013
Stars and Stripes

For the first time, four female Marines have successfully completed the service's enlisted infantry training and will graduate from the program, the Marine Corps Times is reporting.

The four were among a group of 15 enlisted women who were the first to participate in a Marine Corps study to determine which ground combat jobs should be open to women.

The Marines' enlisted infantry training includes a grueling 20-kilometer hike wearing more than 80 pounds of gear. Seven women began the Oct. 28 hike. Three women and 26 of 246 men did not finish it, the Marines said.

Throughout the infantry training, the women were held to the same standards as men, including performing full pull-ups instead of a flexed-arm hang during the physical fitness test, the Marine Corps Times said.

The four women are assigned to Delta Company, Infantry Training Battalion, a part of the Marine Corps School of Infantry-East.

The four female Marines will graduate this week from the training course at Camp Geiger, N.C. However, they will not be assigned to infantry units and will not recieve an infantry occupational specialty, the Marine Corps Times said. Instead, their graduation from enlisted infantry training will be noted in their records as part of the years-long Marine Corps study.


First Female Marines to Graduate Infantry Training | Military.com