The Reality That Awaits Women in Combat

[JakeStarkey]

Some are being downright stupid here. You wear the uniform, you carry a weapon, you get shot at, you are in combat. This is not difficult, not rocket science, and the Russian women who fought in WWII in combat arms or Israeli female soldiers since then would have had little trouble dealing with some of the silliness exhibited here in this thread.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Since 97B ceased to exist as an MOS years ago, I'll asume you haven't been in the military in a long time and have no idea what combat ops currently look like.

However, I will give you a hint, a Soldier does not have to hold a combat MOS to be in combat, especially in COIN.

I am curious of one thing though, as a counter-intelligence specialist, you're not authorized to wear a CIB. How exactly did you pull that off?

you are absolutely correct. I joined the Army in January of 1966 and left In 1986. I joined as an 11B, did a tour in Viet-Nam, wounded at Quang Tri and in 1972 switched to 97B. I went to WO School at Fort Huachuca, trained at Fort Dietrich and Bolling AFB, and served at Heidleberg, Mannheim, Berlin and at 5 different consulates in Eastern Europe. I retired as a Chief Warrant Officer in July 1986.

I RARELY ever had to dress in Class As, but when the occasion arose, My wings and my CIB were on my uniform, a well as my Combat Unit, And unit Citations.

Additionally, I completely understand that the military has changed. I ave no doubt that women have killed the enemy with their weapons. However, as of YET, there are no women serving in any combat MOS.

Answer your question?

Whether or not a woman is serving in a combat MOS is meaningless to the discussion.

Women, especially MPs and Medics, are on patrol on the streets of Afghanistan and were on patrol in Iraq and in these duties, served in combat. Many were wounded and some were killed in these ops.

There really aren't anymore "frontlines" per se, especially in counter insurgency operations. Therefore a Soldier, male or female, does not have to hold a traditional combat MOS to participate in combat ops on a regular basis.

That's not the point, and you ought to know it. No one is doubting the courage of women. No one is doubting their ability to be present in a combat theater. There is a fundamental difference between Combat Arms and every other MOS and further, there is a more fundamental difference between Infantry and EVERYONE else!

How many years do you think an average 5'4" woman weighting 125 pounds, humping 95+ pounds worth of equipment is going to do? We're not talking about doing it once or twice we're talking about combat for a year. But, Infantry for an enlistment 4+ years minimum. I assume we want some to actually become NCOs so make that 15 - 20 years of humping yamas with a backbreaking ruck on. Yeah, right!

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Some are being downright stupid here. You wear the uniform, you carry a weapon, you get shot at, you are in combat. This is not difficult, not rocket science, and the Russian women who fought in WWII in combat arms or Israeli female soldiers since then would have had little trouble dealing with some of the silliness exhibited here in this thread.

As of 24 January, exactly 100 women have been killed by enemy fire in Iraq and Afghanistan.

They've been serving, fighting and dying for this country, as much as many chauvenists want to disparage their service.

 

[Tech_Esq]

You're aware that women are taking part in combat ops as we speak, and have been since the insurgency began in Iraq, right?

Doing what, exactly, Cowboy? CS, CSS? Is their current mission to "Find, Fix and Destroy the Enemy on the battlefield?" If not, what is their current mission? I'm not asking you where they do it, I'm asking what the mission is that they are required to fulfill.

Read FM 3-24.

There is no real "enemy on the battlefield." We're conducting COIN. That's about it. As such, women are and have been on patrol as well as involved in raids on suspected terrorist and insurgent safe houses.

Stop deflecting, they have a mission while they are on these patrols, state it.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

you are absolutely correct. I joined the Army in January of 1966 and left In 1986. I joined as an 11B, did a tour in Viet-Nam, wounded at Quang Tri and in 1972 switched to 97B. I went to WO School at Fort Huachuca, trained at Fort Dietrich and Bolling AFB, and served at Heidleberg, Mannheim, Berlin and at 5 different consulates in Eastern Europe. I retired as a Chief Warrant Officer in July 1986.

I RARELY ever had to dress in Class As, but when the occasion arose, My wings and my CIB were on my uniform, a well as my Combat Unit, And unit Citations.

Additionally, I completely understand that the military has changed. I ave no doubt that women have killed the enemy with their weapons. However, as of YET, there are no women serving in any combat MOS.

Answer your question?

Whether or not a woman is serving in a combat MOS is meaningless to the discussion.

Women, especially MPs and Medics, are on patrol on the streets of Afghanistan and were on patrol in Iraq and in these duties, served in combat. Many were wounded and some were killed in these ops.

There really aren't anymore "frontlines" per se, especially in counter insurgency operations. Therefore a Soldier, male or female, does not have to hold a traditional combat MOS to participate in combat ops on a regular basis.

That's not the point, and you ought to know it. No one is doubting the courage of women. No one is doubting their ability to be present in a combat theater. There is a fundamental difference between Combat Arms and every other MOS and further, there is a more fundamental difference between Infantry and EVERYONE else!

How many years do you think an average 5'4" woman weighting 125 pounds, humping 95+ pounds worth of equipment is going to do? We're not talking about doing it once or twice we're talking about combat for a year. But, Infantry for an enlistment 4+ years minimum. I assume we want some to actually become NCOs so make that 15 - 20 years of humping yamas with a backbreaking ruck on. Yeah, right!

Nobody humps a ruck everyday for a year straight in combat. What is it about mechanized, modern operations that are fucking some people up?

Furthermore, not every woman is 5'4" and 125. Some are much bigger and stronger and some are bigger and stronger than male infantrymen. Its not like every woman is going to be doing this. If a woman is fit enough to do it, she should be allowed to do it.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Doing what, exactly, Cowboy? CS, CSS? Is their current mission to "Find, Fix and Destroy the Enemy on the battlefield?" If not, what is their current mission? I'm not asking you where they do it, I'm asking what the mission is that they are required to fulfill.

Read FM 3-24.

There is no real "enemy on the battlefield." We're conducting COIN. That's about it. As such, women are and have been on patrol as well as involved in raids on suspected terrorist and insurgent safe houses.

Stop deflecting, they have a mission while they are on these patrols, state it.

You want me to explain COIN to you on an internet message board?

Seriously, educate yourself and get back to me, I'm not going to sit here and type out an entire field manual for you.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Read FM 3-24.

There is no real "enemy on the battlefield." We're conducting COIN. That's about it. As such, women are and have been on patrol as well as involved in raids on suspected terrorist and insurgent safe houses.

Stop deflecting, they have a mission while they are on these patrols, state it.

You want me to explain COIN to you on an internet message board?

Seriously, educate yourself and get back to me, I'm not going to sit here and type out an entire field manual for you.

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

Stop deflecting, they have a mission while they are on these patrols, state it.

You want me to explain COIN to you on an internet message board?

Seriously, educate yourself and get back to me, I'm not going to sit here and type out an entire field manual for you.

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

Different patrols have different missions!

Good lord almighty.

Not every mission is the same, thus it can't be clearly stated. There are literally hundreds of different missions that patrols have.

Yeesh

 

[Tech_Esq]

Whether or not a woman is serving in a combat MOS is meaningless to the discussion.

Women, especially MPs and Medics, are on patrol on the streets of Afghanistan and were on patrol in Iraq and in these duties, served in combat. Many were wounded and some were killed in these ops.

There really aren't anymore "frontlines" per se, especially in counter insurgency operations. Therefore a Soldier, male or female, does not have to hold a traditional combat MOS to participate in combat ops on a regular basis.

That's not the point, and you ought to know it. No one is doubting the courage of women. No one is doubting their ability to be present in a combat theater. There is a fundamental difference between Combat Arms and every other MOS and further, there is a more fundamental difference between Infantry and EVERYONE else!

How many years do you think an average 5'4" woman weighting 125 pounds, humping 95+ pounds worth of equipment is going to do? We're not talking about doing it once or twice we're talking about combat for a year. But, Infantry for an enlistment 4+ years minimum. I assume we want some to actually become NCOs so make that 15 - 20 years of humping yamas with a backbreaking ruck on. Yeah, right!

Nobody humps a ruck everyday for a year straight in combat. What is it about mechanized, modern operations that are fucking some people up?

Furthermore, not every woman is 5'4" and 125. Some are much bigger and stronger and some are bigger and stronger than male infantrymen. Its not like every woman is going to be doing this. If a woman is fit enough to do it, she should be allowed to do it.

You don't know what an Infantryman will be asked to do tomorrow or the next day. You are just reporting (I'm assuming, because this is the Internet and you could be a 14 year old boy, but assuming you aren't) what is currently the case in the current engagement.

If the next engagement is opposing the Chinese invasion of India, it will be a whole different thing.

I did not say every woman was anything. I said an average. If you wanna add an inch and a couple of pounds, whatever. It's hardly the point. Yes, there are SOME women that fit your description, but not enough to really matter in troop levels. The infantry it designed to put massive amounts of people through the training and get them ready for finding and destroying the enemy. We can't have huge washout rates for no real purpose. Just so someone can feather their career with a CIB.

They all better be strong enough for haul my 200 lbs ass out of the shit if they are out there. I never had any other infantryman not be able to do it. But at the end of the day how does this make killing people and breaking things more effective or efficient. If it doesn't, then we shouldn't do it.

 

[Tech_Esq]

You want me to explain COIN to you on an internet message board?

Seriously, educate yourself and get back to me, I'm not going to sit here and type out an entire field manual for you.

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

Different patrols have different missions!

Good lord almighty.

Not every mission is the same, thus it can't be clearly stated. There are literally hundreds of different missions that patrols have.

Yeesh

Fine, I'll make it easy for you, list the MOSs of the women you are talking about.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Whether or not a woman is serving in a combat MOS is meaningless to the discussion.

Women, especially MPs and Medics, are on patrol on the streets of Afghanistan and were on patrol in Iraq and in these duties, served in combat. Many were wounded and some were killed in these ops.

There really aren't anymore "frontlines" per se, especially in counter insurgency operations. Therefore a Soldier, male or female, does not have to hold a traditional combat MOS to participate in combat ops on a regular basis.

That's not the point, and you ought to know it. No one is doubting the courage of women. No one is doubting their ability to be present in a combat theater. There is a fundamental difference between Combat Arms and every other MOS and further, there is a more fundamental difference between Infantry and EVERYONE else!

How many years do you think an average 5'4" woman weighting 125 pounds, humping 95+ pounds worth of equipment is going to do? We're not talking about doing it once or twice we're talking about combat for a year. But, Infantry for an enlistment 4+ years minimum. I assume we want some to actually become NCOs so make that 15 - 20 years of humping yamas with a backbreaking ruck on. Yeah, right!

What is it about mechanized, modern operations that are fucking some people up?
.

Don't even presume to try to tell me anything about mechanized operations. I've spent more than my fair share of time in an IFV.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

That's not the point, and you ought to know it. No one is doubting the courage of women. No one is doubting their ability to be present in a combat theater. There is a fundamental difference between Combat Arms and every other MOS and further, there is a more fundamental difference between Infantry and EVERYONE else!

How many years do you think an average 5'4" woman weighting 125 pounds, humping 95+ pounds worth of equipment is going to do? We're not talking about doing it once or twice we're talking about combat for a year. But, Infantry for an enlistment 4+ years minimum. I assume we want some to actually become NCOs so make that 15 - 20 years of humping yamas with a backbreaking ruck on. Yeah, right!

Nobody humps a ruck everyday for a year straight in combat. What is it about mechanized, modern operations that are fucking some people up?

Furthermore, not every woman is 5'4" and 125. Some are much bigger and stronger and some are bigger and stronger than male infantrymen. Its not like every woman is going to be doing this. If a woman is fit enough to do it, she should be allowed to do it.

You don't know what an Infantryman will be asked to do tomorrow or the next day. You are just reporting (I'm assuming, because this is the Internet and you could be a 14 year old boy, but assuming you aren't) what is currently the case in the current engagement.

If the next engagement is opposing the Chinese invasion of India, it will be a whole different thing.

I did not say every woman was anything. I said an average. If you wanna add an inch and a couple of pounds, whatever. It's hardly the point. Yes, there are SOME women that fit your description, but not enough to really matter in troop levels. The infantry it designed to put massive amounts of people through the training and get them ready for finding and destroying the enemy. We can't have huge washout rates for no real purpose. Just so someone can feather their career with a CIB.

They all better be strong enough for haul my 200 lbs ass out of the shit if they are out there. I never had any other infantryman not be able to do it. But at the end of the day how does this make killing people and breaking things more effective or efficient. If it doesn't, then we shouldn't do it.

There are female medics assigned to combat ops that have already been hauling 200+ pound Soldiers out of harms way.

As for the rest, infantry school is 8 weeks, one of the shortest schools in the Army. Furthermore, the MOS is actually overstrength at SL1, so it's not like "massive amounts" of Soldiers are going through there anyway.

A few women will make it and good for them. And we are going to be doing it, whether you approve or not, so there's that.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

Different patrols have different missions!

Good lord almighty.

Not every mission is the same, thus it can't be clearly stated. There are literally hundreds of different missions that patrols have.

Yeesh

Fine, I'll make it easy for you, list the MOSs of the women you are talking about.

Primarily 31B, 68W and intell MOSs.

 

[ArmyCowboy]

That's not the point, and you ought to know it. No one is doubting the courage of women. No one is doubting their ability to be present in a combat theater. There is a fundamental difference between Combat Arms and every other MOS and further, there is a more fundamental difference between Infantry and EVERYONE else!

How many years do you think an average 5'4" woman weighting 125 pounds, humping 95+ pounds worth of equipment is going to do? We're not talking about doing it once or twice we're talking about combat for a year. But, Infantry for an enlistment 4+ years minimum. I assume we want some to actually become NCOs so make that 15 - 20 years of humping yamas with a backbreaking ruck on. Yeah, right!

What is it about mechanized, modern operations that are fucking some people up?
.

Don't even presume to try to tell me anything about mechanized operations. I've spent more than my fair share of time in an IFV.

Your posts on the subkect tell an entirely different story.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Nobody humps a ruck everyday for a year straight in combat. What is it about mechanized, modern operations that are fucking some people up?

Furthermore, not every woman is 5'4" and 125. Some are much bigger and stronger and some are bigger and stronger than male infantrymen. Its not like every woman is going to be doing this. If a woman is fit enough to do it, she should be allowed to do it.

You don't know what an Infantryman will be asked to do tomorrow or the next day. You are just reporting (I'm assuming, because this is the Internet and you could be a 14 year old boy, but assuming you aren't) what is currently the case in the current engagement.

If the next engagement is opposing the Chinese invasion of India, it will be a whole different thing.

I did not say every woman was anything. I said an average. If you wanna add an inch and a couple of pounds, whatever. It's hardly the point. Yes, there are SOME women that fit your description, but not enough to really matter in troop levels. The infantry it designed to put massive amounts of people through the training and get them ready for finding and destroying the enemy. We can't have huge washout rates for no real purpose. Just so someone can feather their career with a CIB.

They all better be strong enough for haul my 200 lbs ass out of the shit if they are out there. I never had any other infantryman not be able to do it. But at the end of the day how does this make killing people and breaking things more effective or efficient. If it doesn't, then we shouldn't do it.

There are female medics assigned to combat ops that have already been hauling 200+ pound Soldiers out of harms way.

As for the rest, infantry school is 8 weeks, one of the shortest schools in the Army. Furthermore, the MOS is actually overstrength at SL1, so it's not like "massive amounts" of Soldiers are going through there anyway.

A few women will make it and good for them. And we are going to be doing it, whether you approve or not, so there's that.

Outstanding! I hope they can. That would be contra the female LT in the saw dust pit in Airborne school crying because the PT was too hard for her. But, whatever.

Man, you are one thick SOB. Seriously, something different than today is going to happen in the future. We are currently in the process of hollowing out the Army. (In case you hadn't noticed). To tell you what that looks like, when I got to my first duty station my platoon had a TO&E of 44 soldiers. We had 14, not including the platoon leader because we didn't have one. We were a squad +. Once the hollow out is complete, if it ever gets complete, and something big happens, they will have to do a lot of hiring, very quickly and they'll go back to running 2 Infantry training brigades at Benning like when I was there (or maybe more). That's what I'm talking about. Not status quo as it is today. There's no great demand today obviously.

Infantry school is OSUT so its 3 months. They don't divide the training so you would notice anyway, flows right through.

So, I take it they are just going to go co-ed with the barracks, showers, toilets etc. I don't see any reason to spend all the money to make all the ranges and barracks separated because they won't be later. And, there really is no purpose, I assume they haven't built any special accommodation for gay troops, so this would just be more of the same.

<sarcasm>I'm sure there will be no pregnancies and no fights and no disruption of morale and discipline in the platoon.....no, that wouldn't happen. That never happens. Oh, well, maybe just the one time when the CSM and I walked into a quatermaster tent out in the boonies and caught two troops heavily "engaged." I'm also sure that women are now much more capable than before when we were aggressing against their NCO school class and had a misfire on their machinegun and couldn't clear it and all got taken prisoner. I'm sure it's not like that any more. </sarcasm>

And finally, DUH, I know.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Don't even presume to try to tell me anything about mechanized operations. I've spent more than my fair share of time in an IFV.

Your posts on the subkect tell an entirely different story.

Really, what's your MOS?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Stop deflecting, they have a mission while they are on these patrols, state it.

You want me to explain COIN to you on an internet message board?

Seriously, educate yourself and get back to me, I'm not going to sit here and type out an entire field manual for you.

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

Tech, you are so hard headed. The world of warfare is now surround and air bound, wherever our troops go. If females can meet the requirements the guys do, guess what: it has happened.

 

[Tech_Esq]

Different patrols have different missions!

Good lord almighty.

Not every mission is the same, thus it can't be clearly stated. There are literally hundreds of different missions that patrols have.

Yeesh

Fine, I'll make it easy for you, list the MOSs of the women you are talking about.

Primarily 31B, 68W and intell MOSs.

MP, Medic and intel. And you figure that's all about the same as Infantry, Armor and Artillery do ya? Well, I'd suggest you don't really understand what the latter do then.

Or as we used to say,
"Look to the left and what do ya see,
a bunch of REMFs want to be like me,
fat neck,
fat back,
can't run, like me
can't be, like me
11B Infantry
C.O., C.O. can't you see, you can't bring no smoke on me,
run all day I can run all night, run, run, run cuz I'm fit to fight."

Just sayin' just an observation. And that's not limited to the ladies. I'm sure they are no fatter or less in shape than their male counterparts (comparatively speaking of course) compared to infantrymen.

 

[Tech_Esq]

You want me to explain COIN to you on an internet message board?

Seriously, educate yourself and get back to me, I'm not going to sit here and type out an entire field manual for you.

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

Tech, you are so hard headed. The world of warfare is now surround and air bound, wherever our troops go. If females can meet the requirements the guys do, guess what: it has happened.

You say that like it's new. How is that different from Vietnam? There was no front like there either. That was 50 friggin' years ago. There's nothing new here.

Why do you think the women will end up having to meet the same quals where does that happen ever? No place. They say that to get people to accept it. Then, after the women sue, they relax the standard (if they even bother waiting for that).

I'm hard headed because I've lived it and you aren't going to tell me that it's fine when I know it isn't and you have no way of know it is.

 

[JakeStarkey]

They have a simple mission on a patrol that can be stated in one or two sentences. For some reason you don't want to do that. I can guess the reason, but I'd rather you just say it.

Tech, you are so hard headed. The world of warfare is now surround and air bound, wherever our troops go. If females can meet the requirements the guys do, guess what: it has happened.

You say that like it's new. How is that different from Vietnam? There was no front like there either. That was 50 friggin' years ago. There's nothing new here.

Why do you think the women will end up having to meet the same quals where does that happen ever? No place. They say that to get people to accept it. Then, after the women sue, they relax the standard (if they even bother waiting for that).

I'm hard headed because I've lived it and you aren't going to tell me that it's fine when I know it isn't and you have no way of know it is.

I served as well in the seventies and eighties for twelve years, and you are telling me all women can't hack it in combat.

You are wrong, but more importantly, your opinion doesn't matter. Tough that.