Jump to content


Getting an "Insecure Connection" warning for Exisle? No worry

Details in this thread

Women in combat

Women in Combat Military Women

  • Please log in to reply
87 replies to this topic

#81 LaughingVulcan

LaughingVulcan

    Still the property of the PPD

  • Islander
  • 3,448 posts

Posted 21 May 2003 - 01:31 PM

Kosh, on May 13 2003, 03:23 AM, said:

It is difficult for me to believe that there is a job in the military, that a woman couldn't do, with the right training and conditioning.
I would suggest that some Special Forces / Special Ops jobs may be gender inappropriate.  Trying to infiltrate Iraqi cities for pre-war intelligence comes to mind.  OTOH, there are equally SF jobs that women would probably be more appropriate than men for.

I wouldn't simply dismiss the concern for opposite gender claims, though.  Were I SecDef, and learned that one of my bright policies allowed one of my troopers to be raped in the line of duty, I'd probably have reservations myself.  Before I'm flamed, I'm not saying that women don't belong in service or combat, merely that decision makers also have consciences coupled with conservative, antiquated values.  Perhaps their values aren't the same as yours, but they've got to live with the decision afterward.
Nikki's Loving LV.  Property of the PPD.  Aka "Mr. Peppermint"
The Vulcan-Pixie alliance is strong.

#82 LaughingVulcan

LaughingVulcan

    Still the property of the PPD

  • Islander
  • 3,448 posts

Posted 21 May 2003 - 01:37 PM

ph3n1ks, on May 20 2003, 06:07 PM, said:

Is it me or did they just say that size of military units actually does matter?
...
Therefore, if I put more troops and equipment on the field than you do and I can last longer than you, I will win the war.
Actually I'm not reading that as anything of the sort.  Please do attack me with a battalion.  Of soldiers armed with pikes and swords.  I'll respond with my company-level force with DPU loaded M-16s.  We'll see which force truly has higher attrition.

Also, it would matter how many "walking corpses" you could field.  The question is how many of them can be wounded.  Same attrition, better psychological edge, more of your resources to commit for battlefield management and medical care.

Sheer numbers might just overwhelm, but it is who has the highest casualty count proportional to size that wins.
Nikki's Loving LV.  Property of the PPD.  Aka "Mr. Peppermint"
The Vulcan-Pixie alliance is strong.

#83 CJ AEGIS

CJ AEGIS

    Warship Guru!

  • Islander
  • 6,847 posts

Posted 21 May 2003 - 02:11 PM

Sounds like just the type of thing Robert McNamara would love so Iím very wary. Never trust the fancy models or military civilian whiz kids too much is another lesson history teaches us.  Vietnam was such a utter failure in a large part because so many in the DOD were enamored with the models of limited warfare.  First rule of war is of all things in the world war is the least limited of them.      

Quote

ph3n1ks: Is it me or did they just say that size of military units actually does matter?

I think the Iraqi Army might disagree that it had nothing to fear from the numerically inferior 3 ID and the other US forces.  The only problem is the Iraqi Army isnít around to attest to the fact that superior numbers is only one in a long list of factors but I guess their lack of ability to say that means something.  Then you can look at the Iran-Iraq War and see how two countries grossly mismatched in numbers ended up stalemated in a bloody conflict.    

The key to modern warfare is a good combined arms doctrine with flexibility. Then you need mobility, technology, communications, and overwhelming firepower on the battlefield.  Numbers is just one component among a host of many and is far from being the most important.    


Quote

ph3n1ks: Attrition is the new mass of modern combat theory.

Attrition the new mass? :blink:

Obviously these fellows are not military historians nor know a ounce of military history.  Attrition was one of the central doctrines of the South during the Civil War with their intention being to bleed the North until it lost the will to fight.  Then WWI upped the ante with both sides attempting to bleed the other dry in bloody trench warfare battles like Verdun.  World War II could be seen as the transitional stage from attrition with mass forces to modern combined arms focused on technology, firepower, communications and mobility.  To put in other terms mass numbers died as the ultimate deciding force with the advent of atomic weaponry.  You can deploy as many guys as you want and they will make nice fodder for my tactical nuclear weapons.  Now with weapons like MOAB the lethality of conventional weapons is rapidly reaching lethality where entire massed formations can be vaporized by a single weapon.      

Quote

ph3n1ks: Therefore, if I put more troops and equipment on the field than you do and I can last longer than you, I will win the war. Amazingly, this has worked for many, many conflicts, wars, and skirmishes. Thus, the more potential corpses I can commit to a war, with equipment, the better chance I have of winning.

This sounds like Soviet Doctrine and that shows the great flaw of it.  This is the type of thinking that results in T-72 tanks being killed by Bradley Fighting Vehicles.  Iíll take superior technology, communications, mobility, and firepower over numbers any day of the week.
"History has proven too often and too recently that the nation which relaxes its defenses invites attack."
        -Fleet Admiral Nimitz
"Their sailors say they should have flight pay and sub pay both -- they're in the air half the time, under the water the other half""
        - Ernie Pyle: Aboard a DE

#84 Ro-Astarte

Ro-Astarte

    goddess of love and blowing things up

  • Islander
  • 3,842 posts

Posted 22 May 2003 - 02:45 AM

LaughingVulcan, on May 20 2003, 09:38 PM, said:

I wouldn't simply dismiss the concern for opposite gender claims, though.  Were I SecDef, and learned that one of my bright policies allowed one of my troopers to be raped in the line of duty, I'd probably have reservations myself.  Before I'm flamed, I'm not saying that women don't belong in service or combat, merely that decision makers also have consciences coupled with conservative, antiquated values.  Perhaps their values aren't the same as yours, but they've got to live with the decision afterward.
Part of those "conservative, antiquated views" being that male PoWs aren't subject to being raped.

So if the concern is about soldiers being exposed to atrocities during capture (which I agree is a valid concern) it should not be gender specific.

If the concern is gender-specific, it is either misinformed, or not about the "protection" of women at all underneath.

Ro

#85 maryavatar

maryavatar

    Peachy

  • Islander
  • 1,426 posts

Posted 22 May 2003 - 03:45 AM

On the POW/rape debate, there's a school of psychological warfare stating that the most effective way to break a group of POWs is to sexually assault their leader in front of them.  Saying that women shouldn't serve because of the danger of rape is, once again, a double standard.
"When God made the arse, he didn't say, 'Hey, it's just your basic hinge, let's knock off early.' He said, 'Behold ye angels, I have created the arse. Throughout the ages to come, men and women shall grab hold of these, and shout my name.'"

#86 EvilTree

EvilTree

    my silence is my pervading call

  • Islander
  • 623 posts

Posted 05 June 2003 - 06:15 AM

Interesting debates...
Most of these guys are BTDT army, marine and SF people.

http://www.socnetcen...20&pagenumber=1

http://www.socnetcen...20&pagenumber=1
Loyalty, Vigilance, Excellence
-Motto of Imperial Space Marines


"Violence, naked force, has settled more issues in history than has any other factor, and the contrary opinion is wishful thinking at its worst. Breeds that forget this basic truth have always paid for it with their lives and freedoms."
-Robert A. Heinlein

"Self control is chef element in self respect. Self respect is chief element in courage."
-Thucydides

#87 Talkie Toaster

Talkie Toaster

    There's no Shepard without Vakarian

  • Islander
  • 1,136 posts

Posted 06 June 2003 - 09:35 AM

Some interesting threads- thanks for the links! :)
Blessed is the mind too small for doubt.

#88 sierraleone

sierraleone

    All things Great and Mischievous

  • Islander
  • 9,226 posts

Posted 06 June 2003 - 10:02 AM

^ I'll second that :)
Rules for surviving an Autocracy:

Rule#1: Believe the Autocrat.
Rule#2: Do not be taken in by small signs of normality.
Rule#3: Institutions will not save you.
Rule#4: Be outraged.
Rule#5: Don't make compromises.
Rule#6: Remember the future.
- Masha Gessen
Source: http://www2.nybooks....r-survival.html



Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Women in Combat, Military, Women

0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users