What do you think?
Should women be allowed to serve in front line combat?
2006-10-01 23:33:49 · 9 answers · asked by Valyn 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Military
No I don't think they should
It's a man's job & you have to draw the line somewhere
women are not protectors & they are frail compared to men.
they would have to be freaks to be as strong
2006-10-01 23:45:02 · answer #1 · answered by ausblue 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There could be many reasons.
1. The front line battlefield is really, really harsh place. It is the place for " I kill you or I get killed by you". I honestly doubt if many of the female combatants have equal or surpassing toughness to the semi-lifetime trained males in general.
2. Needs a special accomodation for women. Separate shower, totally different medical supports (what if she is on her period when the battle breaks out?), and due to the nature of the military, it is very important to separate the male and female within the group (rape, romance, etc.). The military does not like it. Simple is better.
3. Political issues. A woman combatant is captured by the enemy... and gets raped, etc... the army does not want to risk spending the time, effort, and energy to prevent /deal with it when happens... too much headache.
But with all these above, still the U.S. arms forces employee large amout of the female semi-combatants and in fact, during the second gulf war (war to topple Hussein) many female soldiers were taken prisnors by the Iraqis.
2006-10-02 08:44:33 · answer #2 · answered by davegesprek 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are female helicopter pilots in the RAAF. They fly combat missions. they do Air medical evacuations. the traditional reason for not allowing woman to serve in the "front line" is 1. if they are hurt or injured the men tend to loose more moral then with a fellow man. They can be endangering the life of an unborn child. they are subject to rape and molestation. (i know men can be raped as well) but that is why as far as i know. i don't think they should serve in combat. they are too distracting. can you emagine seeing the body of a woman being dragged through the streets and burned. i couldent
2006-10-02 06:48:57 · answer #3 · answered by joel 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
From what I have been told by men in the the military, they are distracted by women being on the front lines, they have a natural and primal urge to protect them. They would be thinking this while in combat and it might put their lives in danger. It is not because of womens abilities, I believe almost any human put in a life or death situation will react with self preservation.
2006-10-02 09:42:04 · answer #4 · answered by hooahgoarmy 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Some women would do a good job on the front lines. They are good fighters and should be allowed to do so if qualified.
2006-10-02 10:26:13 · answer #5 · answered by RayRay 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Traditions for the most part, our emotions are formed by the society we live in.
For centuries men have been protecting women and children, so it has been ingrained in our physic.
2006-10-02 10:50:01 · answer #6 · answered by tom l 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because they would have to fight ALL-MALE armies mainly from ALL-MALE dominated cultures. ALL MALES should protect women no matter which armed forces they're in - US, UK, Australia too - not place them in the frontline. I am an old fashioned 'sexist' only in this aspect. So be it.
2006-10-02 08:01:34 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
If you can get through infantry school you should be able to fight on the front lines.
2006-10-02 09:41:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
because women are full of emotions and after seeing dead bodies on the street day in day out they would have an emotional break-down, also they would get too tired easily and become lazy.
2006-10-02 07:56:53 · answer #9 · answered by sharples_iain 2 · 0⤊ 3⤋