English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

It seems like it would be a good outlet for them....

2007-07-18 09:07:03 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Military

Bill - I do know that they aren't allowed in combat right know; notice how I said "should"?

2007-07-18 10:15:15 · update #1

24 answers

they should go in combat

2007-07-25 22:44:30 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

One thing that I think gets overlooked is that guys have their cycles, too. They may not be as obvious, or as, let's say, physiological, but they are there. How would we determine the battle readiness of any individual if we took all of these situations into account? It would be very difficult. The link may provide a little known insight into the realities of life, and when one of your comrades is lost in your presence, whether you are male or female, the onset of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder far outweighs any other thing they have experienced on a monthly basis. I am not a member of the military, and I have never been in a battle zone of any kind, but it's time for civilians to get a better idea of what our men and WOMEN are going through. I know we are not able to relate completely, but I am sure that you have more common sense than your question indicates. (It's just part of my personality type to give everyone the benefit of a doubt, my friend. And I mean "my friend" sincerely.)

2007-07-18 09:23:40 · answer #2 · answered by healthsys2 3 · 0 2

you sleep alone a lot, don't you?

a woman's monthly cycle has nothing to do with her ability to function well in combat. besides, logistically, your idea is a nightmare. by the time that woman has gotten into theatre, been briefed, assigned, and sent out of patrol, her time of the month would be over and she'd have to be rotated out.

frankly, i think we should stop looking at gender and start looking for the individuals who can kick the most ***.

and bill, you're dead wrong. women can be military police, photographers, journalists, truck drivers, fuelers, fighter pilots, and a slew of other military jobs that put them in harms way every day. not just when they 'go past the enemy.' if you're deployed to a war zone, you're in combat.

2007-07-18 14:54:32 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

Yes I think they should as well. A lot of women I know use that excuse to get out of doing work, and exercises and all sorts of things. Im a woman so I understand that yes, our periods are painful and they cause some serious issues sometimes with hormones and such, but just because she is on her period doesn't mean she can't perform her job while on active duty. They joined the armed forces to serve our country and they should continue to do so period or not.

2007-07-18 09:18:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Not sure how me being on my cycle relates to protecting the country...Where we are, we have bad days all the time, a bit of hormonal monthliness means nothing when your fellow soldier, airman, or marines limbs are hanging off and blood is going everywhere...I hope this was suppose to be humorous...you couldn't have been serious...just the thought of what we've been exposed to takes away any pain frojm cramps, our guys have dealt with far worse pain!

2007-07-18 09:22:53 · answer #5 · answered by msrdbone 2 · 1 1

im pretty sure that women are not allowed to pick a job in the military that involves direct combat. they are not allowed to be infantry, tank drivers, artillery, or anything that has you going out every day to find and kill people. the only time they can be in combat is if they drive past an enemy and is attacked or the enemy attacks a base or camp that they happen to be at.

2007-07-18 10:05:55 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 3

i've got faith women human beings should not be interior the attempt against palms (Infantry, Armor, attempt against Engineers, maximum container Artillery). The Air protection Artillery is yet another remember, yet interior the main significant, women human beings have not got any corporation on the front strains. inspite of the incontrovertible fact that, because of the fluid nature of conflict, any attempt against assist or attempt against service help unit would discover itself in attempt against. All women human beings could have undemanding attempt against education. Any lady service member would discover herself in attempt against. we've lady pilots. There are women serving in missile batteries. we've women serving as commanders of particular attempt against contraptions. in the event that they're the best persons for the roles, so be it. inspite of the incontrovertible fact that, interior the trenches (or interior the tanks and tracks), it is and could be an completely all male teach. Been there, accomplished that. In attempt against contraptions, women human beings would be fairly unwelcome. women human beings have not got a "top" to flow into attempt against. while their "top" compromises the means of the unit to effeciently habit attempt against operations, it endangers the full unit. In particular situations, women human beings have been allowed into direct attempt against. The forces dealing with the contraptions with women human beings constantly have fought greater durable because of the fact the lads did no longer want to be defeated via women human beings. in case you may teach me from experience a single occasion the place the presence of ladies human beings in attempt against has superior the attempt against readiness and performance of a attempt against unit i'd be keen to reassess this situation. concept is hypothesis and all nicely and robust. interior the actual international, the only ingredient that concerns is attaining success in attempt against. Social Engineering gets human beings killed. teach me in any different case.

2016-11-09 19:59:48 · answer #7 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

I did not think that "that time of the month" affects the eyes or the hands

USSR used women snipers in WW2. They did not get "time off" SFAIK. And the best of them had over 300 kills - one could blame PMS I guess... ;-)))

2007-07-18 10:06:47 · answer #8 · answered by cp_scipiom 7 · 1 1

ummm actually you're wrong there is alot of women out here right now that hop on a 50 cal. machine gun and go on missions and convoys so yes they are allowed to do that brother...im in iraq thats how i know

2007-07-18 11:00:51 · answer #9 · answered by Doc 1 · 2 1

Umm we are. Damn you're dumb. Do you really think women aren't dying in Iraq? We can't just stay on the FOB b/c we're on the rag. Get a f*cking clue.

2007-07-18 09:22:52 · answer #10 · answered by ashley b 2 · 1 1

YES, hee...hee....hee...what you don't think a woman going through "PMS" can take down 50 or so people who mess with her comrads....ya... right! she'll take down anyone male or female young or old! who mess's with her family "CUZ" in her state of mind during that time of month...sh......she'll have those people running for the hill's and hiding under rocks just to get away from the rath of a woman of GOD going through PMS!

2007-07-18 10:19:04 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers