Women do perform as well as men in combat in most specialties. And the specialties that they don't perform as well, that's because they aren't allowed to serve in them.
My personal opinion is that the women do just fine.
2007-11-08 14:16:06
·
answer #1
·
answered by Smoker06 6
·
1⤊
1⤋
I will say some can fight just as well. I don't think it's a matter of who fights well. I am going to get thumbs down for this but most women choose the homemaker role it's tough to be a homemaker if you are deployed all the time. Women have more responsibilities to the home then men if they want a family and most do they make the choice of family over combat. Sorry my opinion is a women should be in the home. The husband should be off fighting war. If the woman is gone who is home nurturing the child. No one can nurture a child like a mother can. Thumbs down....ready....and go. :>)
2007-11-08 14:44:39
·
answer #2
·
answered by HA HA HE HE 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
If you were ever the supervisor of an organization that was 50% female, you'd know. At one point, 6 of 9 were pregnant. When we went to the field, they could be categorized as just slightly above useless in setting up GP medium tents or lifting anything heavier than their purse. If they can't function in a support role, I certainly don't want to see them in combat.
Edit: Upper body strength does not include abdominal muscles. Nature gave women stronger abdominal muscles because they need them for pregnancy. PT standards are a joke. I'm 53 years old and if recalled today, my minimum standard for most events would result in a maximum score for a woman half my age. That is a fact. Upper body strength is measured by the pushup, which females do differently than males. I'm old and slightly out of shape and I can easily do a 100 of the female pushups.
2007-11-08 14:24:40
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's not about fighting ability. It's the moral issue of women being subjected to the abusive nature of combat. Men tend to be protective of women, and may make bad decisions based on gender instead of mission. There is also a personal hygiene issue, three months without a shower is rough on guys, it can kill a woman. Personally, I have served with women that were tougher than me, and I would have no problem with some of them leading the way.
2007-11-08 14:07:04
·
answer #4
·
answered by John S 5
·
2⤊
1⤋
Judging from the people I know I would say it is because men want to fight, while women want to protect themselves or their children. It has always been men who are eager and exciting by the prospect of war so someone who wants or at least want to prove themselves would be better soldiers because they are there to fight and no other reason. Also women have issues with uncleanliness, biological weaknesses, and an inclination to flight instead of fight.
2007-11-08 14:39:10
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Less upper body strenght? Are you serious. I went to Basic in South Carolina, been in the army for 3 yrs now. I wish you would have seen those " tough men" doing sit ups. I felt sorry for some of them. It looked like the hardest thing ever. Some couldnt come up all the way, some were whining, and some just couldnt do it. And yet he has the nerve to say women dont have upper body strength... LOL
You are funny.!
2007-11-08 14:03:44
·
answer #6
·
answered by Tru_New Orleanian 4
·
2⤊
1⤋
To sexy army chick:
Abs are LOWER body strength lol. He is referring to pecs.... Women have other things which take up room, men don't.
I think it is fair to say that men and women are different for a purpose.... If we had the same purpose, wouldn't we all be asexual and not be males and females... This is not sexist, simply recognising that we are designed to have different roles. What someone said earlier about a woman screaming with a bullet in her gut... It would be dangerous...
AND think about what women would think if conscription was for females too? then Bush would be called sexist as well!!! its so much easier to recognise the truth. Men and women are built for different things....
2007-11-08 15:03:29
·
answer #7
·
answered by iceydicer 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Is the question supposed to be why can't women?
Women actually make very fierce warriors, the problem lies with our society.
All our lives good men are taught to protect females. Hard to ignore a woman who has a bullet in her gut and screaming in pain. Some guy will get himself killed trying to get to her at the wrong moment.
of course this is just one scenario, others have to do with hygiene in different operations areas.
And then you have the actual physical strength differences, and yes there are strength differences
2007-11-08 14:02:57
·
answer #8
·
answered by SFC_Ollie 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
From my personal expierence, and the history in my country...
they can.
Female Snipers, pilots(including fighter), and anti tank defense, all won gold star hero of soviet union during the great patriotic war. They all fought very well, and made alot of contribution to our war effort, in combat.
2007-11-08 17:04:49
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Tell that to World War II Russian women snipers.
2007-11-08 14:06:16
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋