Is it more difficult for men to serve in Iraq if they aren't circumcised?

Question

I mean, they're in the desert and don't get to shower often and it must mean that a lot of sand and dirt gets caught in their foreskins causing infections and just plain funk.

To the poster that said Arab men aren't circumcised, you are wrong. Most Arab men, being Muslim, are circumcised, even though the Quran doesn't mention that it's a requirement.

Answer 1

WTF?

Answer 2

I heard some people talk about this and some said yes they can have problems, but I also heard others say that the foreskin provides the protective covering and protects the urinary opening and glans so I think it goes both ways. And even if it doesn't look/smell good it's possible that could actually be naturally "cleaner" than the opposite if you get what I mean. Like it might look dirty to us but still be clean. I would expect most of it would get protected by clothing though? And they could still wash a bit? Given that thousands of years ago and longer men were roaming around jungles and deserts naked before circumcision and without showers, I don't think it could be the cause of significant problems, otherwise if their willies had got infected and rotted off we wouldn't be here.

Answer 3

Your "question" bears very little relevance to serving in any area of diverse climatic conditions, from Desert to Jungle.

Iraq is not one big desert and personal hygiene standards are very high with very good facilities to shower and wash.

No such requirement was made for any of the Allied troops who served in North Africa in WW2 including British, American, German, Italian or members of the Commonwealth who saw service there, and there was more dust and dirt than in Iraq, there were no significant reports from Medical Units of a rise in sickness from getting dirt under the foreskin than any other area of combat.

Soldiers are trained with a high regards to hygiene no matter what area of the world they live in. Even in the field hygiene standards are maintained for short periods you can go without the luxury of a long hot bath or an hour in a shower, but the genital area can still be washed, clean underwear worn, and unscented body-wipes and moist tissues as used for babies can be employed to keep a person clean in adverse conditions.

Answer 4

There is ample opportunity for taking showers over here unless you are actually out on patrol. Every base camp, camp & FOB I have been on has some type of shower facility set up for the troops.

Answer 5

One of the main reasons for circumcision is cleanliness and health.

In a situation where showers/baths are a luxury, yes, being uncircumcised could be an additional risk. But I do think the vast majority of troops in Iraq are actually stationed where they can take regular baths or showers.

Answer 6

People may vote my answer wrong, but I doubt it makes a difference because they are there to serve the country. If they had a medical problem it would have be seen to before they went to Iraq or the doctors assessing would have suggested to get circumcised before starting in the Army do the reasons you have noted.

Answer 7

They have to find ways of cleaning themselves without much supplies, and they have to do it more often. They also, indeed, run a higher risk of infection and therefore have to be more careful. So I wouldn't surmise that it is more difficult, just more of an inconvenience.

By the way, women who are unaware of the build-up of scgema in an uncircumcised penis should not answer this question.

Answer 8

Unless it effects your ability to use a firearm correctly, or from following orders, I'd say no. Even without being in the desert you should be keeping it super clean anyway.

lb

Answer 9

It is more difficult for the women. Imagine having sandy/dirty guys and a difficult time of cleaning up.

Answer 10

Is this all you have time to do at night, sit around and think about soldiers genitals? Kind of sad, don't you think?

Answer 11

Yes.