Should females be allowed to fight on the front line in a conflict?

Question

I say yes, as does my wife

HONEYBEE - Why should i replace my wife for having her own view a person like you should be replaced maybe with a bit of sh*t as thats all you are. Remember if you want to get personal I'll react

Answer 1

Me and my hubby discuss this quite regularly(he is in the army)

He has changed my mind by arguing

1.. if women were on the front line it is a mans instinct to protect therefore he would risk himself to save her in the line of fire

2.. the time of the month .. many front line soilders walk for weeks to the front line

3.. possibilty of pregancy

4.. would a woman kill a child who was armed ?

5.. Women are more emotional than men and would suffer more after the event

I have to say i do not think it would be such a good idea for the reasons he mentioned

Answer 2

No, and here's why;

1). It's been proven in tests carried out by the British MOD that men serving with women will invariably stop to help a woman in trouble even when they should be continuing a fight.

2). What happens if the day an unit is due to move to the front line one of the women in a team announces she's pregnant? Send her into battle anyway? or leave a unit a person down?

3). The physical side, although many women can be as strong as an average man, your average soldier or marine will often go into battle carrying weights far in excess of what we train with. A good example is Afghanistan were many marines were carrying loads in excess of 60kg (120Ibs) heavier than your average women.

4). Related to 3 above...ask the Navy...many male sailors have complained that they end up doing more work because many female sailors are not strong enough to do the day to day duties, on a ship you can get away with that......on the front line you cant.

Answer 3

I say NO until they can weed out the ones that actually can handle it. This country is so worried about affending a minority that we let anyone do anything... even if they can't do the job.

I have seen way too many that are there because they can pass a class with a written test at the end. 95% of the women in the military can't handle the physical aspect of combat. I am NOT saying that women shouldn't be in the military of in combat... we just need a better system that is based on performance. How would you like to have thoughts of doubt as to whether a comrad can do their job or carry your butt out of harms way?

We don't need that kind of doubt when we're trying to do our job and are worried about whether someon has your back. Personal experience... both girls I worked with in Fallujah should not have been there... they were a detriment!

Answer 4

No, fighting on the front line is a massive risk to personal safety.
If you have the enemy firing almost point blank range and you run out of ammunition (bullets) then you HAVE to endorse into "face-to-face body combat" or a "fist fight" as its more commonly known. The Government don't agree women should have to go through such an horrific situation therefore in All Countries (Except China), Woman are currently banned from fighting on the front line for their own personal safety.

Answer 5

you're puzzling 2 factors. enable me make sparkling that first. women people are already allowed in maximum forces to serve on the "front strains". What women people in many cases have not been allowed to do and what the Australians replaced replaced into permitting women people to serve in wrestle hands positions including Infantry and particular Forces. i think of it fairly is a mistake. women people lack the actual capability and staying power to function on the point necessary for those positions. The very few women people who can cope with this bodily are expert athletes who could desire to artwork out 8 hours an afternoon just to maintain the actual skill to do the interest. that would not pass away time for education. yet to no longer concern, they are going to do exactly what the U. S. has completed everytime we've made a metamorphosis like this. they are going to decrease the actual universal because of the fact of political tension from women people's communities making their military weaker.

Answer 6

well, these days, its all the guns that matter. so why not? the tradition of women not being allowed to fight harks back to a time of high infant mortality where women were vital to the continuation of the species and still little morle than baby machines. A woman had kids and therefore got the free pass on the life boat and got to stay behind when the world went to war. But, it also had to do with hand to hand combat where women are conisdered weaker. I'm pretty sure that women are already at the front lines, though.

Answer 7

I think anyone that can meet the physical and mental standard of competence to fight on the frontlines should have the opportunity to do so regardless of gender. However, I think it would be wrong to have a separate standard for women with less rigorous requirements than that for men as it does both a disservice to do so. You cannot gloss over that men and women are not physically and emotionally equal. There's no room for being PC when lives are on the line. Soldiers on the frontlines deserve to have the assurance that their comrades in arms can pull their weight irrespective of gender.

Answer 8

If woman are allowed to fight alongside their male colleges,
do you not feel it would put pressure on the males to either go into overprotect mode, or show off mode,thus compromising all around them.
In other words making the unit less effective and therefor more venerable,
I'm no believer in the a woman's place is in the home brigade
but there are limits, and front line duty is a bridge to far for me

joyeux noel to all our fighting men and woman
and all those who are not married to.

Answer 9

I also agrfee with Sammie - as much as many of you would like to think that women would kill enemies without hurting herself emotionally or mentally - you are pretty much genereally wrong. It is a fact that women are more "emotional" and i think we can all agree MOST women would have uncertanties about shooting an armed child...

There are a lot of little problems (they MOSTLY are not as strong as men and what happens when the man needs to be dragged away from battle?) I agree that they should have limited front line positions - possibly medic? - but not as an infantry soldier

Answer 10

Absoulutly not. I never came across a woman Marine who could pick me up and carry me over her shoulder. In full combat gear (no pack) I tipped the scales at about 245lbs. didn't even find any who could drag me.

Women lack the physical upper body strenght to meet the demands of front line combat, to include hand-to-hand. Ladies, do you really want to go one on one with an enemy male soldier with knives or bare hands?

Combat load for a Marine (including pack) 120lbs+.

How does your wife feel about taking a squat around 20-200 guys? Not taking a bath for 1-2 weeks at a time?