Debate Over Women In Combat Likely To Heat Up In '08

Los Angeles Times:

Soon after the Gulf War in 1991, a group of military women pressed Congress to allow female pilots to fly combat missions. But a Vietnam War hero in the Senate, John McCain, pushed back hard.

"The purpose of the military is first to defend this nation's vital security interests throughout the globe and only second to ensure equality," the Arizona Republican argued on the Senate floor, framing the issue in a way that infuriated feminists.

McCain lost that legislative battle, and women pilots started moving into combat roles in the mid-1990s. In the last five years in Iraq, women have flown hundreds of combat missions. And though they remain barred from ground combat units, women -- who make up about 15% of the military -- are playing a bigger fighting role than ever. About 100 have died in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Read the whole story: Los Angeles Times

Comments

[MsLiz]

Society's taboos exist because people in the immediate situation do not see the long term consequences of the proscribed conduct. Hence, incest, cannibalism, homosexuality and women in combat are taboo. (Sorry gays. I think the taboo had to do with preserving the species, and does not recognize that one does not chose to be gay or straight.)

When women could not prevent pregnancy, adult women were constantly pregnant or nursing, so they had no business in war. Someone had to nurse babies and nurture children, so we developed a division of labor which kept women near the home base and sent men out to hunt and fight. Men could get killed, and it did not take as many men as women to reproduce.

Women in the military will not get promoted beyond a certain point without combat experience. I can see women in support roles, but not in the infantry, busting down doors in Baghdad. I do not want women drafted and put in a war zone.

We need to be very thoughtful when we decide to reject a taboo. There is something despicable about a culture that sends young women to be killed and maimed in this war in Iraq, and lets male college republicans stay home spending their trust funds.

[Querent]

I agree. We are not smart enough at choosing our leaders, nor are the leaders we choose generally smart enough, to allow young women to be put in combat situations without explicitly and passionately choosing it for themselves. Young women are a precious resource for our civilization which we must not put at risk. Repigs are stupid enough to do this lightly, and there is no assurance that Democrats will not be stupid enough, either. So we should honor the taboo and strictly rule it out. Only if a woman is wiling to fight for the right to be in combat should it be allowed.

[1will]

Years ago our aircraft required physical strength to fly. That is no longer the case and I can see women flying combat missions as well as men.
Physical strength is still required for many combat billets in the armed forces especially the infantry. I had a friend in the Marine Corps that served as an artilleryman. His job was lifting one heavy shell after another when a fire support mission was called for. I spent my time in the Marines as a machinegunner in the late 1980's. Carrying over 100lbs of gear around was not unusual. Carrying the full combat load for a 27 mile forced march is expected and required. While women can clearly shoot as well as men they usually cannot carry the same load as men. There are extraordinary women with brute strength but the average woman does not have the strength of a man and physical training can only go so far in making up for nature.
They say we always plan to fight the last war. In debating the role of women in combat many are pretending every future war will be fought solely in cities and the troops will be shuttled around in humvees. One thing is clear. There will be another war eventually. I doubt it will look like the current war in Iraq and the days of our soldiers and Marines riding off to combat will probaly be gone.

[CTmom13]

Vets for Freedom is a swiftboating group now attacking Barack Obama with a nasty smear ad suggesting that he would put America's enemies first. Apparently, John McCain approves -- he calls the group a "wonderful organization."

In addition four of his campaign officials are connected with the group: Senators Lindsay Graham and Joe Lieberman, both campaign co-chairman, also both sit on the Vets for Freedom board of advisors. The group's executive director, Pete Hegseth, is on McCain's Virginia steering committee along with the group's treasurer, Wade Zirkle.

All four men are in violation of McCain's recently announced conflict of interest policy, which states: "No person with a McCain Campaign title or position may participate in a 527 or other independent entity that makes public communications that support or oppose any presidential candidate."

Earlier this month, the campaign asked GOP consultant Craig Shirley to leave the campaign because of the same sort of conflict. If McCain also asks these four men to leave the campaign, the challenge for him will be to explain he lavishly praised as a "wonderful organization" as recently as April 8.

McCain's praise for Vets for Freedom came at a rally staged for the media. At the rally, McCain was introduced by David Bellavia, a Vets for Freedom co-founder and candidate for Congress in New York's 26th district. In his introduction, Bellavia likened Barack Obama to Tiger Words, bringing a big smile .

http://www.jedreport.com/2008/05/mccain-calls-sw.html

[Jess27]

This article is inaccurate. Women in Iraq are being detached to infantry and recon units in the Marine Corps. The women service members are needed to search the Iraqi women. Back in 2006 a roadside bomb hit a 7 ton vehicle that was carrying female marines back from searching Iraqi women. My good friend was on that 7 ton. She was burned on 70% of her body, and shrapnel took out a chunk of her leg. Luckily for her, she was not one of the 2 women killed on that truck.
I am very torn on the issue of women in the military. I think women should have the right to choose, but I do not agree with some of the rules that are specific to women. If a woman gets pregnant, she has the choice to stay in or get out; however, they only give you 45 days after the day you find out you are pregnant. I think that is wrong because a first time mother should not be expected to know how they are going to feel after they have a child. Nobody knows how their first child is going to effect their view on life, so I think first-time mothers should have time to decide after the baby is born.

[Grunty1]

dadw5boys :
"Let women participate in the military but not GAY'S ????
We must protect our PRECIOUS GAY'S from the ravages of war!!
RIGHT???????"

Calm down. The article was specifically about women, so that is how I responded. Gay people have as much of a right to choose their own profession.

[Hagrid]

McCain is the last (thank God) of the old school mysogynists.

Any man(?) that calls his wife a c*nt is public, or private for that matter, is not meant to lead our armed forces.

[DMW1]

As a female, I believe women should be allowed to serve in combat as long as their physical capabilities are equal to their particular position and will not endanger their comrades.

As a mother, I wonder if it hurts any more or any less if it's your daughter, rather than your son, coming home in a body bag. I think it would be devastating to lose a child, regardless of their gender.

As I citizen, I am astounded that my nation is willing to sacrifice our youth for WMDs that don't exist and oil in foreign countries (thanks for clearing up our reasons for the war in Iraq Mr. McCain), rather than making the necessary changes to become less dependent on oil.

[Dave01]

Are these the same so-called "feminists" that would rather see McCain than the Democratic nominee in the Whitehouse? Hmmmmmmmm? Boy do they have quite a few lessons to learn. If they think that McCain is going to put women's rights issues front and forward then all I can say is more power to you. You will be set back by 50 years........have at it.

I've never been derogatory towards any female, until now! Granted, I'm not saying all women, I'm saying those who are wiling to jeopardize decades worth of work to advance equality simply because they are bitter. I hope they're ready for the draft and the overturning of women's freedom of CHOICE when it comes to their reproductive health.

I hope they can live with the BLOOD that will be on their hands for continuing this war in Iraq and more than likely the war that will be started with Iran. I hope come November they will CHECK their vagina's at the door and vote for the Democratic nominee, regardless of who HE is.

[AnnieinOR]

send the feminists, they want real equality. Go fight and die for your country the way others have (women)

[Jess27]

Well, that was rather offensive. I don't think any true feminist would vote for someone because of their sex, male or female. The whole point of feminism, in my view, is not to discriminate for or against based on sex. Any woman who thinks she should vote for Hillary just because she is a woman is not a feminist, they are an embarrassment.

[walk0nwalls]

If you can shoot, you can shoot. Ovaries have nothing to do with it.

[Jess27]

Um, yeah, but it is a little more than being able to shoot. My father can shoot better than most in the military, but he is almost 70 years old.

[1will]

You are correct about shooting but can you carry a 100lb pack for miles before the shooting starts? I was a Marine (0331) in the 1980's and part of the qualification for our unit to deploy overseas was a 27 mile forced march with full gear (and a time limit). There were several things a regiment had to do to qualify for deployment but the forced march was probaly the most difficult. I doubt most women could do this and I would hope that if women are integrated into infantry units they face the same standards. That is not the case in today's military.
Actually I may be wrong about the last sentence. I have heard the Army has lowered the physical standards for men to match the female's standards in their coed boot camp. Apparently the men are no longer challenged by the fitness qualifications. If true this is equivelant to dumbing down tests in order to pass more students.

[ibsteve2u]

I betcha McCain isn't all THAT attached to his "no women in combat" position.

If McCain wins, I figure that about four years into his 100 years war DoD will be offering single mothers free baby-sitting and college educations for their kids, if they'll only ride around Iraq - at the risk of getting blown up or picked off occasionally.

[ChicagoDMT]

HuffPost's Pick

One of the key arguments against women in combat is the potential for capture and rape. I find it interesting that rape by the enemy is the rationale for holding women back while rape of women in the military by their fellow soldiers is tolerated and ignored.

Once again, women are penalized because of men's behavior.

This is getting so old.

[dadw5boys]

Hell, some women live in fear of being raped on the U.S. Bases. They won't go to the restrooms at night.

[Jess27]

Really? That was never a concern of mine (or anyone I knew) when I was on a military base from 2003-2007. In fact, I never new any female service member that was raped by a male service member. I never felt more safe than when I was on base; I wish I could have that sense of security everywhere I go. I am not saying it never happens, but it does not happen more frequently than civilian rapes. Military rapes get highlighted in the media whereas it is not news when women are raped by civilians.

[Bill3rdterm]

Have any of you idiots actually served or do you just get your info from rumor mills. I was on probably 14 bases, and had my share of girlfriends on them and never heard about the fear of using bathrooms at dark Where are these public bathrooms on bases anyway? The BX, the dorms, chow hall ??? Give me a break with this non sense. The military is a large large corporation, it's also a mirror of our society, there are crimes of all kinds, just like in society, but don't you dare attempt to paint our soldiers as somehow evil as a whole. It's disgusting and disgraceful to do such to those who are brave enough to risk there lives on a daily basis for the people of this country.


ChicagoDMT is correct, one of the original reasons for woman not being combat soldiers is the rape factor, during interrogation.

[1will]

Do you have a link to real source or is this just another often repeated BS story liberals through around?

[Grunty1]

Excellent point.

[skepticalindenver]

I've got to say, I've never heard that argument used before. Could you cite any politicians using it?

[Simone]

You'll have to do your own homework, but the rape argument has been used by opponents of women in combat. You might have to google it.

The rape argument, of course, does not apply to civilian women who are raped. They are considered fair game.

[skepticalindenver]

woops...my bad, I didn't see there was a 2nd page to the article. Interesting this was a woman making that argument though

[ibsteve2u]

Technically, I think they usually only ignore it if the perp is a member of one of the service academies or an officer - you know, those breeding grounds for future Republicans and members of "Vets for Freedom"?

[WretchedEtcher]

It's not a "woman's choice" but a "person's choice". If that person wants to fight; let them fight.

[robXdion]

But that should come with the knowledge you can't have it both ways. If you want to play with the boys you can't pull out the "I'm a girl" card when convenient.

[jethrock]

McCain clearly does not support women's rights on virtually every issue from equal pay in the private sector, to the right to choose, healthcare, and equality in the military just to name a few.

Any Hillary supporters that would vote for this man out of spite will truly be voting against themselves and the progress America has made over the past 100 years.

Please keep these reports coming.

[mahoner]

I just fail to understand why some Hillary Clinton supporters are willing to jepordize certain rights that John McCain goes against! All because of bitterness towards Obama that they're willing to throw away their vote? It boggles the mind.

[skepticalindenver]

They are bitter and want to cling to their candidate, and failing that will take retribution on whoever beats her. yes, it does boggle the imagination. Hello McCain, bye-bye Roe VS Wade and other less visible rights. My guess is they will come to their senses before November, provided Hillary doesn't continue this nonsense too much longer.

[skepticalindenver]

As a former infantryman, I have no problem with the concept of women serving in a combat role. However, these women need to adhere to the same standards required of their male counterparts. The physical fitness requirements currently in place for women will not cut it. Sure, I know women's bodies are different, but tell that to the wounded soldier on the field (male or female) when a fellow soldier can't pick them up and get them out of harm's way. I know some women that could easily meet the physical demands of ground combat, but I'm guessing many that pass under today's standards for women, could not. Let women serve in any combat role they want as long as we don't give them a handicap to try to make it equitable instead of equal.

[Grunty1]

If women want to participate in the military, let them take action where they will. How hard is this???

Personally, I think anyone planning to join the military, man or woman, as long as the Global Occupation of Oil is underway needs a head examine, but that's just me.

[dadw5boys]

Let women participate in the military but not GAY'S ????

We must protect our PRECIOUS GAY'S from the ravages of war!!

RIGHT???????

[Bill3rdterm]

Gays are allowed in the military, where you been?