Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Americans largely back combat role for women: poll (Reuters)

  1. #1

    Default Americans largely back combat role for women: poll (Reuters)

    Really? I guess I have completely lost touch with my fellow Americans. Isn't bad enough we send our sons to fight and die in these honorless wars, but now we want to send our daughters to the most dangerous roles in these wars? 66%? Wow.

    Sixty-six percent of those polled said they support letting women serve in ground units that engage in close combat, while 26 percent are opposed, according to the survey by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press and the Washington Post.
    http:// http://www.reuters.com/artic...90S0N520130129
    Last edited by pacodever; 01-29-2013 at 08:43 AM.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2

    Default

    Just people being overly PC. I'd be one of 26% that is opposed.
    As for those who said: "Let us eliminate every injustice, for there is no such thing as a partial injustice; let us tolerate no robbery, for there is no such thing as a half-robbery or a quarter-robbery," they were regarded as idle visionaries, tiresome dreamers who kept repeating the same thing over and over again. Besides, the people found their arguments too easy to understand. How can one believe that what is so simple can be true?

  4. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pacodever View Post
    Really? I guess I have completely lost touch with my fellow Americans. Isn't bad enough we send our sons to fight and die in these honorless wars, but now we want to send our daughters to the most dangerous roles in these wars? 66%? Wow.

    Pretty disgusting, but the words used here matter quite a bit. It is not "we" doing it. The use of the word "we" is used to make you feel responsible, when you may not agree at all. Just like "we are leaving our children in debt" is often a large lie, meant to make an average american feel responsibility and guilt. (and is in fact, a lie otherwise too.)

    I know you can make a reasonable intellectual argument that "we" are involved because "we" are not stopping it, but I think one of the first steps to stopping it is getting people to acknowledge that they are not part of the "we" making these things happen in the first place.
    We have allies many of you are not aware of. Watch the tube. Show this to your 30 and under friends. Listen to it. Even if you don't like rap, it has 2.7 million views.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBnvajSfWU#t=0m16s

    Cut off one min early to avoid war porn.

  5. #4

    Default

    I suspect it was asked in the sense of 'if a woman wants to do you think she should be able to if she is capable?' they always slant to get the result they want. Ignoring that most woman might think it is a ludicrous idea for themselves personally. I wonder if they asked THAT what answer they would get?

    My problem would be the involuntary part I am sure will follow. I suspect they would give 'community service' outs, but it would just lead to Rahm Emmanuel's 100% draft for the state idea, I suspect. I don't like them exerting more control.

    As to the women, if they are nuts enough to want it, and if they capable of doing the job, I guess it would be their choice and consequences From what I have heard, however, the consequences can be far worse than just 'not pretty'.
    Last edited by sailingaway; 01-29-2013 at 10:27 AM.
    "Integrity means having to say things that people don't want to hear & especially to say things that the regime doesn't want to hear.” -Ron Paul

    "Bathtub falls and police officers kill more Americans than terrorism, yet we've been asked to sacrifice our most sacred rights for fear of falling victim to it." -Edward Snowden

  6. #5
    Member Keith and stuff's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    The Live Free or Die state
    Posts
    8,976
    Blog Entries
    67

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by pacodever View Post
    Really? I guess I have completely lost touch with my fellow Americans. Isn't bad enough we send our sons to fight and die in these honorless wars, but now we want to send our daughters to the most dangerous roles in these wars? 66%? Wow.
    Women have served on the front line in war after war. The only difference coming is that in the future women might be in special elite units that travel to other countries are murder people the CIA or President don't like. Though, it is possible that it has already happened. If you were in the military, something that has been the norm for over a decade wouldn't be a shock to you.
    Lifetime member of more than 1 national gun organization and the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance. Part of Young Americans for Liberty and Campaign for Liberty. Free State Project participant and multi-year Free Talk Live AMPlifier.

  7. #6

    Default

    I think the chick in that video that got tazed should definitely go.
    "Men, it has been well said, think in herds; it will be seen that they go mad in herds, while they only recover their senses slowly, and one by one."
    —Charles Mackay

    "god i fucking wanna rip his balls off and offer them to the gods"
    -Anonymous

  8. #7

    Default

    I have no issue with women in combat. I have a serious issue with men and women TOGETHER in combat. Two different things entirely. Men think and behave differently around women.... Not to mention all the sexual dysfunction that would result from the mix. No. I have no doubt on a woman's ability to fight. Have all women combat units if they wish to fight, but putting men and women together in an ACTUAL war (ala WW2) and people many would die.

    How about we just dont have wars anymore so no need to have female combat units? Eh?
    "May the Wings of Liberty never lose a feather..."

    - Jack Burton

  9. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jllundqu View Post
    I have no issue with women in combat. I have a serious issue with men and women TOGETHER in combat. Two different things entirely. Men think and behave differently around women.... Not to mention all the sexual dysfunction that would result from the mix. No. I have no doubt on a woman's ability to fight. Have all women combat units if they wish to fight, but putting men and women together in an ACTUAL war (ala WW2) and people many would die.

    How about we just dont have wars anymore so no need to have female combat units? Eh?
    While I agree with this, especially the not have any more wars in the forseeable future part, my views are just more old fashioned I suppose. I think it shows how morally sick we have become to one, fight these unjustified, evil wars, and two send our women to fight, period. Men do battle. As much as I hate to see men ripped to pieces by shrapnel it really boils my blood to see women placed in that situation. (I know they are already there) I really don't care if they want to fight or not. The time for women to fight a war is when an enemy rolls up on our shores. (And I would argue the same for men, in many instances) JMHO.
    As for those who said: "Let us eliminate every injustice, for there is no such thing as a partial injustice; let us tolerate no robbery, for there is no such thing as a half-robbery or a quarter-robbery," they were regarded as idle visionaries, tiresome dreamers who kept repeating the same thing over and over again. Besides, the people found their arguments too easy to understand. How can one believe that what is so simple can be true?

  10. #9
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    23,654

    Default

    Poll comes as no suprise , most Americans are brain dead.Look at the Senate , most Americans voted for most of them.

  11. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kcchiefs6465 View Post
    While I agree with this, especially the not have any more wars in the forseeable future part, my views are just more old fashioned I suppose. I think it shows how morally sick we have become to one, fight these unjustified, evil wars, and two send our women to fight, period. Men do battle. As much as I hate to see men ripped to pieces by shrapnel it really boils my blood to see women placed in that situation. (I know they are already there) I really don't care if they want to fight or not. The time for women to fight a war is when an enemy rolls up on our shores. (And I would argue the same for men, in many instances) JMHO.

    That's very similar to how I feel. The idea of middle aged men sending 18+ women to get shredded on their behalf is just screwed up. I'd very much respect women willing to show up to the party as a last resort.
    We have allies many of you are not aware of. Watch the tube. Show this to your 30 and under friends. Listen to it. Even if you don't like rap, it has 2.7 million views.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kmBnvajSfWU#t=0m16s

    Cut off one min early to avoid war porn.

  12. #11

    Default

    I hope it is a manipulated poll because that just sucks!

  13. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Land of Indians
    Posts
    23,654

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RickyJ View Post
    I hope it is a manipulated poll because that just sucks!
    I doubt it , probably votes by people who will not have to themselves , kind of like the polls that show dumbass Americans supporting higher taxes for the "rich" , so stupid they forgot that is who employs them.......

  14. #13

    Default

    Hell ya I support women in combat. If feminists are going to demand equality, then let them have real equality.

    But no, I don't support the wars.

  15. #14
    Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    location,location
    Posts
    4,048

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by oyarde View Post
    I doubt it , probably votes by people who will not have to themselves , kind of like the polls that show dumbass Americans supporting higher taxes for the "rich" , so stupid they forgot that is who employs them.......

    You got it...I hate how these polls are always presented as "Americans want/believe, etc", based on some poll of 500 people, or less. Get the fuckouttahere with that shit.
    EX-USCG


    What is the difference between a hero and a cop? A hero will not hesitate to risk his life to protect your safety, a cop will not hesitate to risk your life to protect his safety.
    Quote Originally Posted by Brian4Liberty View Post
    Authoritarian leftists. Political prisoners. Gulags. Where are we again?

  16. #15

    Default

    How the fuck can you oppose letting women fight? Aren't libertarians supposed to believe in equality and judging people as individuals? Either you opposite it because you think women wouldn't be good at it, which is not judging people as individuals, or you think that for some reason a women's life is more valuable than a man's. Sexist either way

  17. #16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RandRevolution View Post
    How the fuck can you oppose letting women fight? Aren't libertarians supposed to believe in equality and judging people as individuals? Either you opposite it because you think women wouldn't be good at it, which is not judging people as individuals, or you think that for some reason a women's life is more valuable than than a man's. Sexist either way
    Easy.

    Accepting the known biological truth about the differences between men and women and their suitability and effectiveness for front line combat is not sexist, it is fact. Judging one individual female's suitability from a group of females, will not change that. There are a plethora of medical and biological reasons that make men more suitable for combat, not to mention the additional burden (financial and combat effectiveness) on a unit or the armed services there would be caring for these medical issues.

    I would say that from a biological perspective and a cultural perspective as well that, generally, a woman's life is more valuable than a man's. I don't see a lot of guys bringing a baby to terms and breastfeeding it. Meanwhile, women have a limited supply of eggs which are relatively valuable when compared with the sea of sperm men produce(compare approximately 400 to 400 billion over a lifetime.

    History is full of examples of wars waged to deal with a large population of unmarriable men. Examples of Women fighting in combat was far more rare and usually out of necessity, not springing from gender equality.
    Last edited by pacodever; 02-01-2013 at 10:23 AM.





« Previous Thread | Next Thread »


Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •