Coalition Forces In Middle East: Get the women off the front lines!

[amicus]

Knowing Muslim and Islamic treatment of their own women, it is insane to place British and American female military personnel in harm's way.

And to hell with all of you who will scream that Amicus is a misogynist yet again.

And if you still doubt, ask yourself why the British female sailor is the only one being publicized in the most recent criminal act of Iran.

an angry Amicus

 

[angelicminx]

Knowing Muslim and Islamic treatment of their own women, it is insane to place British and American female military personnel in harm's way.

And to hell with all of you who will scream that Amicus is a misogynist yet again.

And if you still doubt, ask yourself why the British female sailor is the only one being publicized in the most recent criminal act of Iran.

an angry Amicus

Don't bite my head off here, okay? But, why is it more insane to place FEMALE military personel in 'harm's way' than to place ANY military personel in 'harm's way'? I'm just asking.

 

[scheherazade_79]

And to hell with all of you who will scream that Amicus is a misogynist yet again.

No, you just have no faith in the ability of women.

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=angelicminx] Don't bite my head off here, okay? But, why is it more insane to place FEMALE military personel in 'harm's way' than to place ANY military personel in 'harm's way'? I'm just asking. [/QUOTE]

~~~

Assuming, angelicminx, that you are keeping up with the news, women are far more vulnerable during capture than men are. Take note that the Iranian terrorists concentrate on film, stills, and letters of the single female among the fifteen British hostages.

It has been but a small span of time that 'women' were even permitted in combat roles in the military, surely you have not forgotten that?

amicus...

 

[amicus]

No, you just have no faith in the ability of women.

~~~

Scheherazade, I call your attention back to a thread concerning the many complaints women expressed during a menstrual cycle on this very forum. I also remind you of the opinions expressed in another thread, "I just wanna get fucked!"

I for one, would feel uncomfortable in a foxhole or aboard ship working next to a woman with a loaded M16 during that time of the month.

Then again, I am an egoist and rather more concerned with my own life and safety thereof than I am with political correctness and gender equality.

amicus...

 

[scheherazade_79]

~~~

Scheherazade, I call your attention back to a thread concerning the many complaints women expressed during a menstrual cycle on this very forum. I also remind you of the opinions expressed in another thread, "I just wanna get fucked!"

I for one, would feel uncomfortable in a foxhole or aboard ship working next to a woman with a loaded M16 during that time of the month.

Then again, I am an egoist and rather more concerned with my own life and safety thereof than I am with political correctness and gender equality.

amicus...

Admit it, Ami - you'd love me to turn up in your foxhole, wearing nothing but a strategically-positioned M16

Dangerous women are good

 

[elsol]

[QUOTE=angelicminx]
Assuming, angelicminx, that you are keeping up with the news, women are far more vulnerable during capture than men are. Take note that the Iranian terrorists concentrate on film, stills, and letters of the single female among the fifteen British hostages.

It has been but a small span of time that 'women' were even permitted in combat roles in the military, surely you have not forgotten that?

amicus...

Torture hurts men just as much as women.
Men can be raped.

Are you saying that socially we've weakened women to such a state that we've made them more vulnerable to an equal action taken upon a man?

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=scheherazade_79]Admit it, Ami - you'd love me to turn up in your foxhole, wearing nothing but a strategically-positioned M16

Dangerous women are good [/QUOTE]

Ah, Zade, you see right through me, don't you. Without dangerous women in my life, it would have been dull indeed.

ahem...

amicus...

 

[elsol]

I for one, would feel uncomfortable in a foxhole or aboard ship working next to a woman with a loaded M16 during that time of the month.

amicus...

Why?

Aren't you a man?

You telling me a woman can get the drop on you?

 

[angelicminx]

Don't bite my head off here, okay? But, why is it more insane to place FEMALE military personel in 'harm's way' than to place ANY military personel in 'harm's way'? I'm just asking.

~~~

Assuming, angelicminx, that you are keeping up with the news, women are far more vulnerable during capture than men are. Take note that the Iranian terrorists concentrate on film, stills, and letters of the single female among the fifteen British hostages.

It has been but a small span of time that 'women' were even permitted in combat roles in the military, surely you have not forgotten that?

amicus...

Actually, I'm not keeping up with the news. WHY are women 'far more vulnerable'? Educate me, please?

You say, "the Iranian terrorists concentrate on film, stills, and letters of the single female among the fifteen British hostages", but I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

Do you mean they are using images of her capture, and possible torture, to aggitate government officials, who are for the most part men? Using those images to reinforce their stance? Using those images because history has shown that men become angry when 'their women' are captured or abused, and may be likely to lose their head? As opposed a man being captured, where the mind set may be, "Oh, well it's a man, he can handle it."? If not, then what DO you mean?

No, I haven't forgotten that it wasn't long ago that women weren't 'permitted' in combat roles. I haven't forgotten that it wasn't long ago that women weren't 'permitted' to do a lot of things.

I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from here.

 

[angelicminx]

~~~

Scheherazade, I call your attention back to a thread concerning the many complaints women expressed during a menstrual cycle on this very forum. I also remind you of the opinions expressed in another thread, "I just wanna get fucked!"

I for one, would feel uncomfortable in a foxhole or aboard ship working next to a woman with a loaded M16 during that time of the month.

Then again, I am an egoist and rather more concerned with my own life and safety thereof than I am with political correctness and gender equality.

amicus...

Having had several male family members serve in the military, I've heard enough war stories to know that some men, "Just wanna get fucked", as well. Also, take into account the human mind under pressure that can snap at any moment and 'go postal'.

Warning, joke coming: At least with a woman, you KNOW when it's that time of the month and she might snap.

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=angelicminx]Actually, I'm not keeping up with the news. WHY are women 'far more vulnerable'? Educate me, please?

You say, "the Iranian terrorists concentrate on film, stills, and letters of the single female among the fifteen British hostages", but I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

Do you mean they are using images of her capture, and possible torture, to aggitate government officials, who are for the most part men? Using those images to reinforce their stance? Using those images because history has shown that men become angry when 'their women' are captured or abused, and may be likely to lose their head? As opposed a man being captured, where the mind set may be, "Oh, well it's a man, he can handle it."? If not, then what DO you mean?

No, I haven't forgotten that it wasn't long ago that women weren't 'permitted' in combat roles. I haven't forgotten that it wasn't long ago that women weren't 'permitted' to do a lot of things.

I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from here. [/QUOTE]

~~~

I suggest you are being a bit argumentative as you know quite well where I am coming from.

There are absolute gender differences which enable one gender to perform certain tasks more efficiently than the other, whether you choose to admit that or not.

I will state again for perhaps the hundreth time, that I love all things feminine and worship the gender...for what it is, not as it compares to the male.


I would like to see somewhat of a return to the time when both men and women appreciated the differences and the complimentary nature of the two sexes rather than enter into a fruitless and endless competition.

Besides, women have to squat to pee.



amicus

 

[JamesSD]

Women often make better spies than men.

Spying is a very dangerous task.

Should we allow men to be spies?

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=JamesSD]Women often make better spies than men.

Spying is a very dangerous task.

Should we allow men to be spies?[/QUOTE]

~~~


I recall a film a few years ago..."Shining Brightly" something like that, not Michelle Pfieffer, but another lovely female actress who played the role of a spy in Nazi Germany....

The Israeli's have had women in combat for quite some time; in that case, a tiny nation needed the 'Sabra's', I think they called them, to defend the homeland.

There is a particular combat mindset, that of kill or be killed, which I suggest is more a male mentality than a female one. Females, by nature, exhibit more compassion and kindness than the male and may exercise that empathy or sympathy rather than kill and protect as the mission calls for...dunno.

Women have no rights in the Arab world and to place our women, coalition women in that kind of jeopardy when it is not absolutely necessary, seems to me to be a PC, politically correct decision and not within the Rules of Engagement.

amicus...

 

[Zeb_Carter]

Knowing Muslim and Islamic treatment of their own women, it is insane to place British and American female military personnel in harm's way.

And to hell with all of you who will scream that Amicus is a misogynist yet again.

And if you still doubt, ask yourself why the British female sailor is the only one being publicized in the most recent criminal act of Iran.

an angry Amicus

You know you're damned if you do and you're damn if you don't. Amazing how that works.

Women have been in harms way while in the military for over half a century. True they weren't in front line combat units but they were in support units that sometimes became front line units due to being overrun by the enemy.

The M.A.S.H. units in Korea, nurses were assigned to them and in some cases became front line troops when the couldn't mobilize quickly enough.

The same for some units in Vietnam.

And why shouldn't women be allowed to fight along side the men? I have known many a female soldier who was better at their job than many men.

 

[angelicminx]

Actually, I'm not keeping up with the news. WHY are women 'far more vulnerable'? Educate me, please?

You say, "the Iranian terrorists concentrate on film, stills, and letters of the single female among the fifteen British hostages", but I'm not sure I understand what you mean.

Do you mean they are using images of her capture, and possible torture, to aggitate government officials, who are for the most part men? Using those images to reinforce their stance? Using those images because history has shown that men become angry when 'their women' are captured or abused, and may be likely to lose their head? As opposed a man being captured, where the mind set may be, "Oh, well it's a man, he can handle it."? If not, then what DO you mean?

No, I haven't forgotten that it wasn't long ago that women weren't 'permitted' in combat roles. I haven't forgotten that it wasn't long ago that women weren't 'permitted' to do a lot of things.

I'm honestly not trying to be argumentative, I'm just trying to understand where you are coming from here.

~~~

I suggest you are being a bit argumentative as you know quite well where I am coming from.

There are absolute gender differences which enable one gender to perform certain tasks more efficiently than the other, whether you choose to admit that or not.

I will state again for perhaps the hundreth time, that I love all things feminine and worship the gender...for what it is, not as it compares to the male.


I would like to see somewhat of a return to the time when both men and women appreciated the differences and the complimentary nature of the two sexes rather than enter into a fruitless and endless competition.

Besides, women have to squat to pee.



amicus

First, I have to lmao at the squat to pee comment. I am sometimes envious of the ability to 'whip it out and pee wherever'. We'd have gotten to Chicago so much faster if I could have peed in a bottle.

Reading my post over again, I can see where it might be perceived as argumentative. No, I don't KNOW where you are coming from. I can guess, or assume, but I'd prefer to have it spelled out, so as not to step on any toes.

I like you, Amicus. I like you a lot. I'm not good at debate, never have been, but I do like to think.

I have no problem admitting that there are gender differences. As my husband is apt to point out, I wouldn't want to see a tiny female firefighter try to carry my 400 pound uncle out of a burning building. I wouldn't want to see a muscle-bound man try to give birth.

Now I'm being argumentative, deliberately. I don't see how a woman in combat is any more vulnerable than a man, or has any less ability than a man. EXCEPT that a woman in combat makes a MAN more vulnerable. Seems that men in general have this need to protect a female, no matter what that specific female is capable of.

I agree that not EVERY woman should be in a combat situation. I have female family members who rattle when they break a nail. I myself am in no shape to save my own ass, much less anyone else's. But not every MAN should be in a combat situation either. For similar reasons.

I'm thinking of "G.I. Jane" here. Take away the seperate standards for military training and train the women just as hard as the men. Those who can hack it, stay. Those who can't, get 'safe' jobs. Just like the men. (Or have they done that already?)

Like you, I appreciate all things feminine. However, I DETEST a helpless female. I like a sense of independence and identity. I appreciate masculinity, but I hate being treated like I'm incapable simply because I'm female.

My husband can be a chauvinist at times. He's 60 and that's how he was raised, but he's learning to accept that I am capable of doing some of the same things he is. I can read a tape measurer, swing a hammer, run a saw, shoot a nail gun, etc. just as well as he can. (Maybe not JUST as well, he does have nearly 40 years experience on me. )

He and I have had the discussion of male vs. female jobs. We also don't see eye to eye on some of his examples.

He had to teach me how to accept having doors opened, chairs held, cigarettes lit, etc. and I appreciate his efforts.

 

[angelicminx]

You know you're damned if you do and you're damn if you don't. Amazing how that works.

Women have been in harms way while in the military for over half a century. True they weren't in front line combat units but they were in support units that sometimes became front line units due to being overrun by the enemy.

The M.A.S.H. units in Korea, nurses were assigned to them and in some cases became front line troops when the couldn't mobilize quickly enough.

The same for some units in Vietnam.

And why shouldn't women be allowed to fight along side the men? I have known many a female soldier who was better at their job than many men.

Very good point, Zeb.

Amicus, a female can't do the job she was trained to do because her EMOTIONS would get in the way?

 

[Liar]

And if you still doubt, ask yourself why the British female sailor is the only one being publicized in the most recent criminal act of Iran.

What do you mean the only one "being publizised"? Because the footage I've seen of the hostages in the news were one male and one female.

It doesn't really add of take away from your argument, I just wonder what you are referring to.

 

[amicus]

[QUOTE=Liar]What do you mean the only one "being publizised"? Because the footage I've seen of the hostages in the news were one male and one female.

It doesn't really add of take away from your argument, I just wonder what you are referring to. [/QUOTE]


~~~


Liar, I have both CNN & Fox news on about 18 hours a day and occasionally they show a group picture of the hostages, but they have been featuring the female captive almost exclusively and exposed two alleged letters she wrote and have been released to the media.

The media, perhaps people in general, as with the wounded driver earlier in the war, because it was a female, seems to garner more attention.

amicus...

 

[starrkers]

Knowing Muslim and Islamic treatment of their own women, it is insane to place British and American female military personnel in harm's way.

And to hell with all of you who will scream that Amicus is a misogynist yet again.

And if you still doubt, ask yourself why the British female sailor is the only one being publicized in the most recent criminal act of Iran.

an angry Amicus

I agree and always have. At the risk of being taken out and shot by the feminist movement.

 

[R. Richard]

Women soldiers do very well in support roles for combat soldiers. It is just my opinion, but they seem to regard the men they are supporting much like they would regard their own children.

Unlike most of you, I have been involved with women in front line combat roles. In trench warfare situations, they find many men dead without a shot ever being fired from their rifle. The idea of trying to take another person's life is very difficult for most men. The same idea is even harder for most women. The women I have found who can function well in front line combat military roles tend to have very few female characteristics. I had to tell the men under my command that, "If you try anything with the women and they don't kill you, I will." One of my men said, "Me try somthing with the likes of that? You gotta be kiddin'."

 

[amicus]

I agree and always have. At the risk of being taken out and shot by the feminist movement.

~~~


Hey starrkers...blindfolds or not?


amicus...

 

[Pure]

as the soldier gets better technology, body armor, guns; as for instance, the soldier uses tanks, and artillery that's mechanized and controlled by computers, the premium will be on brains, not brawn.

as shown by this thread, it's obvious which gender has more brains and is less given to emotional outbursts. the males who, like the thread starter, lack reason will be the personal servants, the 'go fers' of the new women soldiers.

---
ask yourself why the British female sailor is the only one being publicized in the most recent criminal act of Iran.

let's get this straight: if the loutish males at Fox news give undue attention to the single female in the British group, this proves women are unsuited to the front lines? maybe it means dumb males are unsuited to be newscasters.

 

[Pure]

dear starrkers,

I agree and always have. At the risk of being taken out and shot by the feminist movement.

we--those in the feminist movement and its supporters-- no longer take dissenters out to be shot. we force them to 'message' with amicus on the subject of the glories and fatal weaknesses of 'the second sex.'

this can only be done for limited periods because of the Geneva conventions, but just a few days usually produces a chastened and more reality-based outlook.

 

[SeaCat]

I wasn't planning on responding to this thread, and yet I keep finding myself dragged back here by my morbid curiosity.

I can only laugh at some of the comments here. As far as I'm concerned it isn't even mysogeny, it is fear. Fear of losing their place, their control. The fear of becoming an equal.

Cat