PDA

View Full Version : Women's front-line role reviewed


Diceman
05-24-2009, 05:26 PM
Ministers are to consider changing the rules limiting women's combat roles in the armed forces, the BBC has learned.
A review will be launched to examine whether female soldiers should be included in units whose key role is to seek out and kill the enemy.
The review is partly due to EU rules on equality which require reassessment of the issue every eight years.
The Ministry of Defence said it has an open mind, but one former Army chief said integration would harm operations.
To date there have been seven women killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, which equates to 2% of the total fatalities.
There are few roles in the military which remain off-limits to female personnel. They are engaged in highly dangerous tasks such as flying attack helicopters, driving in military convoys and are often part of foot patrols.
But they are still forbidden from serving in what is known as "close combat". That is fighting with units - mainly in the infantry - whose key role is to seek out, engage with and kill enemy forces.
'Jeopardised'
In an exclusive interview with the BBC's Politics Show, Brig Richard Nugee, the Army's director of manning who is leading the review, said any decision to change the rules would be taken for military reasons.

FEMALE FATALITIES IN AFGHANISTAN AND IRAQ
Cpl Sarah Bryant, 26, from Carlisle, Army Intelligence Corps. Vehicle caught in explosion in Helmand, Afghanistan, 17/06/08
L/Cpl Sarah Holmes, 26, from Wantage, Army Royal Logistic Corps. Road traffic accident at Al Udeid airfield, Qatar, 14/10/07
Pte Eleanor Dlugosz, 19, from Southampton, Royal Army Medical Corps. Roadside bomb in Basra, Iraq, 05/04/07
2nd Lt Joanna Yorke Dyer, 24, from Yeovil, Army Intelligence Corps. Roadside bomb in Basra, Iraq, 05/04/07
Staff Sgt Sharron Elliott, 34, from Ipswich, Army Intelligence Corps. Attack on patrol boat on Shatt al-Arab waterway, Iraq 12/11/06
Flt Lt Sarah-Jayne Mulvihill, 32, from Canterbury, RAF. Missile attack on Lynx helicopter in Basra, Iraq, 06/05/06
Staff Sgt Denise Rose, 34, from Liverpool, Royal Military Police. Killed herself, Basra, Iraq, 31/10/04
He said: "The fact that an EU directive has asked us to do it is almost incidental.
"The real point is that we now have practical experience of women in combat in Afghanistan and Iraq and we want to see, genuinely want to see, what effect that will have on our military.
"This is a very open-minded review, we have no conclusions yet."
In 2002, the Ministry of Defence decided there was not enough evidence to prove women could be integrated into the tightly-knit units which engage in the most extreme type of warfare.
Former head of the Army, General Sir Mike Jackson, told The Politics Show he believed any change could lead to "concerns that operational effectiveness, particularly in the infantry, could be and probably would be, jeopardised".
According to the latest MoD figures, there are 187,060 members of the British armed forces, and 9.4% of them - some 17,620 - are female.
Of those women, 3,760 are officers.
In the RAF, 96% of all jobs are open to women, in the Royal Navy, the figure is 71% and in the Army, it is 67%
The MoD is unable to say exactly how many women are currently serving in Iraq and Afghanistan.
But some reports suggest about a fifth of military personnel in Afghanistan are female, even though they make up just a tenth of total military numbers.
The US Army also bars women from serving as infantry or in Special Forces roles. They are permitted to serve on combat ships and aircraft in war zones.
Israel is the only nation to conscript women to national service. Some drafted women are assigned to infantry combatant roles, potentially placing them on the front line of any conflict.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8065604.stm

FreshBaked
05-24-2009, 08:27 PM
When they say having women around would jeopardize operations, I wish they'd say how, exactly

N120
05-24-2009, 08:47 PM
When they say having women around would jeopardize operations, I wish they'd say how, exactly

because men are superior, who are you to question them huh? sheesh women ...

but seriously, i think its to do with morale, granted it may be old fashioned but it still remains to this day.

men have different a make up, they dont mind acting aggressors against eachother, men vs men is tolerable/generally acceptable, but when women and children come in, they go back to basics and feel overprotective, and a loss hits them hard.

Kusogitsune
05-24-2009, 08:51 PM
They should fight naked, it might help to distract the enemy.

N120
05-24-2009, 08:56 PM
They should fight naked, it might help to distract the enemy.

that'll distract everyone my friend, not just the enemies :lmao

Megaharrison
05-24-2009, 09:04 PM
When they say having women around would jeopardize operations, I wish they'd say how, exactly

It comes down to basic physical ability, nothing else. Men are physically superior and can withstand the strain of combat better on average then your average woman. Combat is exhausting. You're running around in 120+ degree heat in 30-50lbs of gear scared out of your mind and sweating like a pig. If you're part of an anti-tank unit hauling around a Spike/Predator/B-300/Shipon your gear can easily surpass 100lbs. The adrenaline helps, but the average woman still can't last as long in those kind of conditions as the average man. Because of this, they are often seen as a liability and burden to combat operations.

There are exceptions of course. Our own Sayeret Yablan is a Naval Commando force that consists of some pretty savage women that are hardened veterans and experts in Krav Maga. They can kick the ass of most average male soldiers.

But overall, coming from a military that has some of the highest levels of girls in the world, I can tell you that men simply preform better in combat scenarios and thus are allocated to such positions in far greater numbers than women.

Anyway, I know a British female soldier. She thought Dublin was in Northern Ireland and had never heard of Belfast. It was pretty epic.

zabuza666
05-24-2009, 09:32 PM
Men are physically superior, simple as that.

Mael
05-25-2009, 12:47 AM
It comes down to basic physical ability, nothing else. Men are physically superior and can withstand the strain of combat better on average then your average woman. Combat is exhausting. You're running around in 120+ degree heat in 30-50lbs of gear scared out of your mind and sweating like a pig. If you're part of an anti-tank unit hauling around a Spike/Predator/B-300/Shipon your gear can easily surpass 100lbs. The adrenaline helps, but the average woman still can't last as long in those kind of conditions as the average man. Because of this, they are often seen as a liability and burden to combat operations.

There are exceptions of course. Our own Sayeret Yablan is a Naval Commando force that consists of some pretty savage women that are hardened veterans and experts in Krav Maga. They can kick the ass of most average male soldiers.

But overall, coming from a military that has some of the highest levels of girls in the world, I can tell you that men simply preform better in combat scenarios and thus are allocated to such positions in far greater numbers than women.

Anyway, I know a British female soldier. She thought Dublin was in Northern Ireland and had never heard of Belfast. It was pretty epic.

Pretty epic fail you mean. :zaru

But yes, as a member of the US Army I can say that women can be comfortable in most roles, however in combat arms there are still a lot of controversies both on the female and male sides that need to be sorted out.

I
05-25-2009, 01:21 AM
Does it mean that women are going to work in factories again everytime there's a war? I don't think so.

N120
05-25-2009, 02:51 AM
Does it mean that women are going to work in factories again everytime there's a war? I don't think so.

it's not what you think that counts, it's what you can do.

Juno
05-25-2009, 11:19 AM
No, putting 'women' on the front lines will not jeopardise operations. Putting unqualified women will, the same way putting unqualified men does.

I'll be the first to say women are by and large physically weaker and less durable, but that doesn't mean there aren't a good number of exceptions who, while can't compete with the fittest men, at least easily meet the minimum requirements. There are plenty of women who are perfectly fit to carry out close combat fighting, and plenty of men who aren't. It's discriminating to brand all women as innately unfit while only putting men through the fitness screening process.

Jarl lKarl
05-25-2009, 11:48 AM
They should fight naked, it might help to distract the enemy.

Also, release the power of their karma!

The Pink Ninja
05-25-2009, 12:52 PM
The whole fitness thing is easily solved:

Put them to the same training and duties as men, If they can't keep up, they can't stay.

Also, there are plenty of front-line combat roles that don;t requires as much stamina. Anything to do with vehicles for starters.

Megaharrison
05-25-2009, 01:23 PM
The whole fitness thing is easily solved:

Put them to the same training and duties as men, If they can't keep up, they can't stay.

Lawsuit! :edu

Also, there are plenty of front-line combat roles that don;t requires as much stamina. Anything to do with vehicles for starters.

Pfff, you ever try driving a tank?! It's rather demanding, even with new-fangled contraptions such as Powered steering and automatic gears. And it isn't made any easier for our chicks considering the Merkava's the heaviest tank in the world.

Though yeah, we mostly use ours for stuff like logistical duties (driving supply trucks), Medical Corps (Kishimoto would approve), or in Suppressive Fire Artillery units (aka where we line up 50 Howitzers and have them fire into the same area for a bajillion hours to deny the enemy operation there).

RAGING BONER
05-25-2009, 01:25 PM
WHAT IF THEY BLEED FROM THEIR LADY PARTS HUH?!

The Pink Ninja
05-25-2009, 01:53 PM
Lawsuit! :edu

Our army literally gets away with murder and there being no prosecutions. This would be a breeze by comparison.

Pfff, you ever try driving a tank?! It's rather demanding, even with new-fangled contraptions such as Powered steering and automatic gears. And it isn't made any easier for our chicks considering the Merkava's the heaviest tank in the world.

Though yeah, we mostly use ours for stuff like logistical duties (driving supply trucks), Medical Corps (Kishimoto would approve), or in Suppressive Fire Artillery units (aka where we line up 50 Howitzers and have them fire into the same area for a bajillion hours to deny the enemy operation there).

I imagine it's tiring, but nothing a fit woman couldn't handle. Compared to foot based grunt work it's easy.

Also, yeah, I know you use your women for that.

Afterall, it's what you did :hehee

Juno
05-25-2009, 02:41 PM
Lawsuit! :edu

Do you really think they'd be more vulnerable to lawsuits if they barred anyone who fails to meet the requirements, instead of just barring anyone with a vagina?

MidnightToker426
05-25-2009, 03:07 PM
ain't no bitches supposed to be in the ditches :lmao

Cirus
05-25-2009, 08:13 PM
I don't see a problem with women being in front line units. Though if they did that then the physical standards for both men and women need to be the same. (Women in the military on average need to only do half the amount of pushups and sit ups as men, and their run time can be alot slower.) Basically make it fair for everyone both ways and not just for one group of people. Other then that I have no quams about anything.

DeterminedIdiot
05-25-2009, 09:16 PM
kinda stupid. dont really see the point of this. ive seen some women beat alot of guys asses before