US women get closer to combat

[soup]

Some say move imperils units, violates law

By Bryan Bender, Globe Staff | January 26, 2005

WASHINGTON -- The Army for the first time is placing women in support units at the front lines of combat because of a shortage of skilled male soldiers available for duty in Iraq and is considering a repeal of the decade-old rule that prohibits women from being deployed alongside combat forces, according to Pentagon officials and military documents.

The Army's Third Infantry Division has added scores of female soldiers to newly created ''forward support companies" that provide maintenance, food service, and other support services to infantry, armor, and Special Forces units that commonly engage in combat.

Army officials acknowledge that the changes will increasingly place women, who make up about 15 percent of the armed forces, in combat situations, but believe they are following federal law, which prohibits female soldiers from serving in units that engage in direct combat.
>snip<

The change made by the Third Infantry Division was prompted by a shortage of trained troops caused by the unexpected length of the Iraq war and has set off a quiet, but highly charged debate within the Army over the role of women in the military. As a practical matter, the guerrilla tactics used against US troops during the occupation have also blurred the traditional lines between combat and support functions and is expected to prompt a wholesale review of the definition of ground ''combat" within the Bush administration.

''After this operation is over the question of how they define combat has got to be raised," said Lory Manning, a retired Navy captain who heads the Women in the Military Project at the nonpartisan Women's Research & Education Institute in Washington.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2005/01/26/us_women_get_closer_to/

[bluestateguy]

1. Just watch the "Center for Military Readiness" try and blame the liberals

Somehow it will all be made Bill Clinton's fault.

[rodeodance]

2. there really is NO demarcated 'front line" in this type of war-so the

military can push the envelope on this one and get away with it.

[fasttense]

3. I think the two B*sh girls should volunteer for Iraq duty.

It is the patriotic thing to do. Aren't they patriotic? Where is their support for the nation in a time of war? They should be fighting in the war their Daddy started.

It's interesting how quick the establishment is to change the gender roles when it suits their needs. Go to war for us but you'll be lucky to make .75 for every dollar a man makes. Have our babies, make our beds, fight our wars, then roll over and shut up.

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

9. Whenever I get into a discussion with a freeper about this

they inevitably hem and haw and say, "Well, it's not my place to convince them." And when I ask if THEY are serving, they inevitably say, "There are many ways to serve." Yeah. Like lurking on political boards. In times past, when presidents wouldn't allow their children to enter the military in time of war, the kids were called shirkers or worse. As for the freepers-WALK YOUR TALK. Otherwise, I think the next time one rants about how wonderful or necessary the war is, I'm calling them what they are-cowards.

[Azathoth]

4. The longer this drags on, the more inevitable women in combat becomes

And when they finally start putting them in combat, two things will happen:

1) Female recruitment levels in the military will plummet, at a time when the military ain't exactly on a recruiting high.

2) Joe "I-like-Bush-cause-he-kicks-Arab-ass" Sixpack will have to come to terms with the fact that young girls will be coming home in boxes. Suddenly the whole macho element will disappear, and perhaps that will lead him to reconsider whether or not this whole thing is worth it.

[rodeodance]

5. on the other hand, there are women who do not like to be viewed as

as imperialing a unit!!!!! It is an insult to them and will volunteer.

[Azathoth]

6. That would be a very, very small number

Most women join the military for reasons other than the fact that they'll be able to go running hogwild through Falluja with an m16. Once the military starts making them frontline targets, a lot of women will decide that there are better ways to earn a salary and get money to pay for college.

[saigon68]

10. Joe also likes how the Chimp kills thousands of Islamicist "RAG-HEADS"

"Lets cleanse our planet of all those Satanistic Camel Jockeys, and promote a "final solution" to wipe out all rats who bow toward mecca. They are sub-Humans ", he continued. </sarcasm>

On ward kristian soldiers.

[LynnTheDem]

7. But bush last week said "READ MY LIPS. NO WOMEN IN COMBAT".

Yet another bush FLIP-FLOP coming up.

[Jamastiene]

8. When I was a little girl

I always wanted to be a sniper, but they wouldn't let women fight... I say fuck 'em now.

[noamnety]

11. I don't necessarily have a problem with combat roles

But I have a serious problem with the bait and switch tactics that are becoming increasingly common. These are women who enlisted knowing they wouldn't be sent to the front line. Changing the rules after they signed up is on a par with refusing to release the people who signed on for the one year trial period.

[Massachusetts]

12. "US women get closer to combat"

AND THERE IS GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE TO ROE V WADE!:wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :wtf: :crazy: :crazy: :crazy: