Anonymous wrote:The idea of sending the rare unicorn of a woman into combat units has never bothered me but it does seem like a spectacular waste of resources given the vast majority have no chance at handling it physically long term, even if they can squeak by the initial PT tests or early training.
Anonymous wrote:Gillibrand claimed there were no "quotas."
Did she see this memo?
https://www.af.mil/Portals/1/documents/2022SAF/Officer_Source_of_Commission_Applicant_Pool_Goals_memo.pdf
Anonymous wrote:The idea of sending the rare unicorn of a woman into combat units has never bothered me but it does seem like a spectacular waste of resources given the vast majority have no chance at handling it physically long term, even if they can squeak by the initial PT tests or early training.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how he can lead the military when he doesn’t think women belong in it.
The crazy thing is that every man who votes for him has to answer to his wife or daughter or niece. How are women not enraged by this?
Do you think women could have withstood the conditions and torture sessions of a Hanoi prison for 8 years like some of those poor guys endured?
Do you really not know that there were some women who were prisons of war. Do some research before posting asinine and offensive nonsense. Start with Eleanore Arden Vietti.
Of course, you can find a few women who were POWS and survived or died in captivity. I don't think most female war fighters could withstand year after year the physical tortures dreamed up by their captors.
Not one of the PP in this conversations but I think it’s crazy that folks think women can’t endure. Right now in the world are women enduring, mutilation, burning of villages, domestic violence, etc. Throughout history they been burned at the stake, been beat, berated, rape, faced chemical acid attacks, etc. They have and continue to endure everything thrown at them while still managing to build coalitions to fight for humanity, build up community, and teach the young.
Women enduring isn’t and never has been a problem. It’s the fact that they do so and still move forward that scares so many.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how he can lead the military when he doesn’t think women belong in it.
When did he say, "women don't belong in the military"? Please provide a citation.
He said, “Dads push us to take risks. Moms put the training wheels on our bikes. We need moms. But not in the military, especially in combat units.”
https://apnews.com/article/pete-hegseth-background-defense-secretary-confirmation-hearing-e160e10c86385a8beff110d9190fb34e
He also said this:
“I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective. Hasn’t made us more lethal. Has made fighting more complicated,” he said in a podcast hosted by Shawn Ryan on Nov. 7.
Women have a place in the military, he said, just not in special operations, artillery, infantry and armor units.
In his book, he said women have performed well in dangerous support roles during war, but “women in the infantry — women in combat on purpose — is another story.” He adds, “women cannot physically meet the same standards as men.”
Asked about the issue on the “Megyn Kelly Show” in early December, Hegseth said he cares only that military standards are maintained. Women serve in combat, he said, and, “if we have the right standard and women meet that standard, roger. Let’s go.”
Questioned aggressively about his stance on women in combat by senators Tuesday, Hegseth said he supports women in the military but wants to review military standards to make sure they are not lowered to accommodate women.
He's absolutely correct about this. His objection is to women in COMBAT roles.
+1
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand how he can lead the military when he doesn’t think women belong in it.
When did he say, "women don't belong in the military"? Please provide a citation.
He said, “Dads push us to take risks. Moms put the training wheels on our bikes. We need moms. But not in the military, especially in combat units.”
https://apnews.com/article/pete-hegseth-background-defense-secretary-confirmation-hearing-e160e10c86385a8beff110d9190fb34e
He also said this:
“I’m straight up just saying we should not have women in combat roles. It hasn’t made us more effective. Hasn’t made us more lethal. Has made fighting more complicated,” he said in a podcast hosted by Shawn Ryan on Nov. 7.
Women have a place in the military, he said, just not in special operations, artillery, infantry and armor units.
In his book, he said women have performed well in dangerous support roles during war, but “women in the infantry — women in combat on purpose — is another story.” He adds, “women cannot physically meet the same standards as men.”
Asked about the issue on the “Megyn Kelly Show” in early December, Hegseth said he cares only that military standards are maintained. Women serve in combat, he said, and, “if we have the right standard and women meet that standard, roger. Let’s go.”
Questioned aggressively about his stance on women in combat by senators Tuesday, Hegseth said he supports women in the military but wants to review military standards to make sure they are not lowered to accommodate women.
He's absolutely correct about this. His objection is to women in COMBAT roles.
+1