Gillibrand - women in combat

[DO ALL THE THINGS]

Thank you for pointing that out. Every time I considered refuting that my brain hurt just from the thought.
It's as if he believes nothing bad ever happens to male POWs. Clearly he's never read history textbook and looked up Andersonville in the Civil War, or looked up what the Japanese did to POWs.

And given that rape isn't about sex, but about dominance (male dogs, for example, will mount other male dogs to show dominance), saying that men won't be raped as part of the torture is disingenuous. And saying that Muslims won't rape men because of their prejudice about homosexuality denies the facts - in point of fact, as I pointed out earlier, T.E. Lawrence was captured, raped and tortured by Muslim Turks during WWI; I'm given to understand that he wasn't the only one, just the most famous one.

Also, the muslim cultures I encountered were much more comfortable touching men then women. It was not uncommon on the streets of Iraq to see men holding hands or doing other things to each other that are not socially acceptable to Americans. On the other hand, women were often hidden from view and I never saw couples kissing each other or showing affection of any kind.

[Poorisolation]

See now I am thoroughly confused (not actually all that unfamiliar a condition).

To clarify your argument against allowing women in combat with the US Armed Services is that the men of the US Armed Services are not yet vetted for proper competency in their assigned roles? Thus the argument proceeds, since there is no evidence that women soldiers would be any less competent they should not be allowed to take part in combat because....

See there you lose me.

Women already serve in the US Forces in roles that bring them into combat situations simply because nice neat battle lines come into and went out of fashion in WWI and did not exist that much even then. If you think that a signaller or a logistics driver does not need to know how to fight and has likely deployed (what is the average running at these days 4 times or 5?) repeatedly into operational zones without encountering combat I am baffled. Yet if women have proven as universally incompetent as you claim how come the US Army and Marine Corps have not been routed in Afghanistan? Are you advocating the complement disbarment of women from serving in the military contrary to the Second Amendment which guarantees the right to bear arms* in a well regulated militia like for example the US Army, Air Force, Navy, Coast Guard, National Guard or State Militia ? Is Abridgement what you are calling for?

*Yeah I know most people just focus on the keeping it bit but seriously go read the text.

Where did I say men aren't properly vetted? What I was trying to say with that last line is that if they put females into a combat infantry unit (a role that they have not served in before) then they need to go to a unit that is not going to deploy for a year or more if possible. This would allow females to become more familiar with thier completely new role in an infantry unit and allow them to partake in the unit's entire pre-deployment train up period. Male Soldiers PCSing to a new infantry unit will be coming from an infantry unit already, that was the key difference I was trying to get across. I know it is a popular talking point to bring up the fluidity of the battlefield on the news. This is because, like you said, there are no frontlines and because of IEDS and attacking convoys with small arms (not so much anymore due to air cover, although not unheard of) females cannot be guaranteed to not be in a combat situation. However, there is a key difference between those combat scenarios and going out on foot on a combat patrol. That was my point. I do not see women performing well in a knock down, drag out urban infantry combat scenario. Does a signaller or a logistics driver face IEDs and possibly small arms fire, mortar fire etc.? Yes. Does it still suck? Yes. Is it the same as what they will see in an infantry unti? Nope. This is one of my main issues with the arguement of, well they are already in combat so.....

Moving on to what I think should be done. No, I am not calling for barring women completely from serving. I have stated that many times (although probably not to you. I am replying to several people). I would be in support of allowing females in combat arms jobs if the PT standards are unified, they don't pull a fast one and lower the standards overall and if they do not receive special treatment. A testing period where a small number of females are integrated, as others have suggested, I would be for if my previous concerns were addressed.

Okay so to cut a really long and twisty story short what you are for is some kind of regulation specifying a unified physical training standard across all the Services and mandatory proficiency evaluations for each speciality? Oh and the whole test unit as well....still it does seem to me that the other are more likely to follow the steps being suggested by the current legislation.

[DO ALL THE THINGS]

Where did I say men aren't properly vetted? What I was trying to say with that last line is that if they put females into a combat infantry unit (a role that they have not served in before) then they need to go to a unit that is not going to deploy for a year or more if possible. This would allow females to become more familiar with thier completely new role in an infantry unit and allow them to partake in the unit's entire pre-deployment train up period. Male Soldiers PCSing to a new infantry unit will be coming from an infantry unit already, that was the key difference I was trying to get across. I know it is a popular talking point to bring up the fluidity of the battlefield on the news. This is because, like you said, there are no frontlines and because of IEDS and attacking convoys with small arms (not so much anymore due to air cover, although not unheard of) females cannot be guaranteed to not be in a combat situation. However, there is a key difference between those combat scenarios and going out on foot on a combat patrol. That was my point. I do not see women performing well in a knock down, drag out urban infantry combat scenario. Does a signaller or a logistics driver face IEDs and possibly small arms fire, mortar fire etc.? Yes. Does it still suck? Yes. Is it the same as what they will see in an infantry unti? Nope. This is one of my main issues with the arguement of, well they are already in combat so.....

Moving on to what I think should be done. No, I am not calling for barring women completely from serving. I have stated that many times (although probably not to you. I am replying to several people). I would be in support of allowing females in combat arms jobs if the PT standards are unified, they don't pull a fast one and lower the standards overall and if they do not receive special treatment. A testing period where a small number of females are integrated, as others have suggested, I would be for if my previous concerns were addressed.

Okay so to cut a really long and twisty story short what you are for is some kind of regulation specifying a unified physical training standard across all the Services and mandatory proficiency evaluations for each speciality? Oh and the whole test unit as well....still it does seem to me that the other are more likely to follow the steps being suggested by the current legislation.

Yes. However, I don't think that will happen. I do not trust the people in gov't to grant the powers to the people to implement it properly to do so without letting politics play into the whole mess. Nor do I think it will work anyway, as I never met a woman in the Army during my service that could hack it in our infantry unit. If you don't want long answers don't ask questions. It's how I roll.

Edit-

Just thought of this. One thing I did notice is that the Army did lower standards to accomodate female recruits in traditionally male Army schools that were made unisex. Specifically, the Air Assault (AASLT) Program at Ft. Campbell, KY. In the late 90's, one of the requirements of the school was to run 2 miles in under 15 minutes in full BDU's (battle dress uniform, including boots). The change was made in 2002 that you were allowed to complete the run in under 18 minutes without the top of the BDU's and tennis shoes instead of boots. The reason was never stated, but most believe it was to counteract the high number of female dropouts in the AASLT program. This was becuase the APFT 100% for females was close to 15 minutes, so the time was dropped to be closer to the passing score for females on the APFT.

[Poorisolation]

And given that rape isn't about sex, but about dominance (male dogs, for example, will mount other male dogs to show dominance), saying that men won't be raped as part of the torture is disingenuous. And saying that Muslims won't rape men because of their prejudice about homosexuality denies the facts - in point of fact, as I pointed out earlier, T.E. Lawrence was captured, raped and tortured by Muslim Turks during WWI; I'm given to understand that he wasn't the only one, just the most famous one.

Also, the muslim cultures I encountered were much more comfortable touching men then women. It was not uncommon on the streets of Iraq to see men holding hands or doing other things to each other that are not socially acceptable to Americans. On the other hand, women were often hidden from view and I never saw couples kissing each other or showing affection of any kind.

To begin at the beginning ND (is that okay or an acronym too far?) my mind did go into more flip flops than Mitt Romney picking a tie for the morning.

Well Imsogone the event that is kind of etched on my mind was part of a course on how to endure captivity and torture interrogation, it is really hard to get am image of a man with the kind of moustache that belongs in a Boy's Own Annual saying quite blandly, "If you are raped and experience an erection and orgasm don't be alarmed most men who are raped do and this does not make you gay". Not perhaps the most enlightened way to put it but still...it stuck and I think that was the aim.

Do All the Things I do agree that signs of Male Male affection are far more common in the Middle East I don't think that is the root of it, it is equally a prevalent tactic in Southern Africa where homophobia is rife. In fact I have been enlightened of cases of it being used by profoundly homophobic career criminals in the UK as well and we don't like any kind of affection normally (shouldn't really joke but it is that or cringe). The justification across the board seems to be it is okay and not gay if used as a weapon.

[Aquophia]

I know a physical trainer and I do a lot of strength training on my own. In order for your muscles to get stronger, they must be stressed as much as they can. If you put a female and a male of the same body type together, both having never worked a day in thier life, the male will still have to start with slightly heavier weights because men naturally have more muscle mass. He would be curling 15 lbs while the lady would be curling 8-10 lbs, but they would both get the same intensity of training since thier muscles are both being pushed as hard as they can go. If you are working below that point (ie curling 10 when you should be curling 15), then you are basically just wasting time and shouldn't be training in the first place.

Uh huh...so you know a meathead that probably is taking roids anyway.
Have you ever gone through basic training? Ever been subjected to the constant stress and mayhem in order to be transformed from civilian into soldier/airman/seaman/marine? That crucible takes its toll on both genders. It's not just about physical conditioning (which by the way you just measured upper body strength, women tend to develop hellacious lower body strength more quickly), it's about finding a will to survive and overcome. That knows no gender, no superficial qualifier like you'd have everyone believe.

So sorry, since you have no actual experience regarding military training to base this on your argument is still bunk until you prove otherwise.

What you're saying is that i'm wrong because i'm not a solider. That's like saying you're wrong when you debate in politics because you are not a politician.

You also made three strawmen for assuming I associate with juicers, assuming that I was talking solely about upper body strength and assuming that I think that women can't make it in the military at all. Sounds like you are more wrong than me. All I suggested was to make the training programs more efficient. Soldiers today are not as physically fit as there were 50 years ago and merging the two genders is part of the reason why. Look it up if you don't believe me.

[Greed and Death]

Women are already in combat.
The combat roles, Infantry, Ranger, and the like however is different. They want people who can perform similar functions. Lift the same amount, go #1 without the need for toilet paper and the like.

[DO ALL THE THINGS]

Uh huh...so you know a meathead that probably is taking roids anyway.
Have you ever gone through basic training? Ever been subjected to the constant stress and mayhem in order to be transformed from civilian into soldier/airman/seaman/marine? That crucible takes its toll on both genders. It's not just about physical conditioning (which by the way you just measured upper body strength, women tend to develop hellacious lower body strength more quickly), it's about finding a will to survive and overcome. That knows no gender, no superficial qualifier like you'd have everyone believe.

So sorry, since you have no actual experience regarding military training to base this on your argument is still bunk until you prove otherwise.

What you're saying is that i'm wrong because i'm not a solider. That's like saying you're wrong when you debate in politics because you are not a politician.

You also made three strawmen for assuming I associate with juicers, assuming that I was talking solely about upper body strength and assuming that I think that women can't make it in the military at all. Sounds like you are more wrong than me. All I suggested was to make the training programs more efficient.

Soldiers today are not as physically fit as there were 50 years ago and merging the two genders is part of the reason why. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Yet we are expected to carry more into combat than ever before.

http://thedonovan.com/archives/modernwa ... Report.pdf

[Northern Dominus]

Uh huh...so you know a meathead that probably is taking roids anyway.
Have you ever gone through basic training? Ever been subjected to the constant stress and mayhem in order to be transformed from civilian into soldier/airman/seaman/marine? That crucible takes its toll on both genders. It's not just about physical conditioning (which by the way you just measured upper body strength, women tend to develop hellacious lower body strength more quickly), it's about finding a will to survive and overcome. That knows no gender, no superficial qualifier like you'd have everyone believe.

So sorry, since you have no actual experience regarding military training to base this on your argument is still bunk until you prove otherwise.

What you're saying is that i'm wrong because i'm not a solider. That's like saying you're wrong when you debate in politics because you are not a politician.

You also made three strawmen for assuming I associate with juicers, assuming that I was talking solely about upper body strength and assuming that I think that women can't make it in the military at all. Sounds like you are more wrong than me. All I suggested was to make the training programs more efficient. Soldiers today are not as physically fit as there were 50 years ago and merging the two genders is part of the reason why. Look it up if you don't believe me.

You're the one that asserted your expertiese by stating you know a trainer and therefore have some sort of insight when it comes to physical conditioning and how that disqualifies women completely. You also made the implication using curls that because a particular woman and a particular man didn't curl at the same weight that this somehow correlated to both genders entirely.

I might have been elitist in my approach regarding my rebuttal to your very narrow point but then again it is firsthand observation. I've seen big burly men who lift weights daily get disqualified during swims, falter and fail at runs, fall of low structures because of improper balance so strength isn't the end-all be all. And as I stated, training is just as much about fostering a sense of esprit de corps and tempering and fostering the willpower of the civilian who is turning into a soldier. People find ways and means to adapt and overcome, and that's something that can't be strengthened or worked on.

[Augarundus]

I generally don't support bills that "puts people on the frontline of battle"...

[Imsogone]

I generally don't support bills that "puts people on the frontline of battle"...

At least you're lack of support isn't based on a specious sexism.

[Tekania]

He's joking.

Except I get this shit all the time from armchair generals who think they know more than anybody who's actually enlisted or been commissioned, even in a non-combat role. It gets old very quickly.

He's joking.... and he's a former marine btw.

Though it completely wrong of him to denigrate the coast-guard in such a manner.... that's the Navy's job.

[Caninope]

He's joking.

Except I get this shit all the time from armchair generals who think they know more than anybody who's actually enlisted or been commissioned, even in a non-combat role. It gets old very quickly.

IIRC, Dyakovo (the person in question) was an infantryman.

EDIT: Tekania says he was a Marine, so that means he wasn't an infantryman. He was a devil (dog).

[Imsogone]

Except I get this shit all the time from armchair generals who think they know more than anybody who's actually enlisted or been commissioned, even in a non-combat role. It gets old very quickly.

He's joking.... and he's a former marine btw.

Though it completely wrong of him to denigrate the coast-guard in such a manner.... that's the Navy's job.

If he's a Marine, he gets to denigrate the Navy and the Coast Guard. But the Navy gets to make jokes about him.

[Alowwvia]

What you're saying is that i'm wrong because i'm not a solider. That's like saying you're wrong when you debate in politics because you are not a politician.

You also made three strawmen for assuming I associate with juicers, assuming that I was talking solely about upper body strength and assuming that I think that women can't make it in the military at all. Sounds like you are more wrong than me. All I suggested was to make the training programs more efficient.

Soldiers today are not as physically fit as there were 50 years ago and merging the two genders is part of the reason why. Look it up if you don't believe me.

Yet we are expected to carry more into combat than ever before.

http://thedonovan.com/archives/modernwa ... Report.pdf

[Northern Dominus]

Except I get this shit all the time from armchair generals who think they know more than anybody who's actually enlisted or been commissioned, even in a non-combat role. It gets old very quickly.

He's joking.... and he's a former marine btw.

Though it completely wrong of him to denigrate the coast-guard in such a manner.... that's the Navy's job.

Yeah yeah, have fun in those big steel cans while hot bunking. I'll just stay here with my nice soft bed, good food, AND all the women that the Navy leaves alone for months at a time...not the married ones of course. Oh and I STILL get to collect hazard pay while on rotation to the cutter!
Besides what does MARINE stand for again? I think the acronym is My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment...

[Imsogone]

He's joking.... and he's a former marine btw.

Though it completely wrong of him to denigrate the coast-guard in such a manner.... that's the Navy's job.

Yeah yeah, have fun in those big steel cans while hot bunking. I'll just stay here with my nice soft bed, good food, AND all the women that the Navy leaves alone for months at a time...not the married ones of course. Oh and I STILL get to collect hazard pay while on rotation to the cutter!
Besides what does MARINE stand for again? I think the acronym is My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment...

You know why there are 16 buttons on a sailor's pants?


to give the marines 16 chances to say yes.

[Northern Dominus]

Except I get this shit all the time from armchair generals who think they know more than anybody who's actually enlisted or been commissioned, even in a non-combat role. It gets old very quickly.

IIRC, Dyakovo (the person in question) was an infantryman.

EDIT: Tekania says he was a Marine, so that means he wasn't an infantryman. He was a devil (dog).

Oh well in that case he can joke all he likes.

He's wrong of course but he's allowed

[Northern Dominus]

Yeah yeah, have fun in those big steel cans while hot bunking. I'll just stay here with my nice soft bed, good food, AND all the women that the Navy leaves alone for months at a time...not the married ones of course. Oh and I STILL get to collect hazard pay while on rotation to the cutter!
Besides what does MARINE stand for again? I think the acronym is My Ass Rides In Navy Equipment...

You know why there are 16 buttons on a sailor's pants?


to give the marines 16 chances to say yes.

...and when people ask me why I enlisted in the Coast Guard and not the Navy, there's one answer why.

[Vyvansia]

Why would men and women need different training to drive a tank or fire a rifle or march in a straight line or anything else soldiers do?

I don't know about the other two things, but as far as marching is concerned, because men's and women's hips are different. The US Army discovered years ago that when women were made to march the way men march it caused them orthopedic problems. Then when the marching technique was adjusted to make it safer and easier for women, it started injuring men.

[SaintB]

No, really, how is it that fucking simple? I mean, you know it's just peoples' lives and shit, right? It's not like having someone (male or female) in a infantry unit that can't carry their own weight because they are physically inferior or aren't trained to the same high standard as everyone else could, I don't know KILL someone or something.

We're not proposing a change in the physical requirements.

other than requiring that they have a penis anyway.

[DO ALL THE THINGS]

U.S. COAST GUARD ENLISTMENT OATH:
"I, (State your name), swear to sign away 4 years of my life to the UNITED STATES COAST GUARD because I know being in the real military scares me. However, I swear to defend our position as the fifth branch of the Armed Services, although at one point we were under the Department of Homeland Security. I understand that at least twice a day, someone will refer to me a member of the Air Force or Navy, and when I correct them, they will question my military status. I will work on boats the size of kayaks and small yachts during the worst of natures storms, and receive no thanks or notice from the public (or President). I will fly in helos into the eye of the storm to rescue people dumber then rocks, and then be heckled by the same people when I bust them for transporting drugs two months later. I will prevent thousands of gallons of pollution, but be accused of impeding the economy when I won't allow vessels to pour oil into the ocean. I will be the red-headed step child to all of the other services, although I know I got the better deal. All of my equipment will be discarded Navy property. I will use most of my time in the Coast Guard to take college classes, and perfect my web-surfing abilities, then complain that I work too much. I will perfect avoiding PT at all costs, and do my best to attend training that will give me a great competitive edge in the career field of my choice, making retention efforts of the Coast Guard pointless. I will come in contact with so many pollutants during my tenure, I will glow in the dark for the rest of my natural life and refer to myself as "salty" because of it. I will do my best to work 8 to 3, with a two hour lunch, on normal days, and have my pager and cell phone surgically attached, SO HELP ME GOD."
____________________ Signature
____________________ Date

US AIR FORCE OATH OF ENLISTMENT: "I, (State your name), swear to sign away 4 years of my life to the UNITED STATES AIR FORCE because I know I couldn't hack it in the Army, because the Marines frighten me, and because I am afraid of water over waist-deep. I swear to sit behind a desk. I also swear not to do any form of real exercise, but promise to defend our bike-riding test as a valid form of exercise. I promise to walk around calling everyone by their first name because I find it amusing to annoy the other services. I will have a better quality of life than those around me and will, at all times, be sure to make them aware of that fact. After completion of "Basic Training", I will be a lean, mean, donut-eating, Lazy-Boy sitting, civilian-wearing-blue-clothes, Chair-borne Ranger. I will believe I am superior to all others and will make an effort to clean the knife before stabbing the next person in the back. I will annoy those around me, and will go home early every day. SO HELP ME GOD!" ____________________ Signature
____________________ Date

US ARMY OATH OF ENLISTMENT:
"I, (State your name), swear to sign away 4 years of my otherwise mediocre life to the UNITED STATES ARMY because I couldn't score high enough on the ASVAB to get into the Air Force, I'm not tough enough for the Marines, and the Navy won't take me because I can't swim. I will wear camouflage every day and tuck my trousers into my boots because I can't figure out how to use blousing straps. I promise to wear my uniform 24 hours a day even when I have a date. I will continue to tell myself that I am a fierce killing machine because my Drill Sergeant told me I am, despite the fact that the only action I will see is a court-martial for ****** harassment. I acknowledge the fact that I will make E-8 in my first year of service, and vow to maintain that it is because I scored perfect on my PT test. After completion of my ******.....er.....I mean "Basic Training," I will attend a different Army school every other month and return knowing less than I did when I left. On my first trip home after Boot Camp, I will walk around like I am cool and propose to my 9th grade sweetheart. I will make my wife stay home because if I let her out she might leave me for a better-looking Air Force guy. Should she leave me twelve times, I will continue to take her back. While at work I will maintain a look of knowledge while getting absolutely nothing accomplished. I will arrive to work every day at 1000 hrs because of morning PT and leave everyday at 1300 to report back to "COMPANY." I understand that I will undergo no training whatsoever that will help me get a job up! on separation and will end up working construction with my friends from high school. I will brag to everyone about the Army giving me $30,000 for college, but will be unable to use it because I can't pass a placement exam. SO HELP ME GOD!" _____________________ Signature
_____________________ Date

US NAVY OATH OF ENLISTMENT: "I, Top Gun, in lieu of going to prison, swear to sign away 4 years of my life to the UNITED STATES NAVY, because I want to hang out with Marines without actually having to BE one of them, because I thought the Air Force was too "corporate," because I didn't want to actually live in dirt like the Army, and because I thought, "Hey, I like to swim...why not?" I promise to wear clothes that went out of style in 1976 and to have my name stenciled on the butt of every pair of pants I own. I understand that I will be mistaken for the Good Humor Man during summer and for Nazi Waffen SS during the winter. I will strive to use a different language than the rest of the English-speaking world, using words like "deck, bulkhead, cover, geedunk, scuttlebutt, scuttle and head," when I really mean "floor, wall, hat, candy, water fountain, hole in wall and toilet." I will take great pride in the fact that all Navy acronyms, rank, and insignia, and everything else for that matter, are completely different from the other services and make absolutely no sense whatsoever. I will muster, whatever that is, at 0700 every morning unless I am buddy-buddy with the Chief, in which case I will show up around 0930. I vow to hone my coffee cup-handling skills to the point that I can stand up in a kayak being tossed around in a typhoon and still not spill a drop. I consent to being promoted and subsequently busted at least twice per fiscal year. I realize that, once selected for Chief, I am required to submit myself to the sick and quite possibly illegal, whims of my newfound "colleagues." SO HELP ME NEPTUNE!"
______________________ Signature
______________________ Date

US MARINE CORPS OATH OF ENLISTMENT: "I, (pick a name the police won't recognize), swear..uhhhh ....high-and-tight.... grunt...cammies....kill....fix bayonets.... charge....slash....dig....burn....blowup....ugh...Air Force women.... beer.....sailors wives.....air strikes....yes SIR!....whiskey....liberty call ....salute....Ooorah Gunny....grenades...women....OORAH! SO HELP ME CHESTY PULLER!"
X____________________ Thumb Print
XX _________________________________ Teeth Marks
_____________________ Date

-Edit I am not the author of this. Found this on a chain email from a long time ago.

[The UK in Exile]

We're not proposing a change in the physical requirements.

other than requiring that they have a penis anyway.

as long as they just have to own one.....


NO PENIS IS SAFE!

[Neo Arcad]

I'd like to note that my father, who's a CSM in USACAPOC, has a company composed almost equally of women and men. It's like 40% or whatever. In 2006, when they deployed during the worst of OIF, they were running 3 and 4 missions a day, because PSYOP was in high demand. Not once did they have ANY problems where these female soldiers couldn't do their duty. And in addition, USACAPOC was under USSOCOM at the time, so they were technically Special Forces. My dad, a drill sergeant during the first Gulf War, certainly held the women to the same standards as the men. And that was a high standard. So BS to anyone who thinks women can't perform in combat.

[DO ALL THE THINGS]

I'd like to note that my father, who's a CSM in USACAPOC, has a company composed almost equally of women and men. It's like 40% or whatever. In 2006, when they deployed during the worst of OIF, they were running 3 and 4 missions a day, because PSYOP was in high demand. Not once did they have ANY problems where these female soldiers couldn't do their duty. And in addition, USACAPOC was under USSOCOM at the time, so they were technically Special Forces. My dad, a drill sergeant during the first Gulf War, certainly held the women to the same standards as the men. And that was a high standard. So BS to anyone who thinks women can't perform in combat.

Female Soldiers not having a problem running PSYOPs missions has absolutely nothing to do with how they would perform in a infantry unit running combat patrols. Furthermore, being attached to SOCOM does not make one "technically" special forces. The absurdity of that statement is overwhelming.

[SaintB]

Can they carry a 45 lb rucksack with an additional 60 lbs of gear consisting of your body armor, ammunition, water, food, radio, batteries, etc. over the course of a 5 day patrol in the mountains of Afganistan? I know this is, again, just my own experience, but I have NEVER met a woman that could keep up in those conditions. Those were not special circumstances either, that was a standard patrol. That being said, I'm sorry, but quoting tests done on cadets from West Point and the end of basic training 3 day field problem are poor examples. What I experienced in Afganistan and Iraq were nothing compared to our 3 day little romp in the woods at Ft. Sill, OK at the end of basic. A good test you say? Well, in my opinion, I would throw some just out of BCT women into a standard light infantry unit for a year in a garrison environment. Treat them EXACTLY the same as a male first arriving at the unit. That means no special treatment. The same exact crazy cursed filled rampages that only a 12 years+ in an infantry 1SG can pull off. If they pass and don't quit, then send them on a 15 month deployment. If they still pass, don't get anyone killed or don't go home early because they "can't take the pressure" (actually happened to 7 out of 12 female Soldiers in non-combat roles attached to our battalion in Ar Ramadi, Iraq) then open up infantry slots to women using the same standards as the test group.

I'm not advocating special treatment. Please highlight where I said so. All I said is that some perform comparably to men and should be allowed to serve and that strength tests are not an accurate predictor of performance. Keep in mind these studies aren't performance aren't me pulling it out my ass. These are quoted right out of Military Journals written by people whose job it is to evaluate if women can serve. See also where I showed before where I pointed out Isreal's Caracal Battalion. They are fighting at the same level as their male counterparts. While not fully comparable to the US in how they deploy, but several of the US's allies that deploy in the same places as the US have infatrywomen such as Canada and New Zealand. I can also bring up sources on the success of female troops in the Red Army during WW2 (Soviet Women in that conflict were actually held to a higher standard then the men).

Letting women fight in combat is special treatment! Equal treatment is special treatment when you talk about women and gays!