dumb American's view

[garett]

In another BB that I posted on I got this reply from an American who calls himself Ranger. Who knows if he is one or not. The subject was on woman in combat which I posted a message which was in favour. I guess this guy had a different opinion.

Private,

Maybe in teh canadian army which has never won a war can a woman and a man serve next to each other but in armies that free the world such as the United States we cannot afford social experimentation. How heavy are those rucks that you hump? I will bet a lot of money that they weigh less than 50lbs. Get them up to 80-90lbs and then strap on on a woman she will buckel over. I am sorry but the United States does not take advice from soldiers that are only peace keepers. Your example does not work for a country like ours.

[recce_o]

He just proved himself wrong with an internally self-contradictory statement.

The point is that we shouldn't pre-judge women. If a woman can hump a 90 pound or 150 pound (or whatever) ruck, and can meet all the other bona fide requirements, then she should have every right to be a player in the game.

If he wants to talk history, remind him that the only war between Canada and the U.S. (War of 1812) resulted in a Canadian victory. And then tell him that his beloved Robert Rogers was a Loyalist during the American Revolution. And then you can tell him to kiss your Canadian a**.

[Cole]

Ouch, that was nasty....he needs a bit of an additude adjustment.
As for women in the military. Although I am not a soldier yet (3 months!) here is my outside view.
1. You here this one all the time. Woman are naturally weaker then men. True to a point. If the standards are equalized for men and woman I would have to agree with many of the vets on this site that there would be less woman serving. Okay no problem, they can hack it, but....
2. You have less woman serving due to increased physical standards. As a result, this makes woman more of a rarity throughout an army, and subject to being singled out.
3. Men and Women cannot last togeather without all the sexual harrassment BS that goes on and makes life more difficult for the men and women. This detracts from the mission and can cost lives.

Now...This is only my view. I do not mean to offend anyone, only this is the general opinion I have formed from reading the posts of the guys who have been there and done that. Any other opinions, especially from CF members (women or men) that have served alongside female soldiers, in combat positions, would be appriaciated.
Thanks!
(By the way, what site was this on, that Ranger guy seems like an asshole, I want to check him out)

[garett]

the BB in question is on the A&E site and its full of stupid Americans. http://www.aande.com/perl/wwwthreads/wwwthreads.pl?action=list&Board=combat

[Cole]

Garrett, your right, what a bunch of dicklickers. All I can say for Canada and our infantry is "Ducimus" (Try asking a Yank what that means!)

[LRSC Grunt]

The guys right why bust on him?

[This message has been edited by LRSC Grunt (edited 04-28-2000).]

[Cole]

Grunt,
Ya he is right about the woman thing, I agree with him. But his comments about our military, spoken in such a condecending manner, earn him the title of "dicklicker"

[Cole]

Grunt,
In response to my previous message. Garrett's link no longer leads to the thread that I read and Garrett is reffering to. In Ranger's first comment he was trash-talking the Canadian military, saying we have never won a war. Now I've met some vets who fought in both Normandy AND Korea and have been through action that would make this guy shit himself (It would, because one guys said he did) Saying we Canadians aren't capable of winning a war is downright ignorant. Remember, we were fighting Nazi's and Japs 2 years before you guys even got started...

[This message has been edited by Cole (edited 04-28-2000).]

[Cree Warrior]

I got a sh_t load to say on this topic. As an ex 2/75 Ranger and now a CDN PL Comdr I like to tell my US Ranger buddies about females in the Canadian Army. It is from my experience that the soldiers that are the MOST AGAINST women in the military are the weakest, most undisciplined, sh_t bags. They are the ones that are the most threatened by females in combat roles.
Soldiers that are confident in their skills, fitness and in their identity are not threatened by women in combat roles.
As for women meeting the standard, I also like to tell them about a friend of mine who could kick ANY of their asses, including the ones that went on the SFOD. 6'1", 180lbs, 7% body fat, National Gold medal in pistol shooting (loves guns), National Champion in modern pentathalon, runs the 800 in just over 2 min, swims 200 in around 2:15. In other words, for those of you who are athletes...she kicks ass.
The one female in my platoon is one of my best soldiers, and she is also one of the smallest, I've never seen her fall out of anything.
Now most of what I've written is anecdotal evidence, but I feel that it says alot.
People say that allowing women in the combat arms has lowered our PT standars...well how many women do you see now in combat roles, not too many still. Mostly due to poor recruiting and harrassment.
So you can't blame them for the low PT stndards...that you can blame NDHQ.
Anyways, I could go on and on about that topic...maybe a thesis is in the works.

I say tell your Ranger buddy to read up on his Ranger history. Most of tactics/origins that the 75th Ranger Regiment talks about in our history were actually learned from the Iroqouis Confederacy. Who also had female warriors.

Sua Sponte

Can't wait till the boys read this one!

[maniac]

I was an U.S. Soldier for 6 years and did train a short while with females...never ever came across one that could compete with the guys (unless the guy was a fairy). I will give you Canadians one thing...you make damn good whisky!