Well, I'm going to jump in here and keep it simple with a simpleton arguement. Following Desflood's line of reasoning, I want to pose a question. Let's say you have Army A comprised of 100 men infantry. Army B has 100 women infantry. Who will have the upper hand in combat, either long range or hand to hand? Best subjective guess?
Now let's suppose Foreign Army C is invading your city with an army of 200 men infantry. Would you rather defend your city with 100 women and 100 men, or would you rather defend your city with 200 men? Let's assume the male/female defending army are all of normal average builds. Your family's lives are on the line. Assume losing means losing everything.
Understanding that there are plethora other variables I'm not considering, what are your choices with the given scenario?
for some jobs it is fine... but for jobs where the soldiers would be serving together in tight/close quarters the gay problem sets in.. you can't have anyone in the squad, platoon, company, etc thinking on of their "buddies" wants to get closer. even if he didn't it wouldn't make for good morale for the troops... in the military you are put in weird situations and settings... you have to trust your buds 100%
regarding women in combat.. i'm sure manny knows that the majority of women are weaker...i think manny has to have his feminist views bc jekka seems like a strong character..
Nah. Manny is an idealist, bless him. The rest of us are just to jaded to identify!
"Lord Vader, Rise"
"Yes, master"
why couldn't you trust a gay solider? you act as if a gay soldier would constantly be trying to have sex with the other soliders.
On women's emotional instability: This is supported by our prison statistics, which is mostly men.
On gays being unable to control themselves: I guess people are adding gays to the emotional instability list, no doubt that is supported by our prison stats, too.
Let me introduce an inconvenient fact to this discussion. You put a group of guys isolated together for a long period of time. Guess what happens. They start having sex with each other. No, not all of them, but a substantial fraction, much much higher than any gay rate.
i think some of this is in poor taste
yes because the prison population is indicative of the population at large. good job equating 2 people of the same sex choosing to be in a relationship with rape.You put a group of guys isolated together for a long period of time. Guess what happens. They start having sex with each other. No, not all of them, but a substantial fraction, much much higher than any gay rate.
I'd rather defend my city with the better trained better equipped army, not to mention a better motivated army thank you, regardless of race,sex,creed or religion.Now let's suppose Foreign Army C is invading your city with an army of 200 men infantry. Would you rather defend your city with 100 women and 100 men, or would you rather defend your city with 200 men? Let's assume the male/female defending army are all of normal average builds. Your family's lives are on the line. Assume losing means losing everything.
we'll never be able to let the coloreds serve in the army with white soldiers because we simply can't trust them. They aren't as smart and we all know they are cowards at heart.for some jobs it is fine... but for jobs where the soldiers would be serving together in tight/close quarters the gay problem sets in.. you can't have anyone in the squad, platoon, company, etc thinking on of their "buddies" wants to get closer. even if he didn't it wouldn't make for good morale for the troops... in the military you are put in weird situations and settings... you have to trust your buds 100%
just because you're a worthless bigot doesn't mean everyone in the army is.
Lets assume we don't have restrictions on combat and instead take the best 100 qualified people. Who would you ratehr have, the top 100 people, or the top 100 men?
Hey, the top 100 may very well be all men, but if thats the case there's no need for a restriction because the women just won't be good enough.
You guys can try to justify keeping women out of combat anyway you'd like. But when it comes down to it, it's just the justification of a practice who's roots lie within the thought that even the best woman, isn't as capable as the worst man. Thats what it all boils down to.
If even ONE woman can best ONE man, I would much rather have her in place. Whether that be hand to hand combat, long range combat, naval combat, aeiral combat, or who can piss further combat.
It's pretty much the same thing with sexuals. The policy we have in place is incredibly ed up. So, you join the military to fight for the land of the free, yet let the segregation fly. The man next to me may be the best sniper on the face of the earth, but I don't want to fight with him because he really does like guns.
That's pretty damn stupid.
Jess has done nothing but reinforce my views that women are pretty damn capable. But she's not the first person I've dated that's proven that to me. No, actualy, I've been around strong women my entire life, starting with my mother.
when was the last time you were in the army?
here is a personal example of how gays can up your unit morale: i was working at a base. a group of 6 guys i knew(4 army, 2 contractors) went on a weekend trip to rome... one night, they all ended up back at the hotel bar drinking(they were already drunk from being out)..2 dudes(1 army, 1 contractor) said they were tired and were going to bed.. the rest stayed out getting drunk for a little while, then they were like, yeah, we're tired too, let's go to bed as well...anyway, when they went upstairs the 2 dudes who had gone up earlier were naked in the shower TOGETHER! they wanted to puke.. they were so ing mad these dudes would do that to them, etc... when the other 4 came back they told everyone.. whole morale for the unit was shot to ... neither dude had been openly gay before...
"Do that to them"
Man, it's just pointless to continue debating it when thats the mindset. I seriously wonder what it was like for black men being intergrated into the army. There are probably tons of similarities.
the issues are totally different. we figured out that black men are not different that white except in skin color...
gays will still want to you in the ass no matter what.. they are still different.. manny, you have no idea what it is like being in the military...
those dudes couldn't even trust their "friend" to tell them he was gay... then a little while later they find him butt ing someone! how can you trust that dude???
You're right about one thing, I don't understand the military.
Man, we shouldn't allow straight guys in the military either, because all they want to do is women!!!!!!!!
#1 I shouldn't have to trust ANYONE with my sexuality, because it's none of their business.
#2 My sexuality is part of me, but it is not a defining characteristic of how well I do in the military.
#3 Did you ever think the reason they didn't tell anyone was because of the stupid policy that gets them kicked out if they do?
#4 What difference does it make who wants to who, as long as they do their job?
And eventually you will figure out that gay men are not different than straight men except that they dress better, are cleaner, and like a different hole.
i mean trust them for anything... and the military is about teamwork.. if you can't trust your teammates or work with them you are screwed..
those are all stereotypes... funny how you choose to include them now! oh, except the last one.. they'd love to you in the ass any day of the week!
The military says it can't trust the gay man, yet the military demands trust from the gay man. Insane.
Those were jokes.
Do you think every woman out there wants to you? So why would you think every gay man wants to do the same?
I never understood why people assume that either. No matter team you bat for, there still has to be some attraction.
Assume all countries applied US "progressive" reasoning into their militaries and allowed females in combat.
Who in here, if were a Marine sniper, would think it grotesque and grossly against the natural order to line up a female soldier in your sites and squeeze off a head shot?
Who wouldn't give a damn and say, 'hey, she's in uniform, fair game"?
I'm squarely in the former. Everyone else?
So you'd be ok with killing a man but not a woman in uniform?
Man, I am having trouble following much of the logic in this thread.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
