Author Topic: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops  (Read 3040 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline mystery-ak

  • Owner
  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 257,508
Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« on: January 29, 2013, 10:39:31 PM »

Support the USO

Offline Rapunzel

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 71,719
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #1 on: January 29, 2013, 10:44:09 PM »
Maybe they should talk to some of the retired seals first.

famousdayandyear

  • Guest
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #2 on: January 29, 2013, 11:03:15 PM »
aaargh.....another one bites the dust

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #3 on: January 30, 2013, 12:09:46 AM »
Ok, someone has to say it.

Why not?

There is one thing a woman can do that a man can not - give birth.

There is one thing a man can do that a woman can not - carry more weight per kilo of body mass, on average.

If a woman can meet the standards, let her fight. I would even be in favor of trimming the standards slightly since women tend to have both faster reaction times and more acute senses, both of which are well documented by actual studies and not wishful thinking or PC BS. Women have a higher pain threshold, and a much tougher mental outlook.

Oh, but mixed units, I hear you cry. They are already a thing. There is zero difference between watching a hairy guy having a crap in front of you and a woman having a crap in front of you. Both are pretty revolting. The Japanese had a saying - nakedness is often seen but never noticed.
So get out of the 16th century and admit that half the human race is just as capable as you.
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline Cincinnatus

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,514
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #4 on: January 30, 2013, 12:48:59 AM »
Uh, no, I don't believe I will get out of the 16th century nor do I understand why you picked that period. I have already stated on here I don't recall the Israelites conscripting their women into God's army, nor the Greeks into their phalanxes, nor the Romans in their legions. In fact, with the exception of the legends of the Amazons, I do not recall any society that turned its wives and daughters into warriors, especially in the West.

That we are about to do so is further evidence of our decline as a nation.
We shall never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid ~~ Samuel Adams

Offline Relic

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4,967
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #5 on: January 30, 2013, 09:53:49 AM »

That we are about to do so is further evidence of our decline as a nation.

Agreed. It's a very liberal idea to cast women and men as equivalent, and suited for all tasks equally. I noted the tip of the hat to the differences, while making a case there is no difference. Another liberal trait, acknowledge reality, while denying it's implications.

Men are more suited to be warriors. Testosterone... look it up.

Yes, there are individual women who are capable, perhaps even a bit manly. But, in general, the presence of women in combat units will decrease efficiency and effectiveness. But, that is the goal of the liberal.

Women and men are complementary in their skill sets. We need each other. But, we are not equally well suited to all tasks. When this discussion comes up, I remember something I read that attempts to explain the difference in capability of men and women.

A husband and wife are home at night and there is a fire. The man wakes up and thinks: "Must get out, Must get out, Must get out!" The woman wakes up and thinks: "Grab the kids, grab the pets, grab the papers, grab the pictures..." The man gets them out, the woman saves other things along the way.

Offline PzLdr

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,421
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #6 on: January 30, 2013, 10:42:44 AM »
Uh, no, I don't believe I will get out of the 16th century nor do I understand why you picked that period. I have already stated on here I don't recall the Israelites conscripting their women into God's army, nor the Greeks into their phalanxes, nor the Romans in their legions. In fact, with the exception of the legends of the Amazons, I do not recall any society that turned its wives and daughters into warriors, especially in the West.

That we are about to do so is further evidence of our decline as a nation.

In the west, Celts. Remember Bouddica? In Asia, the Mongols [to a limited degree]. There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians.  :smokin:
Hillary's Self-announced Qualifications: She Stood Up To Putin...She Sits to Pee

Offline evadR²

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,197
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #7 on: January 30, 2013, 12:05:43 PM »
"The physical requirements of Ranger School, or even infantry basic training, are considerable, and only a limited number of women are likely to qualify, current SOF operators warn."
I assure you we'll take care of that little problem.
November 6, 2012, a day in infamy...the death of a republic as we know it.

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #8 on: January 30, 2013, 12:56:00 PM »
Agreed. It's a very liberal idea to cast women and men as equivalent, and suited for all tasks equally. I noted the tip of the hat to the differences, while making a case there is no difference. Another liberal trait, acknowledge reality, while denying it's implications.

Men are more suited to be warriors. Testosterone... look it up.

Yes, there are individual women who are capable, perhaps even a bit manly. But, in general, the presence of women in combat units will decrease efficiency and effectiveness. But, that is the goal of the liberal.

Women and men are complementary in their skill sets. We need each other. But, we are not equally well suited to all tasks. When this discussion comes up, I remember something I read that attempts to explain the difference in capability of men and women.

A husband and wife are home at night and there is a fire. The man wakes up and thinks: "Must get out, Must get out, Must get out!" The woman wakes up and thinks: "Grab the kids, grab the pets, grab the papers, grab the pictures..." The man gets them out, the woman saves other things along the way.

Thank you! The bolded bit is exactly what I need for this discussion. For the record, my post was lifted from a FB discussion with a friend - his points, not mine, though I added the 16th century line (Cinncinatus - I picked the 16th century because that was roughly when the aristocracy stopped training their daughters with sword, poniard and bow. Chivalry got big around then.)

I think a lot of the confusion in the minds of those on the left is they have no idea of the difference between active combat and self defense, and the ones that do know the difference are shouted down or get lost in the crowd.

Given the choice of facing a man with an AK or a pissed off mother with any weapon at all, I would choose the man every time. I doubt anyone would deny that women are as adept at self defense (with the usual proviso that an unarmed 120lb woman going up against an unarmed 240 lb man is going to be totally creamed) as men are, and frequently have more incentive to go all in. That, however, does not translate to combat situations.

The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #9 on: January 30, 2013, 01:02:01 PM »
In the west, Celts. Remember Bouddica? In Asia, the Mongols [to a limited degree]. There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians.  :smokin:

Vikings - the women and children defended home while the men were raiding.
The USA - The pioneer women were as important as the men in dealing with Indian raids. Maybe not a war, but certainly a combat situation.
Afghanistan - The men knock the enemy down, the women finish them off. (Kipling, badly paraphrased)
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline Cincinnatus

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,514
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #10 on: January 30, 2013, 01:28:50 PM »
In the west, Celts. Remember Bouddica? In Asia, the Mongols [to a limited degree]. There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians.

Vikings - the women and children defended home while the men were raiding...Afghanistan - The men knock the enemy down, the women finish them off.

That is who you and PzLdr want us to emulate? Barbarbians and fanatical Muslims?

The USA - The pioneer women were as important as the men in dealing with Indian raids. Maybe not a war, but certainly a combat situation.


This, and your 2 other examples, are quite different from what you are advocating. There is no question women are capable of defending the hearth. We have a recent example of that with the woman who shot the intruder threatening her and her children. However, that is certainly not the same as enrolling our wives and daughters in combat units, especially elite units like the Seals or Rangers.

A civilized people does not do that.
We shall never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid ~~ Samuel Adams

Online DCPatriot

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 32,834
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #11 on: January 30, 2013, 01:34:38 PM »
Uh-huh......perhaps as cooks and housekeepers.

Michelle Rodriquez' role in Battle for Los Angeles was just that.....a freaking movie.
"It aint what you don't know that kills you.  It's what you know that aint so!" ...Theodore Sturgeon

"Journalism is about covering the news.  With a pillow.  Until it stops moving."    - Iowahawk

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #12 on: January 30, 2013, 01:54:57 PM »
In the west, Celts. Remember Bouddica? In Asia, the Mongols [to a limited degree]. There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians.

Vikings - the women and children defended home while the men were raiding...Afghanistan - The men knock the enemy down, the women finish them off.

That is who you and PzLdr want us to emulate? Barbarbians and fanatical Muslims?

The USA - The pioneer women were as important as the men in dealing with Indian raids. Maybe not a war, but certainly a combat situation.


This, and your 2 other examples, are quite different from what you are advocating. There is no question women are capable of defending the hearth. We have a recent example of that with the woman who shot the intruder threatening her and her children. However, that is certainly not the same as enrolling our wives and daughters in combat units, especially elite units like the Seals or Rangers.

A civilized people does not do that.

Again, bolded the part for discussion. I agree. Totally. My wife and children are the last line of defense in our home, which is as it should be, and God help the feral idiot that goes up against my wife. Should my eldest daughter wish to go into combat (not legal here, but support positions are dangerous enough) I would fight tooth and nail to stop her. Chivalry has been hammered into us for a long time, and was possibly the biggest influence on our entire Western culture.

As to emulating barbarians of various stripes, including the never to be sufficiently damned sand jockeys - no. A civilized society should not need to do so. Respect for women is one thing that many Muslims hate and fear, for some totally baffling reason and is one point that will never be agreed on.

The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Online 240B

  • Lord of all things Orange!
  • TBR Advisory Committee
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8,466
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #13 on: January 30, 2013, 02:02:08 PM »
What kind of a crazy country would ban mixed male/female boxing, and ban women from professional football, because common sense tells us women would crushed and killed almost immediately in that situation, but this same country would allow them to fight in combat on the front lines, which is 'pro-football X 10', and it is always to the death.

When I see the first woman in the NFL, (with no restrictions or special considerations, as if that is even possible), only then will I believe that a woman can make it on the front lines. Otherwise, I will continue to believe that this will only get everyone involved killed.
You cannot "COEXIST" with people who want to kill you.

Offline Ford289HiPo

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
  • Don't take life seriously; No one gets out alive
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #14 on: January 30, 2013, 03:24:17 PM »
There is a world of difference between working in a combat support billet and actively closing with the enemy with the intent to kill them.
Yes, women have fought and died in combat. That does not mean they should be assigned to combat arms slots.

This is just another agenda driven political game.
I wonder when the lies will stop and truth begin, even as grim as the truth may be. And then I remember that for 70 years, the reign of terror in Russia called itself "the people's government." We have so far to fall, yet we are falling fast and Hell yawns to receive us.

Offline PzLdr

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 3,421
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #15 on: January 31, 2013, 12:16:47 AM »
In the west, Celts. Remember Bouddica? In Asia, the Mongols [to a limited degree]. There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians.

Vikings - the women and children defended home while the men were raiding...Afghanistan - The men knock the enemy down, the women finish them off.

That is who you and PzLdr want us to emulate? Barbarbians and fanatical Muslims?

The USA - The pioneer women were as important as the men in dealing with Indian raids. Maybe not a war, but certainly a combat situation.


This, and your 2 other examples, are quite different from what you are advocating. There is no question women are capable of defending the hearth. We have a recent example of that with the woman who shot the intruder threatening her and her children. However, that is certainly not the same as enrolling our wives and daughters in combat units, especially elite units like the Seals or Rangers.

A civilized people does not do that.

I wasn't asking you, or anyone to 'emulate' barbarians' You made the statement in q prior post that you knew of no civilizations, especially in the West that had sent its females into battle. That statement was wrong. So I attempted to correct it.
Hillary's Self-announced Qualifications: She Stood Up To Putin...She Sits to Pee

Offline Cincinnatus

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 5,514
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #16 on: January 31, 2013, 02:25:44 AM »
Citing Queen Bouddica, or that the  Mongols [to a limited degree] utilized women, is not much in the way of proof of anything. We use women [to a limited degree] and Queen Bouddica was a most unusual individual, not particularly representative of women in general and limited as to time, place, and activity.

As to this?: There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians. . Just another way of saying maybe they did and maybe they didn't, and even then to what extent is unclear.

My statements stand in both regards. Since you held Queen Bouddica up as some kind of role model it's safe to conclude you meant we could emulate her.
« Last Edit: January 31, 2013, 02:33:14 AM by Cincinnatus »
We shall never be abandoned by Heaven while we act worthy of its aid ~~ Samuel Adams

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #17 on: January 31, 2013, 05:21:26 AM »
Citing Queen Bouddica, or that the  Mongols [to a limited degree] utilized women, is not much in the way of proof of anything. We use women [to a limited degree] and Queen Bouddica was a most unusual individual, not particularly representative of women in general and limited as to time, place, and activity.

As to this?: There is also archaeological evidence that women warriors fought for the Scythians. . Just another way of saying maybe they did and maybe they didn't, and even then to what extent is unclear.

My statements stand in both regards. Since you held Queen Bouddica up as some kind of role model it's safe to conclude you meant we could emulate her.

One could cite various unusual individual women - Elizabeth 1 springs to mind for one (Happen to admire her greatly). She could fight like an upset chainsaw if she had to and was reportedly a better swordsman than most of her court - a useful trait when people keep trying to kill you.
A quick trawl through any history book also turns up many males who were completely inept at warfare, and a few eunuchs who were master strategists. That doesn't mean we should castrate our leading military figures, tempting though it may be sometimes.

I am going to use a talking point that both sides use. There are extraordinary individuals out there, both men and women. Where, exactly, does the cut off happen? Where do the rights of society trump the rights of individuals?

Not having a go at you, but it is a conflict between rights and duty that I find endlessly fascinating.
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

famousdayandyear

  • Guest
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #18 on: January 31, 2013, 07:08:33 PM »
When a pro sports team, say the Philadelphia Eagles, signs on a female as offensive center, or nose guard, or even wide receiver, then there can be a SERIOUS discussion of deploying a female SEAL-- that is, AFTER she has successfully completed the BUD/S course.

Offline EC

  • Shanghaied Editor
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 23,836
  • Cats rule. Dogs drool.
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #19 on: January 31, 2013, 08:02:22 PM »
When a pro sports team, say the Philadelphia Eagles, signs on a female as offensive center, or nose guard, or even wide receiver, then there can be a SERIOUS discussion of deploying a female SEAL-- that is, AFTER she has successfully completed the BUD/S course.

I can live with that.
The universe doesn't hate you. Unless your name is Tsutomu Yamaguchi

Avatar courtesy of Oceander

I've got a website now: Smoke and Ink

Offline Ford289HiPo

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
  • Don't take life seriously; No one gets out alive
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #20 on: January 31, 2013, 09:43:02 PM »
When a pro sports team, say the Philadelphia Eagles, signs on a female as offensive center, or nose guard, or even wide receiver, then there can be a SERIOUS discussion of deploying a female SEAL-- that is, AFTER she has successfully completed the BUD/S course.

Maintaining the current standard of performance?
I wonder when the lies will stop and truth begin, even as grim as the truth may be. And then I remember that for 70 years, the reign of terror in Russia called itself "the people's government." We have so far to fall, yet we are falling fast and Hell yawns to receive us.

famousdayandyear

  • Guest
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #21 on: February 01, 2013, 03:21:14 PM »

Offline Ford289HiPo

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
  • Don't take life seriously; No one gets out alive
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #22 on: February 02, 2013, 08:09:10 PM »
McRaven's quote from the article:

 In 1996, I was sent to the Equal Opportunity Leaders Course. One of their main topics was how SF was purposely discriminating against blacks. Piquing my argumentative personality, I questioned the basis for the instructors' statement. His comment was that SF required a swim test, and that was discriminatory to blacks because they didn't have the opportunity to learn to swim.
Now, SFAS candidates attend a train up which teaches the troops a basic survival skill. It's sort of like going to see a doctor and having to teach him how to assess a patient.

Back in the day, SF candidates were required to have served at least 1 tour in the Regular Army. Some Brainiac decided that the rule impinged on his career track. Today, many candidates are what are recruited into SF ranks off the street. This leads to an immature force, a bunch of Pepsi generation twerps who won't listen, think they can do whatever they want, and refuse to take responsibility.

Been there, done that.
 
Nothing like lowering a standard, so please bear with me as I call McRaven out.
I wonder when the lies will stop and truth begin, even as grim as the truth may be. And then I remember that for 70 years, the reign of terror in Russia called itself "the people's government." We have so far to fall, yet we are falling fast and Hell yawns to receive us.

famousdayandyear

  • Guest
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #23 on: February 02, 2013, 09:18:26 PM »
I plead ignorance in assuming that BUD/S training has not been downgraded in the past twenty years.  If BUD/S HAS BEEN DOWNGRADED FOR REASONS OF ACCOMMODATION, I stand corrected.  I have to believe McRaven made these comments slightly "tongue in cheek"

Offline Ford289HiPo

  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 987
  • Don't take life seriously; No one gets out alive
Re: Women could be great Navy SEALs, says head of Special Ops
« Reply #24 on: February 02, 2013, 10:31:43 PM »
I must plead ignorance of BUD/S myself. I went through the Q-course. Since McRaven is SOF Commander, I am assuming that he is talking about SOF in all branches.
I wonder when the lies will stop and truth begin, even as grim as the truth may be. And then I remember that for 70 years, the reign of terror in Russia called itself "the people's government." We have so far to fall, yet we are falling fast and Hell yawns to receive us.


Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo
Smf