Females taking combat role positions in the future

Xervello

Well-known member
I have to say, I think women in the military is a bad idea... Just as I think men in the military is a bad idea... The vast majority of people who are killed in combat situations are completely innocent, it's almost never the leaders or the people giving the orders who lose their lives... Signing up to the military means you're signing up potentially to kill other innocent people.

Sorry to go off subject, but I felt like pushing my pacifistic views a little... I hate war... It's a tragic, terrible waste of life. If everyone refused to fight, there could be no wars...


If Gandhi and his followers stood in the way of Hitler's, Hitler's would have won. I wouldn't join any kind of military because it's not in me to harm another person, but evil must be confronted with force. Sometimes reason and good intentions aren't enough. As for women in the military, read my post above.
 
Last edited:

Starry

Well-known member
Why was the war department renamed to department of defense? Seems as if they got the idea from George Orwell's 1984 newspeak, giving ministries misleading titles. Since changing the name, the US military has waged more offensive campaigns than before and not even in the name of defense. I joined because I had no other means of making money where I live and they made promises of paying for college, I joine the Military Police as they offered me a substantial bonus and told me I would only do police duties and not see combat. That was fiction of course, but by the time I found that out I was in a combat support MP unit. I will not kill another person, so I share your pacifism. Have you ever read the book Civil Disobedience by Henry David Thoreau? Personally, I would like to see the military budget slashed so we might invest in real advancement in education, health and scientific advancement. If something like Starfleet existed, I would be the first in line to join that.

Indeed, the "Department of Defence" is a laughable name, all things considered. Also I agree with your stance on the military budget being used to fund more worthwhile areas.

No, I haven't read the essay, but I've downloaded A PDF of it to read soon.


If Gandhi and his followers stood in the way of Hitler's, Hitler's would have won. I wouldn't join any kind of military because it's not in me to harm another person, but evil must be confronted with force. Sometimes reason and good intentions aren't enough. As for women in the military, read my post above.

If "Gandhi and his followers" had been in the German army and refused to use violence in the first place then there couldn't have been a war. People in armies are innocent people following orders (generally speaking), in fighting army against army it is innocent people being killed. You want to use force against evil? By all means, attack the source of evil, not the innocent order-followers.

Of course, this is an idealist stance, and not one I believe will occur (or indeed is possible to occur in a world such as this), but nonetheless...
 

jaim38

Well-known member
If the world's leaders promoted peace instead of war, if we could stop hating each other, then there wouldn't be wars.
 
If Gandhi and his followers stood in the way of Hitler's, Hitler's would have won. I wouldn't join any kind of military because it's not in me to harm another person, but evil must be confronted with force. Sometimes reason and good intentions aren't enough. As for women in the military, read my post above.

Actually non-violent resistance triumphed in Nazi Germany, and ironically, the ones who had the balls to do it were a group of women: Rosenstrasse protest - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 

NathanielWingatePeaslee

Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!
Staff member
Of course, this is an idealist stance, and not one I believe will occur (or indeed is possible to occur in a world such as this), but nonetheless...
Precisely. It will not occur.

It is the nature of our species. There will always be people quite happy to take what they want by force.

If all of our world leaders actually did decide on a policy of non-violence, others would overthrow them. Violently.
 

coyote

Well-known member
the hope is that having a large, well-trained, well-equipped military will prevent other nations from wanting to wage war against us, thereby ensuring peace

sadly, that doesn't seem to dissuade everyone

so someone has to be trained and ready to fight if and when the need arises

no one wants to kill or risk being killed - least of all the people in the military

most people who join the military do so because they would rather be the ones to have to do the dirty work and get in harm's way instead of having it fall on the shoulders of their families, friends, or neighbors - it's a sacrifice they make willingly so that others won't have to

it is an honor to serve
 
Last edited:

coyote

Well-known member
good article - with various points of view for and against:

Women in combat? Pentagon says yes - Marine Corps News | News from Afghanistan & Iraq - Marine Corps Times

from the article:

Alex Hatfield, an Army enlisted man serving in Vilseck, Germany, said he has concerns. “Women pose an emotional conundrum to men,” he said. “Everyone knows it. We don’t understand how women think, what they feel or why.”

and this:

Army Spc. Heather Wood, who was in Afghanistan in 2010 as a military police officer, said qualified women should be allowed the opportunity. “They should be allowed to do what they want,” she said. “Heck, there are males out there that can’t handle being shot at.”
 

alwayssunnyinphiladelphia

Well-known member
I read 300,000 women have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan from roadside bombs. Why send more people into war to murder people they dont know.

'On average, a US military veteran commits suicide every 80 minutes, according to recent estimates from the Veterans Affairs (VA) Department. At the same time, suicides by active soldiers increased 15 percent in 2012, to a new record.

According to these figures, more soldiers and veterans take their own lives every year than have been killed in action throughout the last twelve years of Afghanistan and the last ten years of Iraq combined'.

Wars are fought purely to make massive profits for arms corporations. Henry Kissingeer saud himself 'Military men are dumb pawns'. Also Amcerica uses depleted uranium in their weapons even though it is illegal under international law.
 

KiaKaha

Banned
the hope is that having a large, well-trained, well-equipped military will prevent other nations from wanting to wage war against us, thereby ensuring peace

That is unless of course a nations military is the initial aggressor.

Not naming names or anything.
 

Kiwong

Well-known member
I am not supportive of these current conflicts, I protested against Australian troops being involved in war on Iraq, and so it follows that I don't support women being involved in combat roles in them.
 

NathanielWingatePeaslee

Iä! Iä! Cthulhu fhtagn!
Staff member
I am not supportive of these current conflicts, I protested against Australian troops being involved in war on Iraq, and so it follows that I don't support women being involved in combat roles in them.
For me, it does not follow. I am not supportive of what's been going on in Iraq/Afghanistan either. I am supportive of women having the right to choose to take combat roles if they wish.

Hope I don't seem like I'm just wanting to argue with you tonight--I'm not, really!
 
Last edited:

coyote

Well-known member
That is unless of course a nations military is the initial aggressor.

Not naming names or anything.

"who started it?" is always a matter of debate

you don't have to support the politics of a particular administration (which has subsequently been peacefully voted out of office by a fully functioning democratic system) to see the merits of maintaining a standing military

they are not the same argument
 

KiaKaha

Banned
"who started it?" is always a matter of debate

you don't have to support the politics of a particular administration (which has subsequently been peacefully voted out of office by a fully functioning democratic system) to see the merits of maintaining a standing military

they are not the same argument

I never said they were.

"Who started it" however is extremely relevant nevertheless.

I always find it amusing how so called peaceful countries really are in fact - not so peaceful.
 

coyote

Well-known member
I never said they were.

"Who started it" however is extremely relevant nevertheless.

I always find it amusing how so called peaceful countries really are in fact - not so peaceful.

you're right - we should immediately get rid of our entire military

that should make things nice and stable
 

alwayssunnyinphiladelphia

Well-known member

Kiwong

Well-known member
For me, it does not follow. I am not supportive of what's been going on in Iraq/Afghanistan either. I am supportive of women having the right to choose to take combat roles if they wish.

Hope I don't seem like I'm just wanting to argue with you tonight--I'm not, really!

No need to argue, it is a difference of opinion.

Australian women are already able to serve in combat roles.
 
Last edited:

dottie

Well-known member
your opinion is sexist. anyone who is willing and capable of going to combat should have that right. what is wrong with people?

sorry, i will step back into the kitchen. here, take my shoes.
 
Top