[War] This is ugly
-
Can this be true? Post-war will be a wicked witch-hunt. Top U.S. official: Iraq has executed some POWs[^]
-
Can this be true? Post-war will be a wicked witch-hunt. Top U.S. official: Iraq has executed some POWs[^]
Post-war, if you could call it that, will be a guerrilla (sp?) war. I'm not exactly sure how you "take" a city while keeping it and the "civilian" population intact, where enemy forces can be hiding behind any door, inside any building, aiming at you from any window, when a "civilian" can turn into a "terrorist" and an "army officer" can turn into a "civilian". I think this is going to get really ugly. Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
Microsoft deliberately adds arbitrary layers of complexity to make it difficult to deliver Windows features on non-Windows platforms--Microsoft's "Halloween files" -
Post-war, if you could call it that, will be a guerrilla (sp?) war. I'm not exactly sure how you "take" a city while keeping it and the "civilian" population intact, where enemy forces can be hiding behind any door, inside any building, aiming at you from any window, when a "civilian" can turn into a "terrorist" and an "army officer" can turn into a "civilian". I think this is going to get really ugly. Marc Help! I'm an AI running around in someone's f*cked up universe simulator.
Sensitivity and ethnic diversity means celebrating difference, not hiding from it. - Christian Graus
Every line of code is a liability - Taka Muraoka
Microsoft deliberately adds arbitrary layers of complexity to make it difficult to deliver Windows features on non-Windows platforms--Microsoft's "Halloween files"It already is ugly ... But, had to be expected. My article on a reference-counted smart pointer that supports polymorphic objects and raw pointers
-
Can this be true? Post-war will be a wicked witch-hunt. Top U.S. official: Iraq has executed some POWs[^]
A female US soldier was captured as well. cheers, Chris Maunder
-
A female US soldier was captured as well. cheers, Chris Maunder
There is also a 20 year old woman missing in action:( Its kind of reopened the whole debate of whether women should serve in combat actions. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
-
There is also a 20 year old woman missing in action:( Its kind of reopened the whole debate of whether women should serve in combat actions. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
Doug Goulden wrote: Its kind of reopened the whole debate of whether women should serve in combat actions. only among people who still think women are too fragile and inferior to be doing something dangerous. -c
Image tools: ThumbNailer, Bobber, TIFFAssembler
-
Doug Goulden wrote: Its kind of reopened the whole debate of whether women should serve in combat actions. only among people who still think women are too fragile and inferior to be doing something dangerous. -c
Image tools: ThumbNailer, Bobber, TIFFAssembler
Chris Losinger wrote: only among people who still think women are too fragile and inferior to be doing something dangerous I wouldn't agree with that, I spent 9 years in the Navy and I really don't want to see women in combat roles. Not that I think that they can't do the job as well as a man, but because I believe that women shouldn't be placed into positions like that. I might be a chauvenist, but I open doors for women still;). I agree that women are capable, I just disagree with the need to expose them to the danger:~ Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
-
Chris Losinger wrote: only among people who still think women are too fragile and inferior to be doing something dangerous I wouldn't agree with that, I spent 9 years in the Navy and I really don't want to see women in combat roles. Not that I think that they can't do the job as well as a man, but because I believe that women shouldn't be placed into positions like that. I might be a chauvenist, but I open doors for women still;). I agree that women are capable, I just disagree with the need to expose them to the danger:~ Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
Doug Goulden wrote: I really don't want to see women in combat roles. why? Doug Goulden wrote: I believe that women shouldn't be placed into positions like this why? Doug Goulden wrote: I just disagree with the need to expose them to the danger why? -c
Image tools: ThumbNailer, Bobber, TIFFAssembler
-
Doug Goulden wrote: I really don't want to see women in combat roles. why? Doug Goulden wrote: I believe that women shouldn't be placed into positions like this why? Doug Goulden wrote: I just disagree with the need to expose them to the danger why? -c
Image tools: ThumbNailer, Bobber, TIFFAssembler
Chris Losinger wrote: why Like I said in my first post, I may be something of a male chauvenist, but I believe that women aren't meant to be killers. They bring life into this world. That may seem silly or old fashioned, but its true. There are also practical reasons. During the time I was in the service the physical requirements for female troops (or sailors in the Navy) were lower for women. The obvious reason being that most part women aren't as physically strong as men. In some roles that doen't matter, a woman can probably fly an airplane as well or better than any man, but in hand to hand a man probably would enjoy some strength advantage. In a tank the woman could do as well a job, but in infantry strength is an advantage. The other thing that most reporting on the subject doesn't tell you is that women get pregnant, as a matter of fact I seem to remember that during '91 there were like 70 - 80 pregnancies. What do you do then? Babies don't enlist. You lose a soldier or sailor for 9 months. Should someone else have to be transfered into the infantry or armor unit to take her place? If the woman was deployed when she became pregnant, the mother and father may be exposed to danger. Do you think if a man and woman are both in a relationship, that they can react in an objective manner like they would if it was just two men (or women) in the same battle situation? The other issue is that women tend to be a distraction. Being in the military is like living in a locker room. Its not a terribly politically correct place lets say. I think, and most of the guys I still know who are in the service, think that the military often has to bend over backwards to be inclusive to make allowances for women that wouldn't be made for men. Thats not something people lik to hear but its true. So are women as capable as men? Yes in some cases they are just as well suited as men, however, in a physically demanding environment they may be at a disadvantage. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?
-
Doug Goulden wrote: Its kind of reopened the whole debate of whether women should serve in combat actions. only among people who still think women are too fragile and inferior to be doing something dangerous. -c
Image tools: ThumbNailer, Bobber, TIFFAssembler
Chris Losinger wrote: only among people who still think women are too fragile and inferior to be doing something dangerous. or among who still think women are too inferior so they should be doing something dangerous. :)
It's not the fall that kills you: it's the sudden stop - Down by Law, Jim Jamursch (1986)
-
Chris Losinger wrote: why Like I said in my first post, I may be something of a male chauvenist, but I believe that women aren't meant to be killers. They bring life into this world. That may seem silly or old fashioned, but its true. There are also practical reasons. During the time I was in the service the physical requirements for female troops (or sailors in the Navy) were lower for women. The obvious reason being that most part women aren't as physically strong as men. In some roles that doen't matter, a woman can probably fly an airplane as well or better than any man, but in hand to hand a man probably would enjoy some strength advantage. In a tank the woman could do as well a job, but in infantry strength is an advantage. The other thing that most reporting on the subject doesn't tell you is that women get pregnant, as a matter of fact I seem to remember that during '91 there were like 70 - 80 pregnancies. What do you do then? Babies don't enlist. You lose a soldier or sailor for 9 months. Should someone else have to be transfered into the infantry or armor unit to take her place? If the woman was deployed when she became pregnant, the mother and father may be exposed to danger. Do you think if a man and woman are both in a relationship, that they can react in an objective manner like they would if it was just two men (or women) in the same battle situation? The other issue is that women tend to be a distraction. Being in the military is like living in a locker room. Its not a terribly politically correct place lets say. I think, and most of the guys I still know who are in the service, think that the military often has to bend over backwards to be inclusive to make allowances for women that wouldn't be made for men. Thats not something people lik to hear but its true. So are women as capable as men? Yes in some cases they are just as well suited as men, however, in a physically demanding environment they may be at a disadvantage. Uptight Ex-Military Republican married to a Commie Lib - How weird is that?