Women now allowed to hold combat positions in the military.

Jun 2012
41,958
15,170
Barsoom
#2
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tylercornwall" data-cid="457306" data-time="1359005388">A ban was put in 1998 to no longer let women serve in combat roles has today been repealed.</blockquote>


I saw that headline. I didn't read the article. Who removed it?
 
Feb 2006
12,705
1,933
California
#5
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tylercornwall" data-cid="457306" data-time="1359005388">A ban was put in 1998 to no longer let women serve in combat roles has today been repealed.</blockquote>


 


To require <span style="color:#ff0000;">all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5741:


 


Universal National Service Act. 111th Congress, 2009–2010. Text as of Jul 15, 2010


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr5741/text
 
Jan 2013
224
2
Ketchikan Alaska
#6
I'm not quite sure. The New York Times said it might have something to do with Obamas mentioning of more equality and the secretary of defense soon not holding his position anymore but I'm not sure. It'll crack down in 2016 while the different branches review it until that time and they can ask for exceptions if there is a good reason for a woman not to hold that role. I think this is a good step forward.
 
Jun 2012
41,958
15,170
Barsoom
#7
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="intangible child" data-cid="457319" data-time="1359006509"><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tylercornwall" data-cid="457306" data-time="1359005388">A ban was put in 1998 to no longer let women serve in combat roles has today been repealed.</blockquote>


 


To require <span style="color:#ff0000;">all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5741:


 


Universal National Service Act. 111th Congress, 2009–2010. Text as of Jul 15, 2010


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr5741/text</blockquote>


That bill never passed.
 
Feb 2006
12,705
1,933
California
#8
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Jimmyb" data-cid="457322" data-time="1359006723"><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="intangible child" data-cid="457319" data-time="1359006509">
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tylercornwall" data-cid="457306" data-time="1359005388">A ban was put in 1998 to no longer let women serve in combat roles has today been repealed.</blockquote>


 


To require <span style="color:#ff0000;">all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5741:


 


Universal National Service Act. 111th Congress, 2009–2010. Text as of Jul 15, 2010


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr5741/text
</blockquote>


That bill never passed.</blockquote>


 


It still sets there, sometimes things dont pass the first time around!
 
Jun 2012
41,958
15,170
Barsoom
#9
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="intangible child" data-cid="457324" data-time="1359006852"><blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="Jimmyb" data-cid="457322" data-time="1359006723">
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="intangible child" data-cid="457319" data-time="1359006509">
<blockquote class="ipsBlockquote" data-author="tylercornwall" data-cid="457306" data-time="1359005388">A ban was put in 1998 to no longer let women serve in combat roles has today been repealed.</blockquote>


 


To require <span style="color:#ff0000;">all persons in the United States between the ages of 18 and 42 to perform national service, either as a member of the uniformed services or in civilian service in furtherance of the national defense and homeland security, to authorize the induction of persons in the uniformed services during wartime to meet end-strength requirements of the uniformed services, and for other purposes.


http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c111:H.R.5741:


 


Universal National Service Act. 111th Congress, 2009–2010. Text as of Jul 15, 2010


http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/111/hr5741/text
</blockquote>


That bill never passed.
</blockquote>


 


It still sets there, sometimes things dont pass the first time around!</blockquote>


It has been around since 2003. I don't if the same person keeps introducing it or not. But it has been offered up several times, maybe four, if I remember correctly. Most bills have sunset clauses.
 
Nov 2012
17,133
5,641
Michigan
#10
women in combat is a huge mistake


 


greatest source of casualties in the first gulf war was women going home pregnant


 


since women only get pregnant you they cannot serve equally with males unless you make abortions or sterilizations mandatory


 


not one job ever in any branch of military service in the US has ever been opened to women without dumbing down the physical standards so women could qualify. not one, ever.


 


men in combat stress, especially for long periods, create lots of testosterone. when you spend all day killing people and watching your friends die there is a biological response of hyper arousal during any down time. the presence of women in the unit is an obvious problem.


 


when your son or brother lies wounded on the field of battle , who do you want their to haul him to safety, a 200 lbs strong man, or a 99lbs female quota hire?