No women in combat - Santorum

Wonder if that means he'd cut any funds for Israel as they routinely place women in combat roles.
 
Hot button topic for sure. Captured women are almost guaranteed to be raped.
 
redrumloa said:
Hot button topic for sure. Captured women are almost guaranteed to be raped.
Click to expand...
That's true Red, but you don't need to be a woman to be raped. I'm sure plenty of Iraqi men who spent time in Abu Ghriab could attest to that.
 
redrumloa said:
Hot button topic for sure. Captured women are almost guaranteed to be raped.
Click to expand...

And this is a good reason to prevent them from participating in all the other assembled horrors of war?

They are in combat. They are there to kill and be killed.
What puzzles me is that some people are perfectly happy for a woman to be brutally wounded or even killed but spit the dummy at the possibility the might be raped.
If a woman being murdered or doing the murdering is acceptable to people, the fact that if captured she is statistically more likely to be raped than a man (men are also often raped) is just another unfortunate side effect of organised murder.
 
Robert said:
And this is a good reason to prevent them from participating in all the other assembled horrors of war?

They are in combat. They are there to kill and be killed.
What puzzles me is that some people are perfectly happy for a woman to be brutally wounded or even killed but spit the dummy at the possibility the might be raped.
If a woman being murdered or doing the murdering is acceptable to people, the fact that if captured she is statistically more likely to be raped than a man (men are also often raped) is just another unfortunate side effect of organised murder.
Click to expand...

Get rid of the draft and I am fine with women in combat.

-Edit-
I shouldn't say fine with it. As a husband and father I would not like to see my wife or daughter in combat. That said, as long as it is a voluntary choice I wouldn't try to block it.
 
redrumloa said:
Get rid of the draft and I am fine with women in combat.
Click to expand...

Is it the draft itself you have a problem with or are you fine with men being drafted but not women?
 
redrumloa said:
Get rid of the draft and I am fine with women in combat.

-Edit-
I shouldn't say fine with it. As a husband and father I would not like to see my wife or daughter in combat. That said, as long as it is a voluntary choice I wouldn't try to block it.
Click to expand...
As a husband and a father I would not like to see either my son or daughter in combat. I do not play favorites based upon sex. I realize both people are unique indivduals and equally deserving of the same respect and roles in society.
 
faethor said:
As a husband and a father I would not like to see either my son or daughter in combat. I do not play favorites based upon sex. I realize both people are unique indivduals and equally deserving of the same respect and roles in society.
Click to expand...

Way to twist that!:lol:
 
Nobody should serve in aggressive combat - for example being deployed overseas to attack countries that didn't attack yours and really can't attack yours even if they wanted to. However, in defensive roles men should be the first forces deployed with women in reserve. All should be trained.

The ability to rebuild a population after a war is almost entirely determined by the number of fertile females. If all your women are dead after the war it doesn't matter if you technically won - you lose.

---
addendum

Of course, if the invading forces rain depleted uranium all over the place then rebuilding your population becomes much harder as you have to labour under a vastly increased rate of birth defects - just ask the "liberated" women of Fallujah.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
The ability to rebuild a population after a war is almost entirely determined by the number of fertile females. If all your women are dead after the war it doesn't matter if you technically won - you lose.
Click to expand...
About 96% of the population in the world is derived from one of 4 females. So one doesn't need all that many.
 
faethor said:
About 96% of the population in the world is derived from one of 4 females. So one doesn't need all that many.
Click to expand...

If you want to build your population back to what it was pre-war within 25 years you don't want to lose more than half of your women. Meanwhile you can lose 80% of your men but the ones that survive will be busy.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
If you want to build your population back to what it was pre-war within 25 years you don't want to lose more than half of your women. Meanwhile you can lose 80% of your men but the ones that survive will be busy.
Click to expand...
At present women are needed for the incubation period. Men are edging ever closer to not being needed.

As long as fertility clinics aren't destroyed... There's 'snowflake babies' and sperm storage. Women could clone the sperm. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6265366.stm

As long as technology is not destroyed.. Spermless humaning cloning appears viable. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=the-first-human-cloned-em

The only hold back is our legal rules on banning humans. They'd quickly be lifted if all the males disappeared.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
If you want to build your population back to what it was pre-war within 25 years you don't want to lose more than half of your women. Meanwhile you can lose 80% of your men but the ones that survive will be busy.
Click to expand...

Come on Fluffy, you know the elites don't want to rebuild populations.
 
faethor said:
As long as fertility clinics aren't destroyed... There's 'snowflake babies' and sperm storage.
Click to expand...

If I were among the few surviving males I plan to be far too busy to be working at keeping some fertility clinic operating.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top