Posted on Dec 6, 2015
Are equal standards required or necessary for combat effectiveness?
4.54K
30
11
4
4
0
Physical Training
Standards
Teamwork
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
4
4
0
SFC Stephen King
Perhaps it is MOS dependent. Carrying wounded soldiers/stretchers, moving heavy truck tires, carrying 100 pound loads of ammunition, digging expedient fighting positions, repairing track, carrying 5 gallon cans of water or fuel are realities of close combat expectations. There will be women who are able to do these things, let them but let's not lower the expectations for Soldiers in a way that will endanger the lives of team members or disrupt their effectiveness.
Perhaps it is MOS dependent. Carrying wounded soldiers/stretchers, moving heavy truck tires, carrying 100 pound loads of ammunition, digging expedient fighting positions, repairing track, carrying 5 gallon cans of water or fuel are realities of close combat expectations. There will be women who are able to do these things, let them but let's not lower the expectations for Soldiers in a way that will endanger the lives of team members or disrupt their effectiveness.
(4)
(0)
SFC Stephen King
CPT (Join to see) all should be allowed to do or choose whatever job and or MOS they desire and as I have said before gender doesn't matter.
(0)
(0)
CPT (Join to see)
SFC Stephen King -
If they can do it YES. In dismounted operations: What do you think the feeling is of a female machine gunner when she reaches her position, sets up, and is ready to lay suppressive fire to find out her female partner with the extra ammo can isn't at side her because she was unable to keep up. Want to know the next move? On the next move the female gunner carries the weapon and the extra ammo making her slower in her advance, making her cover and support for the advance slower... slower means someone wasn't covered who should have been, someone who needed that suppressive fire, maybe someone died because of the delay... YES let women who can, do it, let it be open, but don't assign to fill quota.
If they can do it YES. In dismounted operations: What do you think the feeling is of a female machine gunner when she reaches her position, sets up, and is ready to lay suppressive fire to find out her female partner with the extra ammo can isn't at side her because she was unable to keep up. Want to know the next move? On the next move the female gunner carries the weapon and the extra ammo making her slower in her advance, making her cover and support for the advance slower... slower means someone wasn't covered who should have been, someone who needed that suppressive fire, maybe someone died because of the delay... YES let women who can, do it, let it be open, but don't assign to fill quota.
(4)
(0)
2
2
0
For "esprit de corps" within the ranks it may be a necessary part of the Services, SFC Stephen King. How can any Service hold one individual to a high standard when, in the next platoon over, the same standards are not being enforced? Sooner or later someone is going to question why they have to work at fitness, train in the cold, and the rain, when others are allowed to be overweight, and just sit in an office with no training. All Military members should be ready to fight first, and then also be ready to do whatever their MOS/current assignment entails. Failure to do this could result in a totally unprepared unit under attack, in a real world (deployed) situation.
(2)
(0)
SFC Stephen King
PVT Robert Gresham I agree and value your perspective. Train as you fight is crucial to mission accomplishment.
(1)
(0)
2
2
0
Nope. You certainly don't need a 15W to have a 300 PT score to be an effective UAS operator. The moment the Army figures that out, they'll no longer have a retention problem with the highly skilled MOS's.
(2)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google