Anonymous
11-18-1999, 08:45 PM
I am a middle aged male and have never been in the military so I hope that I do not offend anyone by participating in your discussion.
First of all there probably have not been that many men who wanted to be in combat. The draft (conscription in Canada) would not have been necessary in that case. Even the volunteers did not do so voluntarily. Most volunteers only did so to get a better posting which really meant that many volunteered to avoid combat.
Those who do volunteer to sacrifice their lives for those who would treat them like crap, completely baffle me. This is not to say that I don't appreciate what they are doing, because I do, I just don't understand it. Given that it might be possible for a woman to have the same motivation, maybe they should be accommodated. Perhaps all-female combat units could be formed on a voluntary basis with the applicants keeping in mind that many men would not volunteer for such duty. After the war (there will always be another one) the survivors could then relate their experiences to others who wish to join.
For those who do not volunteer, it is important to realize that other jobs are far more important than anyone realizes. What is the maximum road speed of an M1-A1 without fuel or the maximum range of an M-109 without shells? It is pretty obvious to me that so many have done their jobs so well for so long that they now even take themselves for granted.
Ultimately it should be up to the woman if she wants to volunteer for such duty. But it should be an informed choice. Remember that with all of the "muskrat guns" and "flesh-ettes" that every army uses these days, scarring will be likely unless you have a 10 year advantage in technology.
Sincerely, Murray B.
102132.1651@compuserve.com
First of all there probably have not been that many men who wanted to be in combat. The draft (conscription in Canada) would not have been necessary in that case. Even the volunteers did not do so voluntarily. Most volunteers only did so to get a better posting which really meant that many volunteered to avoid combat.
Those who do volunteer to sacrifice their lives for those who would treat them like crap, completely baffle me. This is not to say that I don't appreciate what they are doing, because I do, I just don't understand it. Given that it might be possible for a woman to have the same motivation, maybe they should be accommodated. Perhaps all-female combat units could be formed on a voluntary basis with the applicants keeping in mind that many men would not volunteer for such duty. After the war (there will always be another one) the survivors could then relate their experiences to others who wish to join.
For those who do not volunteer, it is important to realize that other jobs are far more important than anyone realizes. What is the maximum road speed of an M1-A1 without fuel or the maximum range of an M-109 without shells? It is pretty obvious to me that so many have done their jobs so well for so long that they now even take themselves for granted.
Ultimately it should be up to the woman if she wants to volunteer for such duty. But it should be an informed choice. Remember that with all of the "muskrat guns" and "flesh-ettes" that every army uses these days, scarring will be likely unless you have a 10 year advantage in technology.
Sincerely, Murray B.
102132.1651@compuserve.com