Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

NYC Liberal

(20,136 posts)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:16 PM Jan 2013

Panetta opens combat roles to women

Source: AP

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Senior defense officials say Pentagon chief Leon Panetta is removing the military's ban on women serving in combat, opening hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando jobs after more than a decade at war.

The groundbreaking move recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule banning women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units. Panetta's decision gives the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believe any positions must remain closed to women.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WOMEN_IN_COMBAT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-01-23-15-14-12

38 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Panetta opens combat roles to women (Original Post) NYC Liberal Jan 2013 OP
Finally!! sinkingfeeling Jan 2013 #1
Here is a link to a AP article Tx4obama Jan 2013 #2
I thought this had been settled a couple months ago? Oh well, good on him (and Obama). TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #3
Updated! Thanks! NYC Liberal Jan 2013 #5
First teh gays. Now teh gurls. This is who I think of, re: women in combat... onehandle Jan 2013 #4
Not for me katmondoo Jan 2013 #6
The distinction between "combat" and "non-combat" has been somewhat quaint for awhile Recursion Jan 2013 #7
The distinction was stupid and pointless anyway. Xithras Jan 2013 #8
the only difference now is the training WooWooWoo Jan 2013 #12
I think the next step.. actslikeacarrot Jan 2013 #22
When they send purchasing agents on a mission to rescue hostages or take a forward enemy jtuck004 Jan 2013 #28
I was referring to mechanics, field translators, etc. Xithras Jan 2013 #31
all 40 of the females in my company are right now saying F you pasto76 Jan 2013 #32
My comment was to someone who said anyone who gets shot at is combat, and jtuck004 Jan 2013 #34
I just figured out, you thought I was talking about women. jtuck004 Jan 2013 #36
You know what would be better? Ending combat. n/t Earth_First Jan 2013 #9
BINGO! Stand and Fight Jan 2013 #10
Agreed. N/T actslikeacarrot Jan 2013 #23
!!!!BANG!!!! grantcart Jan 2013 #11
UPDATE - more detailed info Tx4obama Jan 2013 #13
And now, as a final measure of equality Leslie Valley Jan 2013 #14
word. +1 pasto76 Jan 2013 #33
A better thing to do is adieu Jan 2013 #15
HOLY SHIT! BumRushDaShow Jan 2013 #16
Promotions--that's the big ticket item. TwilightGardener Jan 2013 #17
If women want... actslikeacarrot Jan 2013 #21
Your concern is noted. Please feel free to share more of your concerns, and enjoy your stay. nt msanthrope Jan 2013 #24
Ah, I see, your calling me a troll. actslikeacarrot Jan 2013 #25
Bless your heart. I have accused you of nothing. I truly wish you would air more of your concerns, msanthrope Jan 2013 #26
I was a lurker... actslikeacarrot Jan 2013 #27
Actually,,, actslikeacarrot Jan 2013 #20
Elaine Donnely and her fake think tank are going to shit in their pants bluestateguy Jan 2013 #18
I knew this was happening for about 4 months... Javaman Jan 2013 #19
Cool. Now all we need is a draft with no deferrments, and war will be finished. n/t jtuck004 Jan 2013 #29
I want our ERA amendment - this was one of their biggest fear mongering - we need equal rights 2Design Jan 2013 #30
to throw cold water on some of the hysteria pasto76 Jan 2013 #35
Well then it is time that all women, once they turn 18 years of age, register for the Selective Purveyor Jan 2013 #37
I wonder about the emotional impact on guys when a woman gets shredded. DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #38

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
2. Here is a link to a AP article
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:19 PM
Jan 2013

Panetta opens combat roles to women

WASHINGTON (AP) -- Senior defense officials say Pentagon chief Leon Panetta is removing the military's ban on women serving in combat, opening hundreds of thousands of front-line positions and potentially elite commando jobs after more than a decade at war.

The groundbreaking move recommended by the Joint Chiefs of Staff overturns a 1994 rule banning women from being assigned to smaller ground combat units. Panetta's decision gives the military services until January 2016 to seek special exceptions if they believe any positions must remain closed to women.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_WOMEN_IN_COMBAT?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2013-01-23-15-14-12

katmondoo

(6,457 posts)
6. Not for me
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:29 PM
Jan 2013

I could never get past the first day of training. For those who volunteer OK if this is what you want.

Recursion

(56,582 posts)
7. The distinction between "combat" and "non-combat" has been somewhat quaint for awhile
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:45 PM
Jan 2013

We used to "joke" about that in the sandbox.

Still, kind of a nice little parting "F You" to the Pentagon from Panetta, and it will be interesting to see where Hagel goes with this.

(I don't mean it's a bad idea, I mean the Pentagon hates it.)

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
8. The distinction was stupid and pointless anyway.
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:46 PM
Jan 2013

The distinction between a "combat" and a "non-combat" position is only meaningful in a war with an actual front and rear. In modern warfare, where attacks can strike anywhere, it's tough to argue that any position is really outside of the combat zone.

If you can be shot at, it's a combat position.

WooWooWoo

(454 posts)
12. the only difference now is the training
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 05:03 PM
Jan 2013

since men and women still have different PT standards, how are these units going to train together?

actslikeacarrot

(464 posts)
22. I think the next step..
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 06:59 PM
Jan 2013

...is they are going to standardize the PT requirements across the board. Dont pass, get admin sepp'ed out after a certain amount of time to allow someone to get in regs again.

 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
28. When they send purchasing agents on a mission to rescue hostages or take a forward enemy
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:47 PM
Jan 2013

position out, I will remember this post

Xithras

(16,191 posts)
31. I was referring to mechanics, field translators, etc.
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:13 PM
Jan 2013

For example, there are currently combat patrols in Afghanistan where women join the men on patrol as translators and because Afghan culture makes it difficult for civilian women to communicate with male soldiers. These female soldiers carry firearms, wear armor, and walk the same patrols as men, but they are classified as translators or liasons, and not as combat soldiers. Same location, same duty, different title, lower pay.

Or look at the infamous story of Jessica Lynch's unit. She was part of a supply quartermasters unit, an allegedly "noncombat" unit that allowed women to serve. She still ended up shot and captured, which was still an admittedly better fate than her dead colleagues.

"Combat" and "noncombat" designations are largely pointless in modern warfare. Any soldier, on any base or vehicle, can find themselves in combat virtually anywhere. To deny women combat pay and promotions, when they are already dying alongside men, is equally pointless.

pasto76

(1,589 posts)
32. all 40 of the females in my company are right now saying F you
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:23 PM
Jan 2013

they road and drove the same IED strewn miles as us male types.

Many of them were better soldiers than HALF the dickheads in my platoon. I could put a squad together from back then and order them to take "a forward enemy position" and have zero doubt they would succeed. You all need to stop worrying about how manly you dont already look and give it up. White male troops do NOT have a lock on combat. To even suggest so is to completely disrespect the many TENS OF THOUSANDS of females who have fought their way out of ambushes or defended the perimeter, in BOTH wars, for the past DECADE. get over it already.

wait, are you even IN the service? with the slim chance that you are, are you even IN a combat unit? I am.

 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
34. My comment was to someone who said anyone who gets shot at is combat, and
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:27 PM
Jan 2013

that's just hyperbole.

There are lots of people in the service who are not combatants. But perhaps you feel a need to fight everyone.

Good luck.

Btw, I don't have to explain my previous service to you or anyone else.

 

jtuck004

(15,882 posts)
36. I just figured out, you thought I was talking about women.
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 10:09 PM
Jan 2013

The purchasing agent I was talking about is, and this may come as a shock to you, a guy.



grantcart

(53,061 posts)
11. !!!!BANG!!!!
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 04:55 PM
Jan 2013


Strangest thing. I was watching a guy walk by with a "Smile Jesus Loves You" t shirt eating a Chicken Fil A sandwich and he was listening to the news on his I Phone and his head just popped.

Now I know why.

Gonna be a lot of heads exploding all over the place.

Tx4obama

(36,974 posts)
13. UPDATE - more detailed info
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 05:11 PM
Jan 2013


The U.S. military is ending its policy of excluding women from combat and will open combat jobs and direct combat units to female troops, CNN has learned. Multiple officials confirm to CNN that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will make the announcement tomorrow and notify Congress of the planned change in policy.

“We will eliminate the policy of ‘no women in units that are tasked with direct combat,’” a senior defense official says.

But the officials caution that “not every position will open all at once on Thursday.” Once the policy is changed, the Department of Defense will enter what is being called an “assessment phase,” in which each branch of service will examine all of its jobs and units not currently integrated and then produce a timetable in which it can integrate them.

-snip-

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2013/01/23/military-to-open-combat-jobs-to-women/


 

Leslie Valley

(310 posts)
14. And now, as a final measure of equality
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 05:14 PM
Jan 2013

The opportunity to register for the draft should be made a requirement also.

I know the Pentagon hates it, but I'm all for reactivating the draft. The protests in the '60's were as much against the draft as they were against the war. Maybe if everybody had a stake in the game our government wouldn't be in as much of a hurry to deploy our troops all over the world.

Pay attention to Algeria and Mali.

pasto76

(1,589 posts)
33. word. +1
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:26 PM
Jan 2013

that was how the current reserve system was designed by Generals Powell and Schwarzkopf. It was supposed to hurt the community by mobilizing the reserves to sustain a real war effort.

I am in fact, watching closely those two countries.

BumRushDaShow

(129,228 posts)
16. HOLY SHIT!
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 05:26 PM
Jan 2013

That is major major major.

This should hopefully allow those women working the front but not "officially" combatants, to FINALLY get some combat pay!

actslikeacarrot

(464 posts)
21. If women want...
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 06:55 PM
Jan 2013

...to join the infantry, at least in the Marines, they might not get the promotion they are looking for. the 03xx field traditionally has had higher cutting scores than other jobs. Just ask any 0351 (assaultmen) haha. The real disproportionate promotions have been at the top of the officer ranks, as having combat experience or coming from the combat field is almost a requirement for a star.

actslikeacarrot

(464 posts)
25. Ah, I see, your calling me a troll.
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:28 PM
Jan 2013

Well Here are the new cutting scores for Feb 13 for active duty Marine Corps. 0311(Rifleman)-1718 0331(Machinegunner)-1678 0341(Mortarmen)-1667 0351(Assaultman)-1709. These are the cutting scores you need to have to pick up E4 in the infantry. You dont get any points for deploying or being in combat, it's all time in service and MCI's. Now compare that to a 6216(fixed wing aircraft mechanic)-1592. Some non-infantry jobs have higher cutting scores, and some are even closed out! But that is why I said that the infantry TRADITIONALLY had higher cutting scores than most other jobs.

And before this gets even further, I have consistently been on the side of equality, and if a woman wants to join the infantry and can hack it, more power to her. Not sure why you are thinking I am a troll.

 

msanthrope

(37,549 posts)
26. Bless your heart. I have accused you of nothing. I truly wish you would air more of your concerns,
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:33 PM
Jan 2013

and I want you to enjoy your stay.

Thank you for your service. Where are you currently stationed?

actslikeacarrot

(464 posts)
27. I was a lurker...
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:39 PM
Jan 2013

...long before I signed up in 2008 and know when someone is calling someone a "concern troll." I also have been in the south long enough to know what "bless your heart" is really saying. I will kindly see my way out of this thread as this is either going to go nowhere fast or into a brick wall. Thank you for your time.

actslikeacarrot

(464 posts)
20. Actually,,,
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 06:51 PM
Jan 2013

if your in country you get combat pay no matter if your a grunt patrolling everyday or an admin clerk on leatherneck. There was talk of making combat and imminent danger pay a "sliding scale" by how close you were to the enemy and for how long, but that will never change I think.

Javaman

(62,531 posts)
19. I knew this was happening for about 4 months...
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 05:50 PM
Jan 2013

I women here in my office, well her daughter in law is was to be shipped out to Afghanistan this month with her "all female" unit and were to be one of the first all female combat units.

She, to the delight of my co-worker is staying state side for further training in another field the Army deemed more important for her. She is sad that she's not going with her unit, but I'm sure she will get over it after a while.

pasto76

(1,589 posts)
35. to throw cold water on some of the hysteria
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 09:35 PM
Jan 2013

"in the works"

"real soon now"

as in, a new camouflage pattern.

as in, a replacement for the M4.

Doesnt mean there will be significant movement on this issue in less than a geologic timeline. Im in rocket artillery. its not a physical job at all. almost no manual labor. no heavy lifting. The cabs of the launchers are pretty small...a female frame might be more comfortable in one than most males. wouldnt be a problem for 13M. 2016 is a long time away

 

Purveyor

(29,876 posts)
37. Well then it is time that all women, once they turn 18 years of age, register for the Selective
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 10:48 PM
Jan 2013

Service I suppose.



DollarBillHines

(1,922 posts)
38. I wonder about the emotional impact on guys when a woman gets shredded.
Thu Jan 24, 2013, 04:46 PM
Jan 2013

There must have been some extensive psychological research done.

Or not.

Artillery troops, maybe, but not close-in in my opinion.

Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Panetta opens combat role...