Women in Combat Arms/ SOF Discussion

[Mad boomer]

"BRITISH REPORT DELIVERS BOMBSHELL ON WOMEN IN COMBAT"
I was unable to open the Washington times report or the British report. Couldn't access original documents

https://www.sofmag.com/british-repo...-women-in-combat/comment-page-1/#comment-2859

http://www.washingtontimes.com/multimedia/image/8_5_2013_0928201jpg/

 

[AWP]

Two items to continue the discussion. I heard about the first on the radio.

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/special-operations-troops-doubt-women-can-do-the-job-1.338486

WASHINGTON — Surveys find that men in U.S. special operations forces do not believe women can meet the physical and mental demands of their commando jobs, and they fear the Pentagon will lower standards to integrate women into their elite units, according to interviews and documents.
Studies that surveyed personnel found "major misconceptions" within special operations about whether women should be brought into the male-only jobs. They also revealed concerns that department leaders would "capitulate to political pressure, allowing erosion of training standards," according to one document.

...

Andy Hamilton, who works with Bland and has expertise on this issue, noted that women in special operations jobs had concerns, too, about the broader integration.
"They're concerned that this might result in the lowering of the standards in what are currently our male-only occupations, and that would then reflect on either them or on the women who come into those occupations," said Hamilton.

Pretty straight forward and thoughts echoed here and elsewhere. The "misconceptions" quote is a bit disturbing because what isn't understood? What "misconceptions" are those? That kind of smells. The blurb about women in SOF was interesting to me in part because of this:

http://www.armytimes.com/story/mili...5/03/04/women-in-special-operations/24366457/

More than 4,100 officer and enlisted "men only" positions in special operations units of the Regular Army, National Guard and Army Reserve will be opened to women.
...
The organizations being opened to women as a result of the Feb. 27 directive from Army Secretary John McHugh are:

• Army Special Operations Command (Airborne)
• Army National Guard Special Forces Group (Airborne) Battalions
• Military Information Support Operations Command Tactical Psychological Teams
• Special Forces Military Free Fall Operations, and associated additional skill identifiers 4X for officers and W8 for enlisted soldiers.

Here's where I need to call bullshit. 19th Group had at least one female rigger a decade ago. I don't know if a loophole was closed or what, but it happened. There have also been plenty of attachments at various levels which presumably skirts the law because they aren't assigned.

 

[HOLLiS]

There are a lot of guys who can not preform as some think women should. IMHO, combat is something like 90-95% mental. I never had to carry a 250 pound dude 100 yards.

A good read The Marines Of Autumn, on survival. I went over at 165 pounds in 6 months I was down to 125 pound.

Can women do it? Probably yes but not in the same percentage that men can do it.

On Standards; If they actually represent the needs of the job, then they should never ever be lowered. A common comment that I heard in the RVN, they (our trainers) should have been harder on us in training.

Titus Flavius Josephus a first century historian accredited the Roman military success with;

"The practices were bloodless battles. Their battles where bloody practices."

 

[pardus]

When I see females who can carry 100+ lbs in a ruck, plus web gear which is probably 30+ and a rifle, patrol all day with that, live in the bush for months at a time like that, and be able to pass a PT test to male standards. Then I would start to think about a second look at this non pressing issue. That's not even considering the retardedness that the male Infanteers would immediately develop, that would by itself most likely ruin a unit.
It's just not possible and not needed. Fucking leave the issue alone. Jesus christ, work on something real like inequality in wages for women.
Wanting a magic sock that will give you unlimited money may seem like a good idea too, but it's only a real thing while you're on acid, so drop it!

 

[HOLLiS]

I think there are several parts to this issue. Peace time service, Combat service and the different jobs and wars we get into.

Peace time service.. is what it is. Wars are not all the same. We are not facing a enemy at the gates waiting to kill us all, where everyone who can fight is on the line. In that situation it is about survival not being PC or getting promoted. Today, we can be very selective and exclusionary to who we get. We can build the best and effective teams with highly motivated people.

 

[Viper1]

There are a lot of guys who can not preform as some think women should. IMHO, combat is something like 90-95% mental. I never had to carry a 250 pound dude 100 yards.
."

There are others who have Hollis. Most of us weigh over 200 once we're loaded with kit and gear.

 

[HOLLiS]

There are others who have Hollis. Most of us weigh over 200 once we're loaded with kit and gear.

Let see, when I was med-evaced, I weighted 125 pound, down from 165 when I went over six months earlier. My pack weight 110 pounds, that did not include rifle, 30 20 rounds mags, boots, helmet, flak jacket (sans ceramic plates) avec 5 frags, trousers, socks. The radio operators carried more. So now in my fat old age, I don't weight my weight then plus pack, sans the other stuff. No wonder I have joint issues. :)

The difference between a grunt and a mule..... eventually a mule will bulk at carrying more, a grunt won't.




As I mentioned, carrying a 250 pound dude.

 

[Viper1]

As I mentioned, carrying a 250 pound dude.

http://duskinandstephens.com/mike-duskin.html

Both of these guys were on the near end of 250lbs and multiple guys had to carry them and their gear out of Wardak. My buddy got blown up in Wardak and he's a solid 250 lbs. He got pulled out of a flipped over vehicle by a teammate, who was also close to 250-lbs. In fact, the entire ODA was over 215 lbs. We had to carry my team sergeant across the airfield when he got shot and he was a solid 200. The dying contractor I loaded on a medevac bird in '06 was well over 200 as well and that took two of us on the stretcher.

Listen, I think we agree on a lot points. We have to assemble, train, and deploy the best folks we can get to the job. I've served with good men and women downrange and they all performed at or above the standard required. There is no getting around certain facts though. A 100rd belt of 7.62 weighs 7 pounds, a Carl-G weighs in at 20 lbs, a M-240B is over 25-lbs, and there are a lot of guys in service pushing near or beyond the 200 lb mark. As I said, everyone I worked with could operate under those conditions. The standard shouldn't be lowered to get around the previously mentioned facts.

 

[HOLLiS]

The best person for the job is the best person. The neat thing is, it is not my call. If it was, I would want the best person.

Reducing training requirements, standards etc is just wrong.

 

[Brill]

http://duskinandstephens.com/mike-duskin.html

Very fitting website. October 2012 was a rough month.

 

[Ranger Psych]

Yep. Hell, I was 215 before you threw the saw, ammo, armor, etc on.

I only know one woman who's proven to been able to remotely physically mule me around for any sort of distance in any manner. I'm married to her. PTFO after a Phenegrine shot... the whole aid station was getting ready to break out a litter and wheeled litter carrier to get me out to the truck to go home for bed rest.... when she just mungo'ed me the fuck up on her shoulders and asked if someone could get the door for her. I don't doubt she could if I had been in full kit as well, but there's one thing between 100 meters walking at a slow pace with no aggrivating circumstances, and buddy carrying someone because you have to move them to the CCP/LZ with ineffective fire going around you. She knows it too, seems that alot of tiny "flat track bullies" don't seem to get it though.

I mean, I'd sooner prefer seeing more segregation of duty positions... like stryker crew, etc. Can you think of anything more terrifying than a full crew of sync'ed up women on an Abrams or Bradley? It'd be glorious.

 

[medicchick]

You must not remember in Alaska after you had your wisdom teeth out. That was fun getting you across an icy parking lot (not under your own power), then mouthing off to the gate guard.

 

[Ranger Psych]

No, I really don't remember that shit. Now do you see why I really hate doing things that purposely get me to that LOC (or lack thereof?)

 

[HOLLiS]

http://www.marinecorpstimes.com/sto...arine-experiment-drops-two-officers/25418867/

From the Marine Corps Times. I am glad the Corps did not adjust the standards.

 

[AWP]

Could a Marine explain this to me:

Officials have said that ongoing research will consider many aspects of temporarily integrating IOC, including the number of volunteers, their pass rate, and performance in the course. That data will be taken alongside other research points, including the much higher success rate for enlisted female Marines in passing the Infantry Training Battalion course at Camp Lejeune, North Carolina. When that research concluded earlier this year, 240 women had attempted the course, with a pass rate of 44 percent.

Does ITB produce 0311's or is that something every infantry Marine has to complete before going on to an MOS producing course? How does it have a 44% pass rate and IOC has 0%? What are the differences?

 

[BloodStripe]

Could a Marine explain this to me:



Does ITB produce 0311's or is that something every infantry Marine has to complete before going on to an MOS producing course? How does it have a 44% pass rate and IOC has 0%? What are the differences?

ITB is for the enlisted folk. ITB is Infantry Training Battalion. All 03's (Infantry MOS) attend ITB.

Also for the enlisted is MCT. MCT is Marine Combat Training. MCT is where all non Infantry MOS's go.

Combined they all create the School of Infantry (SOI).

 

[Marine0311]

Could a Marine explain this to me:



Does ITB produce 0311's or is that something every infantry Marine has to complete before going on to an MOS producing course? How does it have a 44% pass rate and IOC has 0%? What are the differences?

ITB is for 0311 Marines. MCT (Marine Combat Training) is for non Infantry Marines.

The two put together is/are called SOI (School of Infantry)

I think it is because IOC is longer. ITB as I recall is 8 weeks. Perhaps the IOC standards are "harder" (as much as it pains me to say that) because they are producing officers to lead enlisted Infantry Marines

edit: see above post.

 

[HOLLiS]

Could a Marine explain this to me:



Does ITB produce 0311's or is that something every infantry Marine has to complete before going on to an MOS producing course? How does it have a 44% pass rate and IOC has 0%? What are the differences?

My guess is the intensity of the training. Getting my 0311 was not that difficult. My daughter would have no problem passing the course.

When I was in, Every Marine had to go through a basic infantry course (ITR). Then they went off to schools or to Infantry training battalion, picking up the specialty part of their MOS. 0311, 03 is basic infantry. 11 is the specialty rifleman. Machine gunner, mortarman, etc a different 03XX I had two 03 MOSs, 0311 and 0353.

 

[BloodStripe]

Having never attended IOC (@Teufel can speak for that if he would like) I can only speak on ITB. ITB is designed like many a-schools to graduate those who attend. Is it a cake walk? No, but it's not that difficult of a school. Just be able to hump every where (at least on the west coast back in 02 early 03) and pass a few basic written and practical tests. How any could fail it is beyond me (aside from injury). The standard is not very high coming out of there.

 

[Grunt]

When I went through...it was basically an extension of Boot Camp. Up to and including a couple routine thrashings at times. We ran or humped everywhere we went. When we didn't do it quick enough...we thrashed a little. Things may have changed a bit since I went through in '86.

With that said...since we were two weeks out of Boot Camp...we were all in good shape and the physical aspect wasn't that bad...only aggravating at times because we thought we were done with Boot Camp and thrashing.

The academic side of it wasn't bad -- in my opinion. Where there was some difficulty with some people was with the qualifying on specific weapons. However, with a little motivation and some extra training...they usually pulled through. We had a couple that were moved from MOS to MOS for failure to qualify.