"Military begins recruiting women for combat jobs" Topic

Well then Dragon Gunner, you just better not let me hear you going on about designing steel rule dies, or selling Comcast door to door!
(See how foolish that sounds? >cough cough<)

Dragon Gunner, that's not about wargaming! Stop it! Stop it! I'm offended! Please somebody do something!

@ Winston Smith

You won't see me ever pretend I know anything about steel rule dies or Comcast. I will defer to your experience! Nothing foolish about that!

Well then Dragon Gunner, you just better not let me hear you going on about designing steel rule dies, or selling Comcast door to door!
(See how foolish that sounds? >cough cough<)

Winston, you've just hit it right on the head. He can opine all he wants about those things, but I would certainly defer to your level of expertise on those subjects.

That's the issue: Informed opinion.

So that's it then? It's agreed that informed opinion is the key? Everyone is entitled to an opinion but some opinions are more valuable than others? Regardless of topic.

Fantastic.

And to help us identify the value of the various opinions I suggest an "Informed Opinion Preamble" be included in posts before opinions are given. For instance an example for the non-veteran "Women in Combat" one would go something like this:

* I have never been in combat
* I have never been in a combat zone
* I have never been in a combat unit
* I have never been in a mixed gender unit
* I have never been in the military at all
* I push tiny metal figures around a table and roll dice

And my opinion on women in combat is…

Wouldn't that be helpful when it comes to giving weight to the following opinion?

And just so you know I'm not being overly partisan about this my preamble for selling Comcast door-to-door would look like this:

* I have never sold Comcast products
* I have never sold anything door-to-door
* I do not work for Comcast
* I went to a Comcast Service Center once
* I can barely program my Comcast remote
* I hate walking
* I push tiny metal figures around a table and roll dice

And my opinion on the best way to sell Comcast door-to-door is…

So what do you think guys? And feel free to use the preamble.

I'm with ya Blackhorse !!!!!

Blackhorse for the win LOL and I mean it! You hit it on the head.

Thank you sir.

I'm a civilian, I come from a military family.
All of my cousins and Uncles served. Big but, they all kept quiet.

oh dear, you don't realise about the take.

I have never been in combat
* I have never been in a combat zone
* I have never been in a combat unit
* I have never been in a mixed gender unit
OOPS,

Oh Dear indeed …

* I have never been in combat
* I HAVE been in a combat zone, the DMZ in the ROK
* I HAVE been in nothing but combat units, the 101, 2ID, 197 Mech/18th ABN Corps.
* I HAVE been in a mixed gender unit, a Combat Support Bn

Don't worry he said he couldn't do it he would send his relatives. I am willing to bet his relatives are far more restrained. By the way Crumple if military service is a tradition in your family why did you not serve?

LOL !

DG +1 LOL. It's not the relatives I'd be worried about it's the etc that concerns me. Legion have you ever tangled with an etc before?

I would be more concerned over what he wants to "rip"

Time for the mental bleach.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion but some opinions are more valuable than others?

@kyoteblue,

Wait wait…It's from Animal Farm !!! What do I win ???

And for those playing along at home kyoteblue has identified the paraphrased line.

"All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others."

And here's what you win!
A final ride on Boxer as he is led away to the knacker's.

This whole thing got quickly out of hand. And it took much too long to get it under control

Now we all know where everyone else stands, who are friends, who doesn't like who, everyone's opinion of everyone else, etc. … I'm sure some of us will be wary of others here. To avoid another event like this occuring.

It never should have been allowed to go this far.

Firstly there should be a way to stop certain types from coming back to start trouble. And "It" will be back again as it has done many times before.

Secondly, there should have been more effective monitoring and editing. Had that had occurred, things would have not gone as far as it did.
And many things that have been said would not have been.
As adults we should all be able to know how to have a civil discussion. But with such strong opinions, that does not always happen. Especially when accusations and mud is being slung, etc.,… It was beginning to sound like the political debates that we see almost daily in the US media. And with how different some who are not Americans feel about certain subjects. Very enlightening … but it should not have come with all the dissension, discord, etc., that has occurred …

I guess that is why there is monitoring and editing. But it can't be effective if no one does it in an efficient and timely manner.

And Bill you can DH me … But this clearly rests in your preview. I was not even involved in this thread until you locked out some who never should have got here in the first place. As I knew if I replied it would only make it worst. I hit [!] about 10-15 times before anything was done and it was only a 1/2 measure, IMO. Because I knew if something was not done it would go the way it did.

So a lot of time was wasted and vitriol spewed …

For crying out loud. Your feelings were hurt for 24 hours before anyone did anything about it. You must have hit the complaint button 500 times, and still nobody took every single one of the Bad Man's posts down.
That certainly qualifies as a First World Problem.

What the heck do you expect? 24/7 monitoring of every single post?
Do the math. It's the weekend.
Oh right. Every time somebody hits the complaint button a loud siren goes off. Drop everything! A TMPer is upset!
The crack team of editors certainly let you down.

Airborne, huh? I thought they were tough.

I am not a professional singer.
I am not a black woman.
Therefore I am not allowed to have an opinion on Beyoncé's music.

I have hit the complaint button on myself to save you the trouble. Your fingers must be tired by now.
I have also requested that anybody starting a "Free the OFM!" or "Free Winston!" thread be given the DH.

"I am not a professional singer.
I am not a black woman.
Therefore I am not allowed to have an opinion on Beyoncé's music."- Winston

You can have an opinion but don't expect to tell her how to make music and have your opinion given any weight or much consideration.

Just like I won't tell you how to sell Comcast.

You remind me of the guy who blows $10,000 USD every weekend in the casinos playing blackjack. He gets upset when his wife loses $25 USD in the slots. "Dammit Rose! *I* know how to gamble!"

@Winston

Why do you have to resort to personal insults? Please come up with a reasonable rebuttal if you can…

Your last comment was devoid of reason.

That was not a personal attack. I was opening on those who argue from personal experience. Sometimes their experience…

Btw, Roger Enert was a brilliant film critic. I agreed with him maybe half the time, but even when I disagreed he was still brilliant.
Guess how much actual film work he ever did? He wrote ONE screenplay. It was for Russ Meyers' "Beyond the Valley of the Dolls".

Have you never seen bad actors? Hears bad music? Do you have to be an actual actor or singer to have legitimate criticism?

@Winston

It was a poor example. Entertainers are supposed to entertain if they fail to entertain you then you are entitled to an opinion. In the case of Beyoncé your opinion would be meaningless she has a rather large following. You could dislike her performance but you cannot tell her you know anything about singing and dancing so therefore she should do this, that or the other thing…

What I think you are trying to say is Dragon Gunner I don't like your opinion in spite of your experience so your experience is automatically bad or flawed. Therefore Winston's opinion despite the lack of experience is valid.

Do you have another example?

It does not compare to women in the infantry.

I still won't tell you how to sell Comcast.

Well, it is interesting that a number of the commenters here are quite impressed with 'expert' opinion in fields such as climate, but but wish to totally ignore it when a branch of the military conducts a test and reports their negative findings on the current topic.

The same commenters then also attack other commenters with experience in the field and attribute their view on the matter to mere prejudice.

Now, I do agree with Winston that one can make valid judgements (or at least contribute an opinion on the matter) without having first hand experience. One can look at the historical/real world experience of those who have implemented the policy in question and see what the results were.

There is also the fact that key elements in the discussion are differences in anatomy and biology inherent to the subjects. With knowledge of these differences and correlating them with the aforementioned history and the empirical test study one can certainly make an informed comment.

P.S Perhaps the problem with the acceptance of the recent study conducted by the Marines has to do with the fact that it was empirical. If perhaps the Marines had computed a set of factors based on anatomy and other physical data and used them to build computer models to simulate the impact of women in combat there would be more acceptance. A computer model (or models) that projected an increase in casualties of 20-50 percent, that units would see a 30-40 percent loss of effectiveness, or that the probability of defeat in any given operation would increase by 50 percent, or that global temperatures would increase catastrophically with the inclusion of women in combat might have won the argument for the Marines.

P.P.S. It would be of interest to see the actual combat roles of women in the North Korean and Chinese armies. The fact that the North Korean and Chinese rulers like to see young women in skirts carrying assault rifles parade past a podium does not necessarily show that they are integrated into combat units. On another point, those photos and videos that I have seen show segregated units.

Well, I now realise that I'll just have to be sure to ask myself whether my lack of military experience in some way invalidates my choice of hobby.

We have had threads like this before and they all end with Chest Beating, Locked Accounts and Dawg Housings

KB is a veritable soothsayer.

And what does the returned Tango01 think about the thread he started?

Firstly there should be a way to stop certain types from coming back to start trouble…

The technology of the internet simply does not make that possible in every case.

Never mind Tango, I'd say that Aberrant's Sergeant's advice says it all to all of us.

Speaking of which, where the heck did that post go?

That advice needs to be immortalised for posterity. For those with failing memories, here it is again from memory but reworded for the sake of the faint of heart:

"For heaven's sake Sir, man up and crack on. You're making a complete prat of yourself."

That is the kind of stuff this civilian can and will respect.

"The technology of the internet simply does not make that possible in every case"- Editor

I hear he is on the way back today for more please be vigilant.

"Vigilant? Is he dangerous, is he scary?"- Oranjzicht

No just obnoxious.

With the caveat that my military experience is entirely peace time and I am not a battle-worn space marine or anything but this seems like it should be really simple, no?

Give everyone the same standards and if they pass, they pass.

Right? That's the American thing right?
If you can do the job, it doesn't matter who you are or what you believe.

The marine tests were pretty clear that if you take women who have not been held to the same physical standard, and put them in the same roles, there'll be trouble.

Okay, awesome. Then don't do that. If you took a bunch of random guys at a gaming convention and sent them through an assault course, they wouldn't do so hot either, unless we put a cheetos bag and a new edition of DBA at the end of it :)

As for the easily offended for whom this entire subject is making them itchy and sore, maybe write your senator instead?
None of your elected representatives read TMP.

Goonfighter,

I am pleased that you liked it; he was quite a character. It was a pity that he managed to get killed in such a stupid and pointless manner not long after.

I am slightly surprised that my post was deleted as it was not particularly rude or offensive. Still, we must be aware of the delicate sensibilities of some.

First things first.

Aberrant, I too was surprised, hence my reposting; I am saddened and sobered also.

Goonfighter

Ahem. But about this troll, I'll be alert. TMP needs lerts.

I have two examples of bona fide experts.

Linus Pauling, my God when I was taking chemistry. The only person to earn two unshared Nobel prizes. He published his research on the DNA triple helix. Uhhhhh… It was a double helix. He was embarrassingly wrong.
See Watson and Crick.

Werner Heisenberg. Quantum mechanics. Uncertainty Principle. Was in charge of Hitler's atomic bomb project. Totally on the wrong track. Embarrassingly so.

The technology of the internet simply does not make that possible in every case.

Enable pre-moderation approval for new member's posts until they reach a certain threshold of post counts/trust. A number of forums do that. A political site I used to moderate at did it as we had lots of issues with trolls. That simple measure cut the trouble in half.

Yes. it's a lot of work and it will not catch all trolls, but it does cut down on the "drive by" type trolls.

But you are not going to do that…..

But did you not just have the troll problems due to it being a politics site?

True.
It's not at all uncommon for political sites to get a bunch of idiots from opposing views who like to disrupt such forums. (and before anyone asks, yes there is a world if difference between honest debate/discussion and being there solely to cause trouble. The former are a good thing and can be interesting and entertaining. The latter are childish idiots.)

TMP is not a politics site, but is having troll issues to politics I think.

To some extent I would agree. But TMP also has about a dozen or so hate-filled obsessive malcontents who got banned from here and just can't let it go. That is were much of the "drive by" trolling comes from. But the vast majority of our trolls are just clowns with a low signal to noise ratio, that our host refuses to deal with….or truth be told even admit are a problem.

But what do I know?

To get back on topic.
Command Authority has decided that this is what they want. We are now having an election where someone with the same attitude has a better than even chance of continuing for the next four years.
So you better get used to it.
And if you oppose it, you better come up with better arguments than "Being men, drill instructors will naturally rape women under their control." That sounds so….. Taliban, doesn't it?

Have fun folks; I am off to have dinner with M. le Maire of our little commune, a rather pleasant ex para officer (not something that I would normally say), and his wife.

I expect it will involve rather a lot of the local alcoholic produce:).

So you better get used to it.
And if you oppose it, you better come up with better arguments than "Being men, drill instructors will naturally rape women under their control." That sounds so . . . Taliban, doesn't it?

Martin, you seem to think that The Editor in Chief Bill has nothing better to do (TMP 4.0) than deal with your problems

Funny.
I would think that improving the site is something he would be interested in…

But what do I know?

I have a question or two and I'd very much like some answers.

It's glaringly obvious that a lot of the energy on this thread has gone into a debate as to what constitutes veteran status and the level of respect accorded to former service personnel.

Now firstly, I draw your attention to Aberrant's post of 1135, 6/3 now deleted, followed by my post of 0446 and 0458 in which I mention and reiterate a comment by a Sgt who served with Aberrant.

Secondly, Aberrant posted at 0753 on 7/3 that the Sergeant who had made that comment had been killed shortly after. I post a somewhat embarrassed and short comment.

So. I think it's safe to say that TMP is full to the gunwales with enquiring minds who pore over each other's posts with obsessive fervour and pile in with alacrity. Here we have a clear reference to someone, identified as a Sergeant being killed, presumably on active service and NOBODY comments.

NOBODY. On a thread which degenerated into a slogging match over what constitutes a veteran, NOBODY made even the slightest murmur of sympathy or concern. In fact, most of the next posts are about Internet Security.

I'm curious as to why Aberrants post was deleted.

I'm even more curious as to why no one made one single comment in concern, solidarity or even common or garden RESPECT following a series of posts which if you paid them any attention hinted at an exchange that went to the heart of the recent debate. Perhaps you were embarrassed, I was. But if you talk about respect for veterans, this is where it ultimately takes us.

Aberrant; I hope you've had a good drink. If this has offended you I apologise, that is not my intent. I had just turned 18 in 1982 and fully believe I was saved a lot of unpleasantness by the fact that gentlemen like you – and your Sergeant – underwent it instead. Thank you.

When you can't see what was said (because it was deleted), but only what was said surrounding it, these conversations get really weird to try and follow.

What is the problem with this?

They can drive APC's and pull triggers.

Sure there is certain jobs that would be more difficult due to the heavy lifting involved but you can put the woman has the tank driver.

Is it because they just might get killed?

I agree Weasel, it took me ages to work out what was wrong. That delete was criminal IMHO.