RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms

RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:32:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: Yes? And? I'm English, we're writing English. No kidding.... Well I am. You're trying to pull me up about non-existent spelling mistakes, so I figured you must be foreign, and thus deserving of my sympathy ;)

pahunkboy -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:34:47 AM)
Straight people love to have sex.... almost like rabbits. This is why there are 6 billion of us. ;-)

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:39:22 AM)
quote: it isn't about the strength, or the ability, or the capacity to pass the training I'm actually all for women in the military. I'm for women in general. Just not in certain situations that require strength and dude..It is about ability in general and the ability to pass the training in most things. Let them be tank personnel..Fighter pilots and so on but no front line positions unless they can pull the weight as well as those Men in those groups. In 40+ years I have never seen a women that was able to match the average man's strength that wasn't the exception. The average woman just doesn't have what it takes. You could take a woman and man of the same weight and exact fitness level..place them under heavy upper body physical stress and the man would win hands down again and again. Now some of you with your friends can giggle at that but we have been the physically dominant force on this planet for as long as we've been here...Genetic case closed. If society allows this across the board it wouldn't surprise me in the least though..Society as a whole as far as I'm concerned easily puts accountability and responsibility to the side on a regular basis. Why should this be any different.

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:42:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys The average woman just doesn't have what it takes. And we're not talking about "the average", we're talking about whatever percentage it is of women (and I accept that it may not be a high percentage, but until we test we won't know) who are capable of meeting whatever tests are carried out on men, to exactly the same standard. quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys Genetic case closed. Well no, not at all.

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:42:56 AM)
quote: Well I am. You're trying to pull me up about non-existent spelling mistakes, so I figured you must be foreign, and thus deserving of my sympathy ;) Both of those last comments were a joke of course. :> It's cool.

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:45:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: Well I am. You're trying to pull me up about non-existent spelling mistakes, so I figured you must be foreign, and thus deserving of my sympathy ;) Both of those last comments were a joke of course. :> It's cool. I am genuinely sympathetic towards foreigners though :)

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:46:13 AM)
quote: And we're not talking about "the average", we're talking about whatever percentage it is of women (and I accept that it may not be a high percentage, but until we test we won't know) who are capable of meeting whatever tests are carried out on men, to exactly the same standard. I agree on a number of things here..Yes I think it's going to be a low number unless they do something stupid under outside pressure and lower the standards and no in general I don't mean the average making it..It would have to be someone who was in better shape than her average male counterpart.

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:48:08 AM)
quote: Well no, not at all. That was spoken in big picture terms.

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:50:07 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: And we're not talking about "the average", we're talking about whatever percentage it is of women (and I accept that it may not be a high percentage, but until we test we won't know) who are capable of meeting whatever tests are carried out on men, to exactly the same standard. I agree on a number of things here..Yes I think it's going to be a low number unless they do something stupid under outside pressure and lower the standards and no in general I don't mean the average making it..It would have to be someone who was in better shape than her average male counterpart. Look, this "argue with strangers on the internet" thing isn't going to work if there's a mass outbreak of agreement.

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:51:32 AM)
quote: Look, this "argue with strangers on the internet" thing isn't going to work if there's a mass outbreak of agreement. I agre...I mean screw you buddy!

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:53:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: Well no, not at all. That was spoken in big picture terms. If by "big picture terms" you meant, "in inaccurate generalisations which don't have a great deal to do with the topic in hand terms" then yes, with you 100% If you meant "as it actually pertains to this discussion, because the last I looked the Army doesn't just hand a blind, one-legged gimp a rifle and pack them off to war without testing them terms" then no, I'm not in agreement with you.

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 9:55:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: Look, this "argue with strangers on the internet" thing isn't going to work if there's a mass outbreak of agreement. I agre...I mean screw you buddy! Better. Much better. I'm off to get the necessaries to do steak tartare for dinner. Raw meat is entirely in keeping with this thread, after all.

hlen5 -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:01:41 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys ........You could take a woman and man of the same weight and exact fitness level..place them under heavy upper body physical stress and the man would win hands down again and again........ I just wanted to point out that a woman's lower body strength is porportionally better than a man's. Back to the topic.......

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:03:21 AM)
quote: If by "big picture terms" you meant, "in inaccurate generalisations which don't have a great deal to do with the topic in hand terms" then yes, with you 100% If you meant "as it actually pertains to this discussion, because the last I looked the Army doesn't just hand a blind, one-legged gimp a rifle and pack them off to war without testing them terms" then no, I'm not in agreement with you. Next argument then.... No you miss fired on both points. I mean stretching out the earth's history big picture and taking into consideration every guy I've ever known and every girl I've ever known..read about watched on TV..seen in a grocery store..on a playing field..yada yada. I could go on and on and on..I even do sometimes just because I can. The really big picture which you perceive to have little bearing on this conversation yet still do..Even if they were made as a side note and you are now bringing them to the forefront as an argument after stating they have little to do with said argument..Which in turn makes them a forefront issue now..History isn't now but it can teach us if we're open to learning and we move to forget. How about we pass and move onto something that we both don't agree on.

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:05:38 AM)
quote: I just wanted to point out that a woman's lower body strength is porportionally better than a man's. Back to the topic....... We'll you couldn't say that about every women but yes they do say that's true..The only problem with that is we rely greatly on upper body to do the rest.

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:06:20 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys No you miss fired on both points. I mean stretching out the earth's history big picture and taking into consideration every guy I've ever known and every girl I've ever known..read about watched on TV..seen in a grocery store..on a playing field..yada yada. I could go on and on and on..I even do sometimes just because I can. The really big picture which you perceive to have little bearing on this conversation yet still do..Even if they were made as a side note and you are now bringing them to the forefront as an argument after stating they have little to do with said argument..Which in turn makes them a forefront issue now..History isn't now but it can teach us if we're open to learning and we move to forget. How about we pass and move onto something that we both don't agree on. Translate your first 2 paragraphs into English and you've got a deal.

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:07:36 AM)
quote: Translate your first 2 paragraphs into English and you've got a deal. You want me to remove any Z's and replace them with S's?

RapierFugue -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:08:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys quote: Translate your first 2 paragraphs into English and you've got a deal. You want me to remove any Z's and replace them with S's? :) That too.

Icarys -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:11:25 AM)
quote: :) That too. I thought you'd like that. ;) You guys are better than fiber. I must relieve myself. BBL.

Jaybeee -> RE: Army Mulls Women in Combat Arms (1/15/2011 10:12:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hlen5 quote: ORIGINAL: Icarys ........You could take a woman and man of the same weight and exact fitness level..place them under heavy upper body physical stress and the man would win hands down again and again........ I just wanted to point out that a woman's lower body strength is porportionally better than a man's. Back to the topic....... Actually, that's bullshit. An untrained man's legpress is 50% greater than that of a woman (I write from experience) whereas we are only 38% heavier than you.

Page: << < prev 5 6 7 [8] 9 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0546875