kramadas Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 I'm sure you all heard the news - a 19 year old girl was rescued from the IRaqis, and found in not so great a condition. Now my question - should someone so young be allowed to fight? I mean, you cannot even drink alcohol in this country till you're 21, yet you can go out in a battlefield and man some of the most powerful weaponary known to humans? My take - you should be allowed to enlist at 18, but must be 21 to fight. This way, you're at least a little older, with at least 3 years of training. Not sure how feasible it is, but it makes sense. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underwater Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 how ironic is it that she is from Palestine, WV ..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 yeah, i guess its both a question of gender (as in the other thread) as well as age. i agree with ravermania, i really dont know how mentally, psychologically prepared a teenager ('cos they are still in their teens) is to go around killing people, or placed in the situation to do so.i would like to assume that she was placed there, in front lines, because she proved herself in training to be put in that situation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
underwater Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 she was not on the front lines....she was part of a supply division that made a wrong turn when trying to find the convoy they were following....women are not on the front lines as far as i know.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnice35 Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by vicman i would like to assume that she was placed there, in front lines, because she proved herself in training to be put in that situation. I'm sorry dude but have you seen that girls pic? she doesnt exactly look too fit to be in a battle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnice35 Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by raver_mania I'm sure you all heard the news - a 19 year old girl was rescued from the IRaqis, and found in not so great a condition. Now my question - should someone so young be allowed to fight? I mean, you cannot even drink alcohol in this country till you're 21, yet you can go out in a battlefield and man some of the most powerful weaponary known to humans? My take - you should be allowed to enlist at 18, but must be 21 to fight. This way, you're at least a little older, with at least 3 years of training. Not sure how feasible it is, but it makes sense. I am sure if some of our younger troops would not be too pleased to read this, after all I am sure most of them are eager to fight, regardless of their age. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by dnice35 I am sure if some of our younger troops would not be too pleased to read this, after all I am sure most of them are eager to fight, regardless of their age. she wasn't in battle she wasn't even supposed to see action Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starvingartist Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by siceone she wasn't in battle she wasn't even supposed to see action This is true. However that is a risk they were all aware of from the outset. It is war you know. Age and Gender two things people diligently fight for "equal" rights. And now equal does not sound "fair". Or at least it does not look pretty. I'm all for the ugly truth that comes with equality. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnice35 Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by starvingartist This is true. However that is a risk they were all aware of from the outset. It is war you know. Age and Gender two things people diligently fight for "equal" rights. And now equal does not sound "fair". Or at least it does not look pretty. I'm all for the ugly truth that comes with equality. men are women should be treated equally, but not when it comes to war. why should a womans action jepordise the safety of the other soldiers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
starvingartist Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by dnice35 men are women should be treated equally, but not when it comes to war. why should a womans action jepordise the safety of the other soldiers? A man's actions can jeopordize the safety of the other soldiers as well. I am not saying I want an army full of women. Or even an army full of 18 year old boys. But at 18 you can vote. As a woman you can vote. We all pay taxes to the same government. Therefore if anyone 18 or anyone female wants to join the armed forces, they should be allowed to do so. You can not preach equality in some parts of a government and knowingly allow double standards to exists. I can vote because someone fought for that right in the name of equality. Equality means we have to accept it everywhere. Including the armed forces. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dnice35 Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by starvingartist A man's actions can jeopordize the safety of the other soldiers as well. I am not saying I want an army full of women. Or even an army full of 18 year old boys. But at 18 you can vote. As a woman you can vote. We all pay taxes to the same government. Therefore if anyone 18 or anyone female wants to join the armed forces, they should be allowed to do so. You can not preach equality in some parts of a government and knowingly allow double standards to exists. I can vote because someone fought for that right in the name of equality. Equality means we have to accept it everywhere. Including the armed forces. maybe I didnt make myself clear enough, anyways I was just merly saying that women should not be allowed to be anywhere near the front lines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 i saw this pic on msnnbc and it had this caption next to it:At the readyU.S. Army Pvt. Maranda Nichols, foreground, 18, from Vidalia, Ga., and Pfc. Leysha Williamson, 27, from Texas hold positions in foxholes during a dawn defensive alert Sunday at the forward base of the Delta Company, 1st-58th Aviation Regiment, 3rd Infantry Division, south of Baghdad. Nichols joined the Army June 10 and is the youngest soldier in her unit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 18 years old Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 i would feel more concerned with young kids being sent to a war than being concerned with the gender of a soldier.if a woman proves that she is capable during training to fight, she should be treated equally. trust me that we are not talking of girly-girls here who enlist in the army for combat.they could have gone into the army and be nurses, mechanics, whatever, doctors...etc. they chose to be soldiers. they are not the standard girlie-girl so to speak. there are lot's of tough women out there on the streets, and in the army. i do not know if it was the case with this 18 or 19 yo girl, but if they are capable and have proven that passing through the same rigorous training as mr. joe blow did, and they want to be there, they should be treated equally.i am sure the male soldiers in this time when they are fighting anywhere in Iraq, see them the same way, and would put their life in danger to rescue or save them in the exact same way, they would do for a male soldier and they expect that the female soldier would do the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by vicman i would feel more concerned with young kids being sent to a war than being concerned with the gender of a soldier.if a woman proves that she is capable during training to fight, she should be treated equally. trust me that we are not talking of girly-girls here who enlist in the army for combat.they could have gone into the army and be nurses, mechanics, whatever, doctors...etc. they chose to be soldiers. they are not the standard girlie-girl so to speak. there are lot's of tough women out there on the streets, and in the army. i do not know if it was the case with this 18 or 19 yo girl, but if they are capable and have proven that passing through the same rigorous training as mr. joe blow did, and they want to be there, they should be treated equally.i am sure the male soldiers in this time when they are fighting anywhere in Iraq, see them the same way, and would put their life in danger to rescue or save them in the exact same way, they would do for a male soldier and they expect that the female soldier would do the same. I agree on a fundmental level but the way my mother raised me is to keep women and children out of harms way.. so I would say I wouldn't want a woman on the front line not because of a percieved lack of capacity to act. but because I think women shoudl be kept out of harms way when ever possible. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vicman Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by siceone I agree on a fundmental level but the way my mother raised me is to keep women and children out of harms way.. so I would say I wouldn't want a woman on the front line not because of a percieved lack of capacity to act. but because I think women shoudl be kept out of harms way when ever possible. those were different times. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
siceone Posted April 2 Report Share Posted April 2 Originally posted by vicman those were different times. what was so different about it Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
magellanmax Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 Originally posted by raver_mania I'm sure you all heard the news - a 19 year old girl was rescued from the IRaqis, and found in not so great a condition. Now my question - should someone so young be allowed to fight? I mean, you cannot even drink alcohol in this country till you're 21, yet you can go out in a battlefield and man some of the most powerful weaponary known to humans? My take - you should be allowed to enlist at 18, but must be 21 to fight. This way, you're at least a little older, with at least 3 years of training. Not sure how feasible it is, but it makes sense. My biggest concern about the whole thing is that...A soldier was rescued...from a HOSPITAL no less.....I thought George Bush said the Iraqis were executing the POWs What gives? And she was a young female....my thought would be that she was rescued from a torture chamber after being desecrated?And relating to the topic.... The UN has been advocating for an International court to prosecute criminal soldiers during the time of war or during peace missions. But it kinda sticks out like a sore thumb that one prominent nation strongly objected to it...wonder who?Make an educated guess.....You got it..... And we wonder why the rest of the world turns a deaf ear when we accuse Iraq of Geneva Convention violations regarding POW treatment... Hmmm... " A Coin Has Two Sides"...Wonder how many are going to challenge this...I cant wait... fire away your ignorant comments warmongers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nycmuzik Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 Alot of the US Army Rangers are under 21 and they are a highly capable special op's force....To porve that point, they were the one's who rescued her....Age really doesnt have alot to do with being ready for battle....If the person is not capable of handling himself/herself and their weapon then they will not be placed in a situation where they can fuck up....Thats what training is for.....Not only do they teach you the occupation or speciality you selected but it also get rid of the people who cant handle themselves under certain circumstance....The last thing the army wants is someone out there who not only will put themselves in danger but the soldiers they're fighting along side of..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pookie23 Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 Originally posted by magellanmax My biggest concern about the whole thing is that...A soldier was rescued...from a HOSPITAL no less.....I thought George Bush said the Iraqis were executing the POWs What gives? And she was a young female....my thought would be that she was rescued from a torture chamber after being desecrated?And relating to the topic.... The UN has been advocating for an International court to prosecute criminal soldiers during the time of war or during peace missions. But it kinda sticks out like a sore thumb that one prominent nation strongly objected to it...wonder who?Make an educated guess.....You got it..... And we wonder why the rest of the world turns a deaf ear when we accuse Iraq of Geneva Convention violations regarding POW treatment... Hmmm... " A Coin Has Two Sides"...Wonder how many are going to challenge this...I cant wait... fire away your ignorant comments warmongers... 11 DEAD POW's were also recovered. And about your "international" court, when the UN has peace committees lead by Syria and Libya, I'd be worried shitless about a "fair" international trial.BTW...I haven't heard about any Iraqi POW's being tortured. Please enlighten me if you've heard otherwise. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrmatas2277 Posted April 3 Report Share Posted April 3 Originally posted by magellanmax The UN has been advocating for an International court to prosecute criminal soldiers during the time of war or during peace missions. But it kinda sticks out like a sore thumb that one prominent nation strongly objected to it...wonder who?Make an educated guess.....You got it..... i knew the French would do this...BASTARDS!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.