Defense chief Panetta to clear women for combat roles

[Major Nikon]

By Jim Miklaszewski and Courtney Kube, NBC News

U.S. Defense Secretary Leon Panetta has decided to clear the way for women to serve in many combat positions in the U.S. armed forces, a senior defense official told NBC News on Wednesday afternoon.

The Pentagon chief will announce on Thursday that he is eliminating the direct ground combat exclusion — the Department of Defense policy that excluded women from assignment to units below the brigade level if the unit would be engaged in direct combat.

This will allow women to be assigned to select positions in ground combat units at the battalion level.

"I support it. It reflects the reality of 21st century military operations," said Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, in anticipation of the announcement.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/23/16664507-defense-chief-panetta-to-clear-women-for-combat-roles

[Denninmi]

1. Past due.

No reason not to. Women are no more or less expendable than men.

[lumberjack_jeff]

2. People may begin to think twice about electing "tough guy" presidents now.

Next up: draft registration.

[Upton]

3. Great..then it's time for women to start registering for selective service..

Otherwise, we can coin a new term as it relates to this topic: Female Privilege

Well actually it's not new, for when it comes to the draft and war, it's men who have always been considered the expendable gender.

[TM99]

4. I don't support it

I won't beleaguer the reasons why I am against it. I have no desire to be labeled a 'sexist', a 'misogynist' or a part of the 'patriarchy'. It is obviously a done deal though the consequences have yet to be determined.

What would make me support this?

1) All women aged 18 to 25 must now sign up for Selective Service.

2) All PFT requirements and entry requirements for combat arms must be gender neutral and NOT gender fair as they currently are in the military as a whole. Gender fair will diminish the combat effectiveness of those units.

Will either of these occur? Not likely. So this is not 'fair', and it is not 'equal'. It is gender politics and really just about advancement for a small percentage of females in the officer corp. It is just the same old same old.

[Major Nikon]

5. I would prefer Selective Service registration to just go away

The military has proven that even during times of war, they can establish recruitment and retention levels adequate to complete their mission. There is absolutely no reason for it any more.

[TM99]

6. I agree, however, until it is done away with

then all men and women if they are going to be equal in all respects of military service must therefore be registered for it.

If a young man must do so with the knowledge that he could be called up, have a gun put in his hand, and be forced to kill for his country in order to get student loans and other government aid and services, then a young woman who now wants that same equality can do so as well.

Fair is fair. Equal is equal. Unless it is not.