Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 1,256 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 427,839
Pageviews Today: 620,293Threads Today: 156Posts Today: 2,397
04:59 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions

 
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32771247
United States
01/23/2013 08:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
A draft is almost always a bad thing. It's only needed when there's a ton of ground forces needed.

The reality is the combat readiness of the average man or woman in the USA is abysmally low. Many Americans are obese. Most have no upper body strength, even young people.
[link to www.chicagomag.com]
[link to sportsmedicine.about.com]
[link to www.nytimes.com]

The new recuits are a product of video games and not hiking, canoeing, rock climbing, regular and disciplined physical education.
 Quoting: Don'tBeAfraid


well, initial induction and basic training are all a weeding-out process, and between the men and women, all tolled,
we should be able to muster enough combat troops to get the job done.
 Quoting: Judysnowflake


What job? A nation that uses its military has already lost.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 12056996
United States
01/23/2013 08:09 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
put them on the matt furey combat conditioning plan and an eat or starve all healthy diet . 90 days them blobbery fucks would be in combat readey shape.
I am closer to 50 than 30 and I can knock out 500 500 squats push ups from the training program , took two years to get there, but damn am i am good shape. even 100/100 right off the bat with proper form is a good workout ranger friends tell me.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32859410
Germany
01/23/2013 08:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
It seems, as if maybe even more naive, easily deployable and disposable living "cannon fodder" (alias precious human beings) is/are needed and/or wanted (in the (near) future) in order to serve the ruthless "elite" and their countless sinister goals and all of this is (and makes me) infinitely sad.
.vasaline

User ID: 30545486
Canada
01/23/2013 08:10 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
i thought women were always able to have a combat trade
and be in war
.vasaline....don't forget to rub som eon
.vasaline

User ID: 30545486
Canada
01/23/2013 08:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
i thought women were always able to have a combat trade
and be in war
 Quoting: .vasaline


thought it was like that for a good 12+ years
.vasaline....don't forget to rub som eon
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32771247
United States
01/23/2013 08:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
That is just awful. Women are not made for combat, not mentally or physically.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32299721


War is WRONG - always. It indicates that the "leader" was too incompetent or too egotistical to avoid the war.
Judysnowflake

User ID: 7749211
United States
01/23/2013 08:18 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
I'll never go out with, have a relationship with, or marry any girl or woman that has ever been in the military or law enforcement. Whatever they say, something has been broken that cannot be repaired.

This is disgusting and shows BO's true colors. The "man" is a cretin - a lowlife that would throw women into a caldron of rape and sacrilege. This is an announcement of further wars to come.

A decent president or leader keeps us out of wars.

I expect a military draft. The younger generation has no idea how this will change everything. Now we have to keep our women safe from OUR government as well as those of other countries.

The bastard is beyond forgiveness.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247


Girls with guns:

katballoo

User ID: 32828024
Canada
01/23/2013 08:28 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Congratulations ladies, you got your equal rights. Now you too can become meat for the beast. A wise person once said be careful what you ask for, you might get it.

Enjoy!
 Quoting: JesseDart


I am sure there are alot of women who didn't ask for this. That being said, I don't think it is a good idea, at all. I know there are some pretty tough women out there that could probably handle it, but it just doesn't seem a place for a woman to want to be. Maybe that is just ME, talking for ME...I don't know. The world is changing at a rapid rate...I am happy staying where I am, I guess.
The Right Policy

User ID: 31219881
United States
01/23/2013 08:40 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Any woman that voted for 0bama should absolutely be drafted. Why not???
The Right Policy is Always Conservative

"The danger to America is not Barack Obama, but a citizenry capable of entrusting a man like him with the Presidency. It will be far easier to limit and undo the follies of an Obama presidency than to restore the necessary common sense and good judgment to a depraved electorate willing to have such a man for their president. The problem is much deeper and far more serious than Mr. Obama, who is a mere symptom of what ails America . Blaming the prince of fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince. The Republic can survive a Barack Obama, who is, after all, merely a fool. It is less likely to survive a multitude of fools, such as those who made him their President." - Vaclav Klaus
Don'tBeAfraid

User ID: 32113282
United States
01/23/2013 08:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
A draft is almost always a bad thing. It's only needed when there's a ton of ground forces needed.

The reality is the combat readiness of the average man or woman in the USA is abysmally low. Many Americans are obese. Most have no upper body strength, even young people.
[link to www.chicagomag.com]
[link to sportsmedicine.about.com]
[link to www.nytimes.com]

The new recuits are a product of video games and not hiking, canoeing, rock climbing, regular and disciplined physical education.
 Quoting: Don'tBeAfraid


well, initial induction and basic training are all a weeding-out process, and between the men and women, all tolled,
we should be able to muster enough combat troops to get the job done.
 Quoting: Judysnowflake


What job? A nation that uses its military has already lost.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32771247


Perhaps. There's some wisdom in that. War is expensive. That's something a ton of the executive and legislative branch have forgotten.

The military doesn't create wealth, it costs wealth by protecting wealth through security. If we put too many dollars in security and not enough in creating goods and services (as we are doing in the USA) then it's not capitalism, is it?

Using a sledgehammer to put in a nail is stupid. Using cluster bombs is stupid. You excise the tumor, not kill the entire body. Police actions are stupid. They foster more and more insurgency. It would be better to do a scorched earth policy as abhorrant as that is versus a sustained police action that costs a nation in soldiers, ancilary personnel, high taxes, materials, etc.

It ruins the infrastructure of an occupied nation. The goal might be total war, but occupations in history seldom worked. Assimilation worked for a long time in Roman times, but that was so far back and probably isn't effective anymore. To do that would be to absorb nations not create puppet regimes.

In those days they pillaged and took back all the wealth. That's one of the only ways in history that militaries paid for their actions. That disabled the occupied nation and eventual absorbed assimilated nation was so weakened as to not be able to muster soldiers.

Otherwise, in modern history in WW2, the USA sold armaments and ultimately made security worse by that process. It did however create wealth, but now is dooming us.
...
Bringing in women in this way, you have to ask, "Why now?" We're cutting Defense spending? We're lowering troop strengths. We're retaining less officers. Why now add women into a mix in such a decline?

One possibility is an anticipated World War scenario in which a lot of ground forces would be needed. That should make a lot of people shudder.

Last Edited by Don'tBeAfraid on 01/23/2013 08:46 PM
MuslimAmerican

User ID: 26542172
United States
01/23/2013 08:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Great!

Now every woman in the service can be raped to death protecting the Muslim Brotherhood in Obama's World Caliphate Expansion project!

banana
 Quoting: Professor Xavier


This is exactly the reason they enacted the policy to begin with. The lines were already blurred about where women could and couldn't serve due to the Iraq and Afghan war. The only thing that was clear was they couldn't be grunts. And as far as I know, most women were happy to oblige the military and take other combat support roles that got them plenty close to the front line.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25019064


I'm guessing neither of you have any military experience that certainly sounds like the problem, but it actually had more to do with the fact women on the front line wouldn't be taken as serious or as a threat by enemy troops.

Rape did play some role in it but not from the Muslims, rather their own men since people get so lonely and so crazy being away from home and loved ones and being in steady combat not knowing if you're going to make it through the day alive. Even for women not in front line active combat, sexual assaults and rapes take place all the time with the attackers being their peers or ranking officers, most victims don't come forward because military policy means both get punished and because of fear of retribution for speaking up. The Navy being the worst for these kinds of incidents. Take a look at some of the documentaries on women and the armed forces it's made real clear.
Feed the hungry, visit the sick, free a captive if he be unjustly confined(kidnapped/enslaved by someone). Assist any person oppressed, whether they're of the Muslim or non-Muslim. - Prophet Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32830451
United States
01/23/2013 08:43 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
How dare all of you underestimate the power of women.

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32903826
United States
01/23/2013 08:44 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
girls in combat:


 Quoting: Judysnowflake


^ This
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32863005
Mongolia
01/23/2013 08:45 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
I think the Israelis tried women in frontline combat units and it didn't work. Same with the Russians IIRC.
 Quoting: s. d. butler


There are certainn complications with women in combat positions. here are a few:

1. Generally, women are only about 60% as strong as men, so they suffer a serious disadvantage on the battlefield when having to perform physical tasks and fighting against men on the other side. If your battle buddy takes a dirt nap, you must be prepared to carry him (or her) out of harms way to a medic. If your battle buddy is a small girl, she might not be able to carry you out of harm's way to a medic. That is a problem.

2. Women and men like to form emotional attachments to one-another that are often a distraction on the battlefield. If your girlfriend beside you gets her head blown off in a firefight, you might become a little too distracted to continue the fight. Plus men will be fighting each other for the affections of a pretty girl in the unit. It can lead to unnecessary emotional tension and moral problems within the organization. Everyone will hate the boyfriend of the pretty girl on the squad if he too is on the squad, as he'll be the only one getting laid while everyone else will have to suffer with hearing all the action. This will cause resentment, jealosy and sometimes violence within the unit. Everyone will want a piece of the action.

3. Mixed sexes together on guard duty at night (gays too) will sometimes be paying more attention to each other than to their security, which will compromise their mission.

4. That will sometimes lead to pregnancies, which will weaken the fighting force unit cohesion when they have to take off for maturnity leave.

5. Life on the front lines is often very austere, without luxuries such as bathrooms and showers, so there will often be a severe lack of privacy for the women. She might have to take a dump out in the open in front of all the men, lol. And shower or sponge bathe outside with them too.

6. In urban and jungle environments, often combat is done in very close proximity with the enemy. In such situations, your sense of smell can be an asset. And odors can be a liability. If you can smell cigarette smoke, you know someone is near was was near not long ago. The same goes with perfume, deoderant, cooked food, and body odor/menstration, chewing tobacco, etc. Personal hygeine often seriously lacks on the battlefield, with a lack of water to wash with, and time and other resources to shower. Everyone is dirty, grungy and generally in a nasty condition, so that could be a problem.

These are just a few examples of the complications of adding women to the battlefield. I'm sure there are others.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32903826
United States
01/23/2013 08:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
I think the Israelis tried women in frontline combat units and it didn't work. Same with the Russians IIRC.
 Quoting: s. d. butler


There are certainn complications with women in combat positions. here are a few:

1. Generally, women are only about 60% as strong as men, so they suffer a serious disadvantage on the battlefield when having to perform physical tasks and fighting against men on the other side. If your battle buddy takes a dirt nap, you must be prepared to carry him (or her) out of harms way to a medic. If your battle buddy is a small girl, she might not be able to carry you out of harm's way to a medic. That is a problem.

2. Women and men like to form emotional attachments to one-another that are often a distraction on the battlefield. If your girlfriend beside you gets her head blown off in a firefight, you might become a little too distracted to continue the fight. Plus men will be fighting each other for the affections of a pretty girl in the unit. It can lead to unnecessary emotional tension and moral problems within the organization. Everyone will hate the boyfriend of the pretty girl on the squad if he too is on the squad, as he'll be the only one getting laid while everyone else will have to suffer with hearing all the action. This will cause resentment, jealosy and sometimes violence within the unit. Everyone will want a piece of the action.

3. Mixed sexes together on guard duty at night (gays too) will sometimes be paying more attention to each other than to their security, which will compromise their mission.

4. That will sometimes lead to pregnancies, which will weaken the fighting force unit cohesion when they have to take off for maturnity leave.

5. Life on the front lines is often very austere, without luxuries such as bathrooms and showers, so there will often be a severe lack of privacy for the women. She might have to take a dump out in the open in front of all the men, lol. And shower or sponge bathe outside with them too.

6. In urban and jungle environments, often combat is done in very close proximity with the enemy. In such situations, your sense of smell can be an asset. And odors can be a liability. If you can smell cigarette smoke, you know someone is near was was near not long ago. The same goes with perfume, deoderant, cooked food, and body odor/menstration, chewing tobacco, etc. Personal hygeine often seriously lacks on the battlefield, with a lack of water to wash with, and time and other resources to shower. Everyone is dirty, grungy and generally in a nasty condition, so that could be a problem.

These are just a few examples of the complications of adding women to the battlefield. I'm sure there are others.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32863005


the point is, that they can put women in combat whenever they want to or need to. but, they will have guns, and
they can shoot the enemy whenever they feel like it.
Don'tBeAfraid

User ID: 32113282
United States
01/23/2013 08:52 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
I think the Israelis tried women in frontline combat units and it didn't work. Same with the Russians IIRC.
 Quoting: s. d. butler


There are certainn complications with women in combat positions. here are a few:

1. Generally, women are only about 60% as strong as men, so they suffer a serious disadvantage on the battlefield when having to perform physical tasks and fighting against men on the other side. If your battle buddy takes a dirt nap, you must be prepared to carry him (or her) out of harms way to a medic. If your battle buddy is a small girl, she might not be able to carry you out of harm's way to a medic. That is a problem.

2. Women and men like to form emotional attachments to one-another that are often a distraction on the battlefield. If your girlfriend beside you gets her head blown off in a firefight, you might become a little too distracted to continue the fight. Plus men will be fighting each other for the affections of a pretty girl in the unit. It can lead to unnecessary emotional tension and moral problems within the organization. Everyone will hate the boyfriend of the pretty girl on the squad if he too is on the squad, as he'll be the only one getting laid while everyone else will have to suffer with hearing all the action. This will cause resentment, jealosy and sometimes violence within the unit. Everyone will want a piece of the action.

3. Mixed sexes together on guard duty at night (gays too) will sometimes be paying more attention to each other than to their security, which will compromise their mission.

4. That will sometimes lead to pregnancies, which will weaken the fighting force unit cohesion when they have to take off for maturnity leave.

5. Life on the front lines is often very austere, without luxuries such as bathrooms and showers, so there will often be a severe lack of privacy for the women. She might have to take a dump out in the open in front of all the men, lol. And shower or sponge bathe outside with them too.

6. In urban and jungle environments, often combat is done in very close proximity with the enemy. In such situations, your sense of smell can be an asset. And odors can be a liability. If you can smell cigarette smoke, you know someone is near was was near not long ago. The same goes with perfume, deoderant, cooked food, and body odor/menstration, chewing tobacco, etc. Personal hygeine often seriously lacks on the battlefield, with a lack of water to wash with, and time and other resources to shower. Everyone is dirty, grungy and generally in a nasty condition, so that could be a problem.

These are just a few examples of the complications of adding women to the battlefield. I'm sure there are others.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32863005


All completely true and on target.

In history, women were actually in prostitution as a way of controlling disease for soldiers. That's the ugly truth.



"There were 800,000 women who served in the Soviet Armed Forces during the war.[1] Nearly 200,000 were decorated and 89 eventually received the Soviet Union’s highest award, the Hero of the Soviet Union. "
One in Four were decorated for valor and that cannot be ignored.
[link to en.wikipedia.org]

Only in 1940+ were women used, and then only because of dire need based upon a lack of sufficient men to be drafted as soldiers. Probably the largest use is arguably in the ex-Soviet Union during WW2 where very brave ordinary women served with honor and distinction. And no I'm not a Red, I'm as Conservative and as much a Tea Party person as possible.

Bringing women in at a time when we don't require them is a social experiment. No thanks! The mental cost of having women in body bags is not worth it.

If they're planning a major offensive such that we need women in combat, we're screwed, because the military-industrial complex completely devalues human life. We are their slaves and they don't care how many it takes to consolidate wealth for the fat cats. It's not about empire for nations, it's about empire for 150 corporations.

Last Edited by Don'tBeAfraid on 01/23/2013 09:01 PM
christian
Suited up and Armored in Christ!

User ID: 6038128
United States
01/23/2013 08:58 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Both women who went through the Marine Combat Training (Failed)
Susie

For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also.....Matthew 6:21
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32863005
Mongolia
01/23/2013 09:06 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
I think the Israelis tried women in frontline combat units and it didn't work. Same with the Russians IIRC.
 Quoting: s. d. butler


There are certainn complications with women in combat positions. here are a few:

1. Generally, women are only about 60% as strong as men, so they suffer a serious disadvantage on the battlefield when having to perform physical tasks and fighting against men on the other side. If your battle buddy takes a dirt nap, you must be prepared to carry him (or her) out of harms way to a medic. If your battle buddy is a small girl, she might not be able to carry you out of harm's way to a medic. That is a problem.

2. Women and men like to form emotional attachments to one-another that are often a distraction on the battlefield. If your girlfriend beside you gets her head blown off in a firefight, you might become a little too distracted to continue the fight. Plus men will be fighting each other for the affections of a pretty girl in the unit. It can lead to unnecessary emotional tension and moral problems within the organization. Everyone will hate the boyfriend of the pretty girl on the squad if he too is on the squad, as he'll be the only one getting laid while everyone else will have to suffer with hearing all the action. This will cause resentment, jealosy and sometimes violence within the unit. Everyone will want a piece of the action.

3. Mixed sexes together on guard duty at night (gays too) will sometimes be paying more attention to each other than to their security, which will compromise their mission.

4. That will sometimes lead to pregnancies, which will weaken the fighting force unit cohesion when they have to take off for maturnity leave.

5. Life on the front lines is often very austere, without luxuries such as bathrooms and showers, so there will often be a severe lack of privacy for the women. She might have to take a dump out in the open in front of all the men, lol. And shower or sponge bathe outside with them too.

6. In urban and jungle environments, often combat is done in very close proximity with the enemy. In such situations, your sense of smell can be an asset. And odors can be a liability. If you can smell cigarette smoke, you know someone is near was was near not long ago. The same goes with perfume, deoderant, cooked food, and body odor/menstration, chewing tobacco, etc. Personal hygeine often seriously lacks on the battlefield, with a lack of water to wash with, and time and other resources to shower. Everyone is dirty, grungy and generally in a nasty condition, so that could be a problem.

These are just a few examples of the complications of adding women to the battlefield. I'm sure there are others.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32863005


the point is, that they can put women in combat whenever they want to or need to. but, they will have guns, and
they can shoot the enemy whenever they feel like it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32903826

Yes, they can shoot well, but there's more to war than shooting. There's getting in, and out, and lot's of tough physical assertion, and hauling wounded troops, not to mention having the mental compartmetnalization to be willing to kill people. Anyone who is too compassionate has no place in a combat role. Many women are very compassionate.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32903886
United Kingdom
01/23/2013 09:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Dunno..? might work.. women can be pretty fierce in battle, with their sonic oral attacks, efficient use of kitchen & household objects as weapons with their multitasking skills & of course the 'ace' up their sleeve.., being sarcastic when dressed to kill. The only giveaway is that women would never be able to execute a 'surprise' attack, due their insistence in wearing noisy sounding high heels to sneak up on the enemy. Quiet women wearing trainers armed with office supplies would be 'lethal.'
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 10606300
United States
01/23/2013 09:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions

[link to www.breakingnews.com]
 Quoting: Dixie Normous


Good.. It's about time that these cunts accept the negative aspects of "equality" along with all of the benefits.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32757949
United States
01/23/2013 09:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
So what are TPTB planning? Why do they need so many more warm bodies at this time?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32863005
Mongolia
01/23/2013 09:13 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Both women who went through the Marine Combat Training (Failed)
 Quoting: christian

Even in non-combat roles, military women in military schools are judged with lower standards than men. But they don't have that luxury on the battlefield. Only death awaits them there.

If they want women as equals on the battlefield, they need to judge everyone by the same standards: the same push-up scores, the same sit-up scores, the same chin-up/pull-up scores, the same run time scores, etc.

But that will never happen. It's all just an illusion of equality.
Don'tBeAfraid

User ID: 32113282
United States
01/23/2013 09:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Dunno..? might work.. women can be pretty fierce in battle, with their sonic oral attacks, efficient use of kitchen & household objects as weapons with their multitasking skills & of course the 'ace' up their sleeve.., being sarcastic when dressed to kill. The only giveaway is that women would never be able to execute a 'surprise' attack, due their insistence in wearing noisy sounding high heels to sneak up on the enemy. Quiet women wearing trainers armed with office supplies would be 'lethal.'
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 32903886


Now that is genuine wit, something rare and to be encouraged on GLP. Would give you green karma for it. Why not make an account?
Sneetch

User ID: 32906284
United States
01/23/2013 09:18 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
What a nightmare...
We were meant to live for so much more, have we lost ourselves?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32903826
United States
01/23/2013 09:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Both women who went through the Marine Combat Training (Failed)
 Quoting: christian


Girls with guns:

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 28870983
United States
01/23/2013 09:21 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
remember when all the Marines had to disarm when Panetta went over to the Middle East to speak to them? How pathetic can you be.

And we are no longer a sovereign nation. Our military fights for the UN, make no mistake about it. And they will soon be called on to disarm the United States. How anyone can follow those orders is beyond me.....
Don'tBeAfraid

User ID: 32113282
United States
01/23/2013 09:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
remember when all the Marines had to disarm when Panetta went over to the Middle East to speak to them? How pathetic can you be.

And we are no longer a sovereign nation. Our military fights for the UN, make no mistake about it. And they will soon be called on to disarm the United States. How anyone can follow those orders is beyond me.....
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 28870983

Agreed in a constitutional republic the People are the Sovereign. Now the executive branch is pretending we're a democracy in which He is the sovereign meanwhile the puppet-master corportations are the despots who pull his strings.

Last Edited by Don'tBeAfraid on 01/23/2013 09:25 PM
duncog2012

User ID: 24294934
United States
01/23/2013 09:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Both women and men should be banned from combat and that would solve the problems.
duncog2012
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 32906722
Thailand
01/23/2013 09:31 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
byekitty
How else can what I told you about how food prices are going to go up until people are working a day for a loaf of bread (3rd seal done) and then the "great war" will come (4th seal) UNLESS the obamination does his job ??????

This is his job. He has to tear our nation apart to prepare it for the communists to come in and kill everyone. First it was the fudge packers, now the women. What better way to weaken the nation's defense ????

Seriously it is only going to get worse. In the end all of you will know I told you the truth about the future that I got from God. Repent now while it is still given to you. No point fighting for a lost cause.
Don'tBeAfraid

User ID: 32113282
United States
01/23/2013 09:32 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: US Defense Secretary Leon Panetta removes military ban on women in combat, opening thousands of front line positions
Patriots, not sexualized human beings. Honor and Valor. Rise up and stop talking and pleading for your rights.


Last Edited by Don'tBeAfraid on 01/23/2013 09:42 PM

News








We're dropping truth bombs like it's the end of days!