Could the Next Navy SEAL Team Be Made of Women?
- Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:18pm by
Tiffany Gabbay
- Print »
- Email »
Who’s to say what might soon be in store for the elite armed forces unit that took out Osama bin Laden? If top special forces commander Admiral Eric T. Olson is correct, the Navy SEALs could soon have female enlistees.
Admiral Olson, a Navy SEAL himself, told ABC News that he would like to see women in SEAL combat roles by the opening session of the 2011 Aspen Security Forum:
“As soon as policy permits it, we’ll be ready to go down that road,” said Olson.
He added that being a SEAL is not just about physical strength. “I don’t think the idea is to select G.I. Jane and put her through SEAL training, but there are a number of things that a man and a woman can do together that two guys can’t,” said Olson. “I don‘t think it’s as important that they can do a lot of push-ups. I think it‘s much more important what they’re made of and whether or not they have the courage and the intellectual agility to do that.”
While women do serve in the special forces in information and civil affairs capacities, there are reportedly no female SEALs, Green Berets, Rangers or Marine special operators due to an exclusion policy enacted in 1994 prohibiting women from serving in ground combat units.
Admiral Olson, however, reportedly believes females are in a unique position to form bonds with local women in, as ABC put it “conservative societies,” which, given the most recent SEAL operation, might mean Islamic ones.
And according to ABC, “Cultural Support Teams” comprising two to four women each have already been attached to SEAL teams and Green Beret units. The Admiral said 56 additional women graduated last week, “all of whom will be in Afghanistan by the end of August.”
“We don’t have nearly enough,“ Olson told ABC ”and we’re too late bringing them into what it is we have them doing.”
ABC went on to explain that last March the Military Leadership Diversity Commission recommended that the Department of Defense eliminate female combat exclusion policies. The MLDC alleged the policy curbs military women’s chances for recognition and promotion.
Now some argue that placing women in combat roles can jeopardize the mission at hand, as men serving alongside women might feel overly-protective and hence, make choices they normally wouldn’t — choices that could compromise their operation and the safety of those in the unit. Then there are questions as to whether women possess the same level of physical stamina and brute strength men do. Given these possibilities, do you think it wise for women to serve in combat roles, and specifically, in the SEALs?
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 677 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 529 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 417 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 329 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 270 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 279 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 153 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 147 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 300 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 270 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (258)
LorrainefromMaine
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:56pmI’m a woman in good physical condition who does a lot of manual labor, and I say NO. There are times when I have to kill myself to really keep up with big rugged guys who know what they’re doing (not that we’re overrun with those, but my husband is one). More important, there are some things that I am simply physically incapable of doing — or doing well, which is why my husband is the boat builder and I am the boat painter. This PC crap has gone way too far.
Report Post »biohazard23
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:08pmAmen to that, sister! As a woman, I do not believe that there is a place in the special forces for the ladies if it’s not in a support capacity. Men are built for the rough and tumble stuff that combat and spec ops entails. This would be wrong on so many levels. Frankly, I’m tired of the people trying to emasculate our military. They’re out to destroy the greatest fighting force on earth for the sake of political correctness.
Report Post »Baberaham Lincoln
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:20pmI‘m going to assume you didn’t read the article. The issue here is that women present special *advantages* that men do not. Primarily their ability to gain sympathy from civilian and enemy women. And in fact, as the article points out, women have already been attached to SEAL teams to serve as “cultural support.” If the SEALs are going to be carrying out operations that require these services, why not include women? It’s a huge advantage. Plus the training these women receive is completely off the charts compared to what you or I could do. If they fit the role, why *shouldn’t* they participate? That’s the better question.
Report Post »Ruler4You
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:32pmThere are times when I have to kill myself to really keep up with big rugged guys who know what they’re doing (not that we’re overrun with those, but my husband is one). More important, there are some things that I am simply physically incapable of doing..
That‘s why they’d make the ‘team’ up of all women. That way no men would have haul their as_es around all of the time. I’m afraid that this would be a giant mistake. This is really designed for only one thing: to disembowel the U.S. military.
Designed by the same mind set people as the ones now economically trying to destroy the nation through handouts and other forms of transfer payment equivalents. Being “smart” isn‘t just for the ’elites’ no matter what they tell you. Americans have to begin to think for themselves. This “IS” our country, not theirs, again, no matter what they tell you. We (the People) wear the Ruby Slippers. It’s time we learned how to use them properly!
Think smart, act smart. Aren’t you getting tired of being played for a fool? by manipulative SOB’s?
Report Post »Patrick in AZ
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:49pmThe biggest problem with this idea is that the standards will eventually be lowered so as to allow more women to succeed – and then lives will be in jeopardy
Report Post »5775lindy
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:58pmOK Ladies–I don’t know any of you, but I am sure none of you are the type of woman capable (physically or mentally) of being the ‘BEST OF THE BEST’ !! There is no reason a woman can’t do just about everything a male counterpart can- except sheer strength!! If a woman can pass the training, I, for one,would APPLAUD her . And if she chooses to serve our country,as so many other elite soldiers have, I would be as proud to shake her hand and thank her for that service. The kind of woman who would be capable of this are few and far between–and this country can use all the help we can get. The only possible problem would be if men were not being able to keep their minds on business and do their jobs with her there. This is not her weakness, but THEIRS. Just sayin’
Report Post »hifi74
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 7:33pm5775lindy,
Strangely your post made me think about the women of the Israeli Special Forces. They are some tough broads, they make my ex-wife look tame. Seriously though I agree with you, I think they have a different aspect that they can add to the battlefield and while they might not physically be as stout, there are spots and roles that they can fill that their male counter-parts either typically don‘t or can’t.
Report Post »Stuck_in_CA
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 8:20pmoh, pah-leez. Where will it ever end. Between this and recruiting homosexuals, our country’s safety is slipping fast.
Report Post »JohnnyRaiden
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 8:22pmLindy~ The real problems are deeper than that. First, It’s EXTREMELY unlikely that any woman would be able to pass without going through extensive and rigorous training and dieting to be able to pass Seals training. So they either lower standards(risking lives) or don’t. It’s just cheaper to train the men. It’s also not just brute force, men are better at taking damage in every aspect over women minus head trauma.
IDF doesn’t allow women into special forces units as regulars either, they serve in support roles only since it’s again, cheaper and more efficient to allow men in only.
Report Post »JohnnyRaiden
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 8:34pmHonestly this comes down to promotion. Most high ranking officers are pilots or Infantry/special forces. With women barred from 2/3′s of the jobs that would produce the easiest path to promotion, of course someone is gonna b*tch. And after they try and whole classes fail out, they will lower standards or just give women a lesser course, give them support roles and call them “Seals”, you know, like female Marines.
Report Post »That Guy
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 9:30pm@ baberaham: I‘m going to assume you didn’t read the article… According to ABC, “Cultural Support Teams” comprising two to four women each have already been attached to SEAL teams and Green Beret units. I for one agree if a woman is able to pass all the same tests and get though the same exact training, she should be able to serve next to any man, and we should be proud to have her… I was all for it until i read this “I don‘t think it’s as important that they can do a lot of push-ups. I think it‘s much more important what they’re made of and whether or not they have the courage and the intellectual agility to do that.” You see if they lower the standards so that women can become seals, does that make current seals more or less safe??? I’m going with less…
Report Post »Seasoldier
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 9:45pmAs I understand it from reading current military professional journals, no policy decisions have been made regarding integrating women in the manner suggested by the headline on this article. Women have been integrated and given special roles in Marine Corps and Army patrols in Afghanistan and Iraq, but, so far not in a combat role. Their role, so far, has been to work with local women, explain American intentions in the area, gather information, arrange for assistance to women who need it, etc. Women Marine recruits, although trained separately from the men, already receive weapons, self-defense, and other combat related training. In the Fleet Marine Forces, they perform many combat-related jobs previously reserved for men, and, since America has gotten serious about the global war on terror, the women have been even more closely integrated into activities in the battle areas. Ordinarily, I would oppose indiscriminately integrating women in front line combat units; however, employing women for specialized tasks well within their capabilities could be tactically effective. I believe the CIA already employs women as field agents and the Department of Defense might be able to do the same.
Report Post »Noizee1
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 11:51pmI have long held the belief that women should be allowed to serve in combat if they so chose IF and only IF they can compete on the same physical level as a man. There should NEVER be any offer or allowance for a lesser performance as there should be no doubt in her squad mates’ minds about her ability to keep up. This is something that I feel should be applied all the way across the board for that very reason. I never figured that it would be much of an issue to serve side by side with the men, but after reading some of the other posts, I think it may be more appropriate to have them serve in an all female unit so as to help alleviate the possibility of a male doing something stupid just to possibly help her out in a bad situation. I have a young daughter myself and while I know that she’ll never end up in the military (she’s autistic), if she did and wanted to be in combat, I would support her fully. The way I see it, Death doesn’t discriminate against anyone. Whether you‘re 6’06″ and 280lbs, or 5′06″ and 120lbs soaking wet with rocks in you’re shoes, 10/10 people die. Why should anyone not be able to willingly and knowingly choose an occupation that could cause their death any sooner just because of their sex? Let’s face it, it doesn’t require a third leg to kill or be killed and if a woman can do the same job with the same requirements, then how is that PC? Personally, I hate political correctness and feel that it is one of the many tools used by the communist
Report Post »jzs
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 12:20amI’m not an expert on military practices. Surely females do not on average have the strength or speed of men who are testing to be seals (that simple genetics). But in terms of intelligence, endurance, resourcefulness, skill with any weapon, and determination to kick a–, I think that some women could go toe to toe with any guy.
Fire departments used to have the same restrictions, but women firefighters, and captains are now common.
This issue to me is why exclude half the population the pool of people you are choosing from? Especially, as someone pointed out, they have advantages that men don’t. Maybe some standards, such as physical strength should be relaxed for women, but it’s not good for our country to exclude half the population from serving our country in this way. Women can kick it too.
Report Post »JohnnyRaiden
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 1:12amJZS~ You need to take endurance off that list. Seal training is endurance hell and that’s usually what gets most of the new recruits. Men are stronger, faster, and can keep going longer than women, just genetics. No standards should be relaxed if they are going to be doing the same job, ever. I actually helped a buddy get in shape for the PT test for a fire department, they hold women to lower standards than men so more pass, so that’s kinda a bad example.
Report Post »earl perea
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 2:25ami don’t care what gender you are,i had a blackhawk pilot that was a female and that WOMAN saved my life 3 times
Report Post »Rational Man
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 3:52amBe a good job for my ex-wife. I liked to never got out of that deal alive!!
Report Post »Besides, I think she would enjoy sneaking around at night killing men…………
(hope she doesn’t find out I posted this)
Puppy
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 4:21amYou know, being a veteran from Iraq and having seen women serve, in combat rolls, along side males, I have to give credit where credit is due. Women can fight as hard as any man when the rubber meats the road but, having said that, there are some things a woman cannot do. I do not think the fairer sex can carry their 200 lb. buddy across a battle field in full combat gear all the while under fire . It’s just not physically possible. Only for that reason do I say no.
Report Post »warrior21
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 4:51amAnother idiot PC General (Admiral) sucking up to his superiors. He actually wasn’t saying that women would become Seals. What he said was
“Being a SEAL is not just about physical strength. “I don’t think the idea is to select G.I. Jane and put her through SEAL training, but there are a number of things that a man and a woman can do together that two guys can’t,” said Olson. “I don‘t think it’s as important that they can do a lot of push-ups. I think it‘s much more important what they’re made of and whether or not they have the courage and the intellectual agility to do that.”
What I don’t understand is how they can be called Seals/SF if they did not attend the qualification training. To put them through another type of training and then allowed them to be called Seals/SF would be downgrading those who actually qualified. I would like to see the After-Action reports from some of the operations that have included women who accompanied Seals/SF operations to form bonds with local women.
Report Post »tdufy
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 8:15amSounds like Brad Thor’s Athena Project.
Report Post »Islesfordian
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 8:39amSeal Team 5 1/2?
Report Post »richard the lion-hearted
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 8:50amHate to sound ‘old fashioned’ but whether or not a woman could pass the exact same physical requirements as a male to join is not the point, I’m confident that the percentage would be very, very, low anyway. The fact is that men go to war so women don’t have to, to protect them, to HONOR them in their status as being MOST precious to protect along with children, it’s not a slam. This whole Hollywood, women are as tough as men, fantasy that has come from action movies is just what it is, A FANTASY!! Moral suffers when a man has a woman directly in his platoon because he will always look to protecting her first, putting her above others in the heat of battle, not to mention if troops are captured and what that would do to policy concerning a female soldier being held hostage. Women and men are NOT the same nor can women endure the harsh physical demands that a man can in many situations. Women are smaller, softer (physically and mentally), with less muscle mass…and thank God for that because they are the ‘ying’ to men‘s ’yang’ that offsets the harshness, and cruel logic that men predominately use. Men are peacemakers and women are peacekeepers because of their capacity to love and consider mercy before angered response that a man naturally is drawn to because of…everyone say it together now, TESTOSTERONE!
Report Post »robert
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 10:45amIf, as this PC admiral maintains, push ups and other SEAL physical requirements are unimport then why do they have them in the first place for anybody?
This is just another geek from the Penatagon brass who thinks butt-kissing the politically correct plantation owners in Washington is going to enhance his career some way. He’s the same one who came up with support for gays in the military, claiming it would not effect troop morale.
This is no surprise to me. I’ve been looking for this type of lackey to push to have a reduction in requirements that have to do with mental ability so he can squeeze blacks into the higher branches of Special Forces. The Green Berets have already had their requirements reduced substantially, since Togo West was Secy, of the Army.
Political correcness is now finally destroying the military and even special ops units. It’s vitally important to push to reduce funding for defense expenditures. They have so much money now they are able to pursue absurd political whims, just as this spineless fop admiraL wants to do.
The world is fast catching up. The US military has deteriorated to the point where it could well see its first major defeat on the battlefield in the near future, if the falling economy doesn’t render it useless before then.
Report Post »Napkin
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 11:28amNo, no, and no. Women have no place in combat, not as pilots, not serving on ships. Not only do standards have to be “adjusted” but oodles and oodles or our tax dollars must be spent to house two sexes instead of one. A battlefield, base, or ship is no place for that.
Report Post »Not to mention, on ships, you run into problems with pregnancy, and prostitution (yes, prostitution). I‘m sure it’s great spending thousands upon thousands of dollars to train a soldier/airman/sailor, only to have her leave the military once she get’s knocked up.
This vet says….no thank you.
Rice Water
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 8:00pmI’m in full support of this: The uniforms should consist of stiletto heels, camo lace stockings & garter belts, and tank tops. The elite Seal Team 6 members would be required to have long hair, full pouty lips, and amazing bodies.
Report Post »Wilkins
Posted on July 31, 2011 at 10:03amIs it true that a group of women who are living and working in close proximity experience a synchronization of their menstrual cycles?
If so would the possibility a Navy Seal team, composed entirely of women pms-ing together, strike terror in the hearts of the enemy?
Hey, I’m just asking the question.
Report Post »smithclar3nc3
Posted on August 1, 2011 at 8:47amCan the best palyers in the WNBA beat the the best players in the NBA. Can the best Female boxers beat the best male boxers….ect
Report Post »There’s a reason why the olympics are seperated between male evenst and females events,,,Because shorts of figure skating no Woman would qualify much less win an event. The seals teams are comprised of the best of the best and while I‘m sure that there are women who can out best an average guy we’re not talking average guys…..We’re talking the best of the best.
To do this in the name of gender equality does a diservice to the program.
nptden
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:54pmIsn‘t it great how the commies have used ’Diversity’ to weaken our entire system. I mean who can be against diversity? Even when it destroys cohesion in the military. Becomes a ‘quota’ system in the workplace for the unqualified. Got to give it to them, those Commies are clever and have a way with words.
Report Post »hifi74
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:59pmWhat I am going to say may upset some people, yourself not excluded, and I say this as a male, prior service Army soldier, and father of a rather tough young girl. There are aspects of women’s physiology that allow them to keep up just as well as the men, they usually rely more on agility vs brute strength to name an example. They have the ability of using their sex appeal (lets face it women have it easier then men when it comes to that aspect) in certain situations where a man would be much less likely to succeed. Not to mention the other advantages named in the article. With proper training and support women can be just as affective as men on the battlefield despite the physical difference. I say why not, if they are dedicated and want to do it, I think they can have a lot to offer in that theater.
Report Post »JohnnyRaiden
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 8:27pmHif~ I also say this as prior military. No they can’t Women can not physically be as capable of men on the battlefield, ever, without outside help. I knew a female soldier who not once carried her own toolbox that weighed no more than 60 pounds because she couldn’t lift it. She had to have a male soldier carry it for her or team up with another female to do it. Every male was required to carry his own tools. The extra work to get women trained to do the same job is wasted money and the upkeep is easier for men to keep in that required shape than women. Specially since steroids will be needed to get the pass rate of women above a fraction of %1
Report Post »TH30PH1LUS
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 9:21pmThis will breed trouble (pun intended) among elite units. It’s a close-knit group… The disadvantages and potential risks outweigh the benefits in my opinion.
Report Post »hifi74
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 11:25pmJohnnyRaiden,
Then you didn’t read what I said, go back and re-read and tell me where I said that the women were physically equals? You wont find that, what you will find is me saying that they have other means of making up for there lack in physique like agility. Now, re-read and try again.
Report Post »JohnnyRaiden
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 1:26amHif~ I never said you did, you however did bring up making up for lack of strength with agility, which isn’t really true when carrying a 50 pound rucksack on a 12 mile march. I’m saying your wrong and women can not be as effective as men overall without steroids or outside help. Men can be just as and more agile than women ,but also carry that 200 pound load. Versatility. . Turns out you should have re-read my post and come to a better conclusion than what you did.
Report Post »richard the lion-hearted
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 9:07am@hifi74 – You are totally wrong, and diminish the honor due women by even entertaining the notion. There is only ONE instance that a woman should be in direct combat, when all the men have been killed and they are all that’s left to protect the children and homeland. Agility is nothing without the strength to endure, the agility of a fly means nothing when caught in the strength of the spider’s web.
Report Post »Mil-Dot
Posted on July 31, 2011 at 8:38pm@hifi74 is a pinhead father of a chick that does not know his A$4 from a hole in the ground. Yeah right, chicks as navy seals. Please, I think I am going to puke from laughing so hard. Don’t get me wrong. Girls are smart and they bust their asses, but the equal of an “operator” they are not. PC out of control. Get out of my face, and I mean right fricking now!
Report Post »jakartaman
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:49pmI think it’s a heck of a lot better than gay seals!
Report Post »Yes women are better suited for certain aspects that would be beneficial in some instances
I don’t know about black operations – see minimal advantages.
mossbrain
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:18pmFor seducing the enemy and getting secrets, YES. Most of those Muslims are perverts, probably easily seduced by a women who doesn’t have hair on her back, like the women they are used to.
Report Post »The_Hut_In_Co
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 10:15pm@mossbrain Man! SFA! LMAO!
Report Post »dejavu43
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:49pmI am SOOOO tired of these PC-crazed generals doing their level best to destroy the best fighting forces in the world. I am a woman, just as educated about and demanding of my rights as any other woman. If there is ONE place in this world a woman does NOT belong, it’s a SEAL unit. There isn’t a woman on the face of this earth worth losing a SEAL team because SHE has different plumbing and the enemy knows it. Create an all female team–I‘m sure this idiot PC General can find something for them to do that won’t result in an active team getting blown away.
Report Post »Uncurable wound
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:49pmBad Idea…
Report Post »conservativeamerican
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:47pmThis commander is an idiot.
If they are not on the same level of physical ability as the men in the unit they are going to get a lot of good men killed. They don’t belong in these type of forces.
They are pussifying the amrmed forces. Next it will be girly-men.
Report Post »Shamrock241
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:47pmFor any mothers out there that read this and think YOU GO GIRL, ask yourself this if your son runs into two males on the enemy side and there 200lbs of twisted steel, would you really want your sons backup to be Demi Moore AKA GI Jane or would you choose Hulk Hogan to watch your son’s back. Ladies ask yourself why the women in basketball not play against the men at the professional level? this is not meant to belittle women we all have our place in this world and thank god for women, i am just saying the battle field is no place for you.
Report Post »HUNITHUNIT
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:46pmIt is amazing how you can discount an entire group of people, yet you do not know a single one of them. You have no idea about their capability in any situation, much less in combat. The gross amount of pure ignorance spewed on this site is astounding.
Report Post »Rayblue
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 7:10pmWut’s yur point ?
Report Post »dejavu43
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 7:16pmHun: It doesn’t matter whether we know any GIJanes or not. Their competancy is not in question. The bottom line is the enemy–an enemy that would be delighted to inflict 10 times more perverted torture on a woman prisoner than on a male and post pictures of it around the world. I‘m sorry you can’t accept that men are physically different from women, if only in the combat zone. Risking an entire team of SEALS is not worth making you, the PC General or an entire battalion of GIJanes happy.
Report Post »selloursouls
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 10:33pm@ Hunithunit, Then why are there different standards for women and men in the military if their capabilities are unknown? When women have to do the exact and I mean the exact same training and requirements then we can maybe talk about women in an SF team.
Report Post »Dudley Do-Right
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:44pmPC run amok! There’s a reason men are more aggressive than women…testosterone! But hey, who knows, maybe the SEALS could start estrogen therapy to make them more sensitive!
Report Post »Iamnotanumber
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:43pmI saw the movie too, but just because you can do something doesn’t make it a good idea!!!
Report Post »MidWestMom
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:27pmI think this is one of those situations where “female equality” is taken too far. I’m sure there are women would be able to pass the current requirements but just because they qualify doesn’t mean they are the best soldiers for the job.
One of my military sons is in a Special Forces unit and to date has served two tours in Iraq. We’ve talked about this subject before. While he fully supports that women should not be discriminated against, he also knows the situations this type of unit can & likely will encounter. He feels, as do the rest of his unit, that women would be a distraction. Why? Because every one of these guys are really good men. They respect women, they will defend any women and they would take unnecessary risks to keep a woman out of the hands of the enemy. Especially the enemy forces in the Middle East. The horror stories we hear about how they treat women in general and women soldiers specifically are true. And the public only hears about the tip of the iceberg.
Report Post »Puppy
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 4:26amHay, it was a movie and all she did was in the script! (IT WAS JUST A MOVIE!)
Report Post »OneofMany
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:40pmTotally Pathetic, Politically Correct B.S.!! What a dishonor to all the men who have been cut from a program that they would give their life for, because they couldn’t handle the physical aspect…so now it’s not so important??! yeah and when things go sideways and they need to bust a hump out of there, some male SEAL is going to get his balls blown off because he had to carry HER gear because she couldn’t carry it and run as far or as fast… This is a disgrace.
Look, if they can pass the exact same standards that men do, well, then I have no problem…but don‘t give me this BS that strength and speed aren’t important. The only people that say that are commanders like him who are being blackmailed by their POLITICAL bosses (probably never served a combat mission in their life) and politicians who could give a rip about any of the US combatants… They use us like pawns and if they make a mistake, oh well… next move, the game continues…but someone DIED! They ought to make ALL politicians serve in combat or only allow those who have served in combat to vote on war matters.
This makes me sick. Same as gays in the military… not because of the homophobic factor… but because of the total disregard for God…homosexuality is sin…it is very clear in the bible. When you bring them into your unit, your unit is compromised spiritually. If I were still in, I would request to be moved from any unit with gays in it.
Report Post »affinnity
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:39pmI don’t think this is a good idea. If the woman can’t fight she becomes a liability to the team. How many guys are seriously going to leave a woman in mortal danger? I can understand women in some intelligence and special support roles but not as actual special operations team members.
But what the hell the women and politicians aren’t going to care what I think anyway. Good luck.
Report Post »RichNGadsden
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:39pmThey will water down SEAL training to the point that it is useless. Or, if for political reasons this has to be done at least do with no coed courses. Eventually, body counts of the good guys will stop this insanity. Of course, we’ll never hear of the failures or fatalities that occur.
Report Post »Rachel Madcow
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:39pm1 n 50 million could make it through buds. The Navy would have to dramatically change buds training for women to make it through. They are just as smart, they may be as tough but they simply could not compete physically with the male seals. I know I have seen this first hand. Before I hear screams of sexism please explain how men in the olympics out perform there female counterparts in virtually every physical athletic event.
Report Post »Fly Old Glory 24/7 365
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:59pm@ Rachel Madcow: so would you pass the test? :)
Report Post »kenia110
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:38pmI think if they can pass the same rigorous training and testing as a man, then they should be allowed to serve. But nothing should be made “softer” for them.
Report Post »heavyduty
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:37pmJust makes you wonder what they can do better than two guys. Just saying.
Report Post »Mil-Dot
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:27pmPlease, they may be able to seduce guys with sex but that is it. When it comes to all out endurance and killing and stuff, the guys are the best. Please don’t make me laugh with this PC BS.
Report Post »kickthecan
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 6:46pmThey can talk to the tribal women, who are prohibited from talking to men, to gather intel.
Report Post »whatthecrazy
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:37pmlook i feel like its possible to have some women in certain fields , maby someone like the woman from wal-mart,now that would intimidate a muslim ,ya know confuse them with the moobies and while they try to figure whats up we take em out…….yyyeeeaaa
Report Post »jblovesAmerica
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:35pmpiss poor PC General.
Report Post »How about when captured, idiot.
Radical Muslim crazies-torture,brutalize and burn our boys now.
Women-i can just imagine what a circus that might b e.
affinnity
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:48pmThe Muslim’s would probably use them for breeding some useful Arab fighters.
Report Post »single stack
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:33pmIf women can qualify with absolutely no changes to the program as it currently exists I have no problem with it.
““I don‘t think it’s as important that they can do a lot of push-ups. I think it‘s much more important what they’re made of and whether or not they have the courage and the intellectual agility to do that.”
Which means the physical requirements will be reduced for women. A lot of good men are going to die.
Report Post »inexiletill2012
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:33pmHeadline :
Report Post »10-17-2012 Up News ; Seal Team 9 Captures Ayman Mohammed Rabie al-Zawahiri .
An elite team of 9 Female U.S. Navy Seals today captured the………..
rfycom
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:29pmnow that is a real turn on
Get drink folks and forget about all this crap
Report Post »Average_Joseph
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:36pmYes, but every 28 days this group could kick everyones a$$!!! PMS Seals – beware!!!
Report Post »affinnity
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:45pmAverage_Joseph. Good thinking. Can you imagine a complete Seal team made up of pissed off, moody, angry, women weapons pointed at directly at you?
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:28pmOh bother, what’s next…the gay SEALS?
Report Post »loriann12
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:36pmAs long as they don’t make any exceptions on the training, if a woman can pass it just like a man, more power to her. However, I doubt that will happen. I tried out for the police force back in 1994. Men my age were required to bench press 75% of their body weight (I was 29) and I was only required benchpress 50% of my body weight. I failed that, so I didn’t even do the run. I had practiced on an incline, and they had me do it flat. Different standards aren’t fair. If a woman seal got captured, they would do more to her than they would a man. And just like the police force, do you think that 200 pound man running from the police is going to care that it’s a woman chasing him? Do you think he’ll go easy on her?
Report Post »MarinesNolikeyObama
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:40pm—> Gonzo… What makes you think there aren’t homosexuals in the SEAL teams now?
Report Post »ZOMBIE JESUS LOVES ME
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:43pmStatistically, there are already gay SEALs. (I bet that turns you on, doesn’t it, Mr. Bunker?)
You tea bagging perv.
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on July 30, 2011 at 10:44amThe guys that wash out of the SEALS are better soldiers than the best women and there are no gay SEALS, the Navy looks very closely at these guys before they even get the chance to try. Believe what you want but, these warriors know that the SEALS is no place for women or gays. They just can’t say it.
Report Post »MONICNE
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:28pmOf course not.
Report Post »pscully17
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:28pmWhy? men are stronger, faster. Youre going to comprimise the units ability to perform for a political movement. Too whoever is pushing this… Youre an Idiot!!
Report Post »banjarmon
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:25pmIf they are MAN enough let them.
Report Post »Constructionist
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:24pm“I don’t think the idea is to select G.I. Jane and put her through SEAL training, but there are a number of things that a man and a woman can do together that two guys can’t.” I don’t understand, I thought we already changed that policy.
Report Post »jblovesAmerica
Posted on July 29, 2011 at 5:31pmhow about when they may be captured. Jackass PC General.
Report Post »We have enough PC civilians running down our military-plenty of work for smart diciplined men and women in the Military, make sure round peg in round hole. People die.