June 18th, 2013
07:18 PM ET

DoD plans for women in combat

A dramatic moment at the Pentagon Tuesday, and another milestone for military women.

Declaring "the days of Rambo are over," officials announced that in a few years, women will be allowed in combat units.

Eventually, that may including the country's most elite special forces.

CNN Pentagon Correspondent Chris Lawrence explains how long the transition will take.

soundoff (22 Responses)
  1. why

    why do we need to do this? what is it we – as a country are trying to prove? Do we not have enough able bodied men?

    This is unnecessary and uncalled for – it's a national disgrace.

    Truly ashamed – US citizen

    June 23, 2013 at 8:46 pm | Reply
  2. Portland tony

    See the green patchwork Icon.....he's a poser AKA troll! 🙁

    June 20, 2013 at 12:49 pm | Reply
  3. Portland tony

    @ Trevor: I hope you take notice of the small Icons next to the commenters "handle". I been called a schmuck before.....but only for what I've done....Not for some poser's idiotic rambling. 🙂

    June 20, 2013 at 12:45 pm | Reply
  4. ?

    i went to iraq for some b s the army called route clearance/eod...ha, ok...well anyways we were an all male mos but we had a female battle buddy for a medic, she was a professional and the with us all the way, now i don't think she was spec ops material but what the hell l neither was i, comming straight from basic and what not, i will tell you what though after a year on the frontlines of the war on terror, there were no males in the platoon nor were there any females, we were all lunatics, fully qualified for a shrink or priest and in some cases both....but now that we are all home i imagine she looks at this whole situation and laughs considering how many times she had shrapnel wizz by her head and yet still going back out the next day

    June 19, 2013 at 7:20 pm | Reply
    • ?

      "what the hell neither was I"

      June 19, 2013 at 7:23 pm | Reply
  5. tax payer

    if we send women to war, we will have no women at home... barbaric but chivalris....the past did it this way for LOOOOONGER then recorded history for a reason... but by all means send them in to combat im sure the AMA figured out how to inpregnate men..... plus didnt men go to war to protect and get away from them? we want to be so even these days we why dont we just stop calling them women? rude if you want but the lines and the PHYSICAL appearnce of most would prove my point... you wanna talk and perform like a man but treated like a lady then cry about doubled standerd and proper treatment ....men are nice in order to sleep with you, men are rough because women WERE gentle the sharing of roles helped complete relationships...now you can be your own man and woman... might as well stop reproducing....

    and on the rapes.....its been men raping , piliging, and burning everything and everyone of their enemies or those in their paths... then a woman puts on the armor and picks up a sword...it wasnt uncommon it just wasnt needed.... the real war is keeping the babies coming keeping your claim on humanity alive for the next couple generations to fight then too.

    June 19, 2013 at 3:59 am | Reply
  6. James

    I served as a medic with 2/187 of the 101st. On my first field problem, my packed ruck and aid bag weighed a combined 124lbs. We moved almost 6 miles in just over hour at the start. Granted that at the time I was green and packed every single item on the winter packing list...a mistake I would never again make.

    June 19, 2013 at 12:29 am | Reply
  7. California

    Equal rights. Fair is fair.

    Draft women just like men.

    June 18, 2013 at 11:41 pm | Reply
    • emskadittle

      Draft? what draft?

      June 19, 2013 at 10:50 am | Reply
      • California

        If you're for equality and what's "FAIR" then you're for drafing them if/when there's a draft again.

        June 19, 2013 at 2:42 pm |

    Trainwreck in the making. Most females, the vast majority, cannot hang in the simplest of combat training tasks let alone the rigors of a combat arms MOS. When a woman arrives at a combat unit, she is immediately the physically weakest member of the unit. Someone else, a male, will be required to pick up her slack. In units such as infantry, tanks, artillery, etc..., she will immediately become a liability in combat because she cannot do what every male in that unit can do; even the weakest of males will possess physical strength far in excess of her. Are female servicemembers dedicated? Absolutely. Are they squared away? The vast majority are. Do they deserve the right to serve their country? Without a doubt. However, the military is not a "jobs program" or an "equal opportunity employer". It is an organization whose first and formost mission is to kill other people and break their stuff. By knowingly placing a weak link in the chain of a combat unit whose primary mission is to close with and destroy the enemy places other members of the unit at unneccesary risk.

    June 18, 2013 at 9:26 pm | Reply
    • Sprt

      Nicely said.

      June 19, 2013 at 4:52 am | Reply
    • Trevor

      So are we saying the physical entry standards of that combat unit (standards that will not be lowered) are not an accurate metric and are inadeqate? If the female can "hack it" physically, then they should be "good to go" correct? If the physical standards for entry didn't show their weakness, their first Spin up combat exercise for deployment will definately "bring it to light" and that individual will not set foot on the rotator. I know my wife, the ruthless "mentality" will certainly be there!

      June 19, 2013 at 7:47 pm | Reply
      • Sigh

        Ok....this would be true IF the standards were the SAME...but they aren't. Take a look at the APFT score tables and I want you to look anyone in the military and say that its EQUAL.

        Don't get me wrong if a female is the best qualified for a position she should receive that position (because ive seen a few) but don't for a second give me this whole woman are equal in opportunity but not in standards BS because logic dictates the world we live in. Not idealistic views of those of the general population

        June 22, 2013 at 1:57 pm |
  9. Portland tony

    I'm not sure this effort is all about a GI Jane issue. There are many career jobs, specifically officer leadership prerequisite positions, that are closed to women and because of this, there is a sort of a glass ceiling for women as senior commanders. This isn't just about shooting a weapon, hand to hand combat or leading seal teams. It's about giving women an equal opportunity to Command an Aircraft Carrier, an air wing, a Naval battle group or even be selected to head a service branch. Sure it's gonna help the enlisted women too by opening up opportunities in new disciplines.....but not as much as women officers!

    June 18, 2013 at 8:22 pm | Reply
    • Trevor

      Don't know about the Navy, but women already command air wings in the USAF...552 ACW to name one.

      June 19, 2013 at 7:35 pm | Reply
      • Portland tony

        A Carrier Air Wing (CVW, formerly known as a Carrier Air Group) consists of several squadrons and is an operational formation that is based on an aircraft carrier. The squadrons of a CVW are also assigned to an administrative type wings (such as Strike Fighter Wing Atlantic). Navy groups are commanded by Rear Admirals (Lower Half) and wings are commanded by Captains. The Air Force has three basic types of wings: operational, air base, and specialized mission.
        Col. Jay R. Bickley
        Commander 552 ACW would probably object to being designated a woman!

        June 19, 2013 at 11:25 pm |
  10. championofwomen

    is this who we want in combat

    June 18, 2013 at 7:21 pm | Reply
  11. championofwomen

    Everytime the issue of military rape heats up the DoD starts talking about putting women in combat to change the subject!

    June 18, 2013 at 7:20 pm | Reply
    • George Patton-2

      True enough, championofwomen. Furthermore, someone needs to get it across to these women that there is absolutely no glory in killing people nor that war is merely fun and games. Contrary to popular American opinion, war is but one thing only, bad, bad and bad!!!

      June 18, 2013 at 7:34 pm | Reply
      • Portland tony

        Very well stated, George. Thank you.

        June 19, 2013 at 8:32 am |
      • Trevor

        So you know the mentality of "these women" and what they consider is "glorious"? What a schmuck...

        June 19, 2013 at 7:30 pm |

Leave a Reply to Portland tony


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.