Women Combat Roles

WI agree with the sound out Chiefs of Staffs allowance of wo hands to be in struggle position. I find it a little sexist that women were denied the chance to non have fleck roles. In the article, Pentagon Removes Ban on Women in Combat by Ernesto Londono of The Washington Post, it says, Panetta inform a lifting of the ban on female service members in combat roles, a watershed policy change that was informed by womens valor in Iraq and Afghanistan and that removes the remaining barrier to a fully inclusive military. I conjecture that women are just as dependent as men.Even if their bodies arent built as strong and men, they have determination and rotter do so many things, even better than some men. The the States currently excludes women from intimately 25 percent of active-duty roles. The article says that, The decision comes afterward a decade of counterinsurgency missions in Iraq and Afghanistan, where women demonstrated heroism on battlefields with no front lines. To me this is proving the point that women are just as capable with men. Women are just as much as heroes as men are and just as inspiring, if not more.The Army and the marines are handout to present their plans to open most jobs to women by May 15. I authentically think that this is an excellent idea. As the article says, its monumental. I abruptly agree. Every clock equality is recognized and meritocracy is enforced, it helps everyone, and it willing help maestroize the force. I agree that the force will be more professional with women in combat roles and not just men. Of course this announcement has created a lot of critics and lots of skeptics.The article says, Critics of opening combat positions to women have argued for age that integration during deployments could create a distracting, sexually charged atmosphere in the force that women are unable to perform some of the more physically demanding jobs. I say that is sexist. Women are emotionally and physically strong. T hey may not be able to bench press the amount that men mass but they can do a whole lot and the combat roles would be very lucky to have them. If they want to dedicate their time/life to the military then let them.In the article it says, Lifting the ban will go a long way toward changing the culture of a male dominated institution in which women have long complained about discrimination and a high incidence of sexual assault. I think throughout history, womens rights have been a serious issue. If they let women strife on combat roles, it would do wonders that would go down in history. another(prenominal) thing the article says is, Ive served with women at all levels, and based on my experience, women have done a phenomenal job, said the officer. Women are phenomenal, I agree. They can do amazing things, just as much as men. Its important that the military doesnt lower their standards of whats delightful and not and they address this in the article when they say, It is critical t hat we maintain the kindred high standards that have made the American military the most feared and respect fighting force in the world. I think that women can have-to doe with these high standards and perform them just as well. I agree with the Joint Chiefs of Staffs position to allow women in have a role in combat positions.