- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Female Marine at Airport .I can do 5 pull ups. Obama can do 1.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:03 am to DanTiger
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:03 am to DanTiger
quote:
When I hear the word Marine or soldier I don't picture a woman but that is just me. I don't have a problem with women serving but they don't belong in the straight leg infantry or any special operations groups.
Go ahead and add armor, cavalry, and artillery to that list as well. The upper body strength requirements here are even greater than in the infantry.
1
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:09 am to Darth_Vader
quote:
Go ahead and add armor, cavalry, and artillery to that list as well. The upper body strength requirements here are even greater than in the infantry.
Most arty guys I know are the definition of meathead. All slow as shite with a huge upper body and no neck. I guess 155mm shells aren't light.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:11 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
KillBodies0311
Whoa dude. Motard much?
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:12 am to Dixie Normus
quote:
Whoa dude. Motard much?
That dude is motarded.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:12 am to GeauxxxTigers23
Motarded?
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:13 am to SabiDojo
So motivated, that he is retarded
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:14 am to Dixie Normus
This post was edited on 1/6/14 at 9:14 am
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:15 am to Big Time Tiger 11
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:15 am to SabiDojo
quote:
Motarded?
Extremely motivated. Says oohrah a lot. Probably keeps the highest regulation haircut there is. The type of guy who wears is school of infantry graduation t-shirt to the bar and has a user name like,
quote:
killbodies0311
For instance, the guy who was on that video a while back kicking the shite out of that dude's care was probably a "motard."
This post was edited on 1/6/14 at 9:17 am
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:17 am to GeauxxxTigers23
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:18 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I guess 155mm shells aren't light.
M107 round weighs just under 100 pounds (~97).
ETA - for DV - 120mm sabot rounds weigh between 40 and 50 pounds.
This post was edited on 1/6/14 at 9:21 am
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:28 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Most arty guys I know are the definition of meathead. All slow as shite with a huge upper body and no neck. I guess 155mm shells aren't light.
That's a pretty common stereotype of "red-legs" but actually that's not the case. Guys in artillery, at least the ones working fire control, have to be pretty smart, especially in math, due to the fact they have to be able to do some pretty heavy calculating in order to put their rounds on target.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:28 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
for DV - 120mm sabot rounds weigh between 40 and 50 pounds.
I assume you're talking about the tank round?
Anyways, isn't it a wonderful idea to put a chick in the loader spot of a tank to reload that gun? If I'm not mistaken, being able to reload as fast as possible is crucial to a tank surviving in combat.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:30 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
ETA - for DV - 120mm sabot rounds weigh between 40 and 50 pounds.
And the MINIMUM standard for a loader on the Abrams is to be able to load that main gun every 4 seconds. But the reality is that any loader that's worth a shite can load it in 3 or if he's good, 2 seconds. And they have to be able to keep this pace up for as long as is needed for the mission.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:35 am to Darth_Vader
Damn. Great stuff.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:36 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I assume you're talking about the tank round? Anyways, isn't it a wonderful idea to put a chick in the loader spot of a tank to reload that gun? If I'm not mistaken, being able to reload as fast as possible is crucial to a tank surviving in combat.
He is talking about the tank round.
And loading the main gun is only part of what goes into it. There is also the matter of maintenance on the tank, cross loading ammo from the ammo point or other tanks in the platoon (yes tanks are organized into platoons). On top of this there is also the possibility that the tank will throw a track. If that happens, the last thing you want is someone with low upper body strength.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:40 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Anyways, isn't it a wonderful idea to put a chick in the loader spot of a tank to reload that gun?
The analogy I make is - putting a woman in a combat role - with "gender-pared" physical requirements is the equivalent of giving that unit a wounded or disabled person in the assembly area.
Females have served proudly, in many important roles for over 100 years in the US Armed Forces, my own daughter among them. However, to suggest that having different physical standards is "okay" because of physical differences remains the silliest thing I have EVER heard. But, we wanted to include females and treat them "fairly", fine.
Now, to put them into combat units - without removing the gender-paring is LUNACY. Again, a female in the motorpool, or the hospital, the payroll office, heck the tactical operations center is one thing - and yes - $hit happens and we all become infantrymen.
But - combat units are to close with and destroy the enemy. And the enemy doesn't care if whiny assed liberals (most of whom have never served in uniform) in Washington said it was okay for you to be in a rifle company, even though you can only do 20 pushups. That makes your job harder and their job easier.
May the grace of G-d protect us from ourselves and our mistakes.
This post was edited on 1/6/14 at 9:41 am
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:43 am to Ace Midnight
You don't need to convince me buddy.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:46 am to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
You don't need to convince me buddy.
I'm not your buddy, guy.
Posted on 1/6/14 at 9:46 am to Ace Midnight
quote:
The analogy I make is - putting a woman in a combat role - with "gender-pared" physical requirements is the equivalent of giving that unit a wounded or disabled person in the assembly area. Females have served proudly, in many important roles for over 100 years in the US Armed Forces, my own daughter among them. However, to suggest that having different physical standards is "okay" because of physical differences remains the silliest thing I have EVER heard. But, we wanted to include females and treat them "fairly", fine. Now, to put them into combat units - without removing the gender-paring is LUNACY. Again, a female in the motorpool, or the hospital, the payroll office, heck the tactical operations center is one thing - and yes - $hit happens and we all become infantrymen. But - combat units are to close with and destroy the enemy. And the enemy doesn't care if whiny assed liberals (most of whom have never served in uniform) in Washington said it was okay for you to be in a rifle company, even though you can only do 20 pushups. That makes your job harder and their job easier. May the grace of G-d protect us from ourselves and our mistakes.
good point. And on top of issue of the fact females are physically weaker, there is also the issue of crew cohesion. For a tank to be effective, all 4 crewmen MUST perfectly mesh as a well oiled machine. There can be no issues that drives any sort of distraction or tension into the crew. And putting a mixed male & female crew on a tank is all but assuring there will be issues.
Page 5 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News