- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- 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: Navy officer applies to become the first ever woman to join the elite SEALs
Posted on 7/24/17 at 12:58 pm to Argonaut
Posted on 7/24/17 at 12:58 pm to Argonaut
quote:
That isn't my response. My response is that if you see this as a waste of money that we should go to bat to prevent, why not the same fervor on anything else? It's because you don't really care about wasting money.
That's bullshite. Some of the people who have made that point are in favor of folding entire branches of the military and giving responsibility to the National Guard to save money.
1
Posted on 7/24/17 at 12:59 pm to Argonaut
Honestly I'm still waiting on a reason why they should be allowed other than "why not?" I don't think you have one. Can you point to some specific value women bring to the table that other men can't bring?
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:00 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
That's bullshite. Some of the people who have made that point are in favor of folding entire branches of the military and giving responsibility to the National Guard to save money.
Cool, some of them. Why not all of them? Why not a majority of them? Why not even a significant amount of them?
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:00 pm to Argonaut
quote:Why? It's an invalid point.
I pointed it out.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:02 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Honestly I'm still waiting on a reason why they should be allowed other than "why not?" I don't think you have one.
I've given many reasons. You've just dismissed them.
quote:
Can you point to some specific value women bring to the table that other men can't bring?
No, and that's never been my argument.
I can't point to a specific value that some men bring to the table that other men can't bring either.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:03 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Honestly I'm still waiting on a reason why they should be allowed other than "why not?" I don't think you have one. Can you point to some specific value women bring to the table that other men can't bring?
Same here
Her response is the jobs are open to females so deal with it. Is not a real reason.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:03 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
Why? It's an invalid point.
I agree. Stop making it.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:04 pm to StraightCashHomey21
quote:
Her response is the jobs are open to females so deal with it. Is not a real reason.
The expert on all things military doesn't know how the military works.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:04 pm to Argonaut
quote:I don't think you e given any reasons. If you have they were so ridiculous that yes, I dismissed them.
I've given many reasons. You've just dismissed them.
quote:Theyre stronger, tougher, smarter and more driven than other men? Still not sure how that addresses the point of having women join?
I can't point to a specific value that some men bring to the table that other men can't bring either.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:05 pm to Argonaut
quote:
The expert on all things military doesn't know how the military works.
ummm what you say stolen valor
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:05 pm to Argonaut
why ask why
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:06 pm to Argonaut
how does it work then, General
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:06 pm to Argonaut
quote:
I questioned why this was your main point of contention on training resources.
It's my main point because I don't consider things like cohesion, etc etc to be insurmountable problems.
You're new here but I don't post shite I don't believe just to make a point and I don't pretend something is my primary concern if it isn't.
I think most if not all other arguments against women in these forces would be of little consequence if it were actually true that women were physically superior to the men they were selected over.
But, it isn't. And, it never will be.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:06 pm to GeauxxxTigers23
quote:
I dismissed them.
That's right, and I see no need to continue repeating myself.
quote:
Theyre stronger, tougher, smarter and more driven than other men?
Not all of them are.
quote:
Still not sure how that addresses the point of having women join?
Your point is that women don't "belong." My point is that men don't inherently "belong" either.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:07 pm to lsucoonass
quote:
how does it work then, General
its just amusing now
she keeps digging a deep hole
or a dfp bc she is superwoman
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:08 pm to Argonaut
quote:
Your point is that women don't "belong." My point is that men don't inherently "belong" either.
No one has argued that most men belong, bc we know they don't' Its still not a reason to include females.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:09 pm to Argonaut
quote:Thats where you're wrong. Men do belong because this country NEEDS men to fight its wars. It doesn't NEED women.
My point is that men don't inherently "belong" either.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:09 pm to Argonaut
I get it, I think.
I'm not military, so I don't know how people get selected to go to BUDS.
How does that happen?
Is there a chance under the current system where a female would out perform enough males to be selected for the training?
I'm not military, so I don't know how people get selected to go to BUDS.
How does that happen?
Is there a chance under the current system where a female would out perform enough males to be selected for the training?
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:10 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
You're new here but I don't post shite I don't believe just to make a point and I don't pretend something is my primary concern if it isn't.
OK, then maybe I mixed you in with these other dudes. Apologies if that's the case, and it appears that it is.
Posted on 7/24/17 at 1:11 pm to StraightCashHomey21
Let me see if I can summarize my understanding of a point.
Argonaut now acknowledges that the only way a woman should ever be selected is if she is among the top selects? She should not be selected if there is a man who outperforms her among the candidates that she would be selected in front of?
If the above is true, this thread has been 20 something pages for nothing because.
1. No woman has ever outperformed the best non-selected male applicants.
2. No woman ever will outperform the best non-selected male applicants.
Argonaut now acknowledges that the only way a woman should ever be selected is if she is among the top selects? She should not be selected if there is a man who outperforms her among the candidates that she would be selected in front of?
If the above is true, this thread has been 20 something pages for nothing because.
1. No woman has ever outperformed the best non-selected male applicants.
2. No woman ever will outperform the best non-selected male applicants.
This post was edited on 7/24/17 at 1:12 pm
Page 31 of 38
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News