First Batch Of Women Fighter Pilots To Be Inducted In June

[T-123456]

I am not angry.
Just trying to find a way to put my thoughts across.
And I don't celebrate woman's day. You know it!!! Lolz

I know,you are never angry( )!
These thoughts include killing men?
And again,congratulations on your special day Teach.
(Today im nice to women)

 

[Levina]

These thoughts include killing men?

cold blooded murder?
Yeah I might attempt one soon.

 

[Abingdonboy]

In India right? Not the world? Because if that's the case, Telemark Battalion (Brigade North's Mechanized Infantry battalion) would like a word with you.

Kids will still be kids.

If you mean India only, well, you know the dynamic better then me, though I'd still disagree.
If it's cultural I'll respect our differences.

It's not cultural, it's a biological reality that we cannot ignore- as much as we may like.

The Marine Corps is playing out just such a scenario today. In response to relentless political pressure from social-justice warriors who mistake military service for one long exercise in diversity training, the Marines conducted a nine-month study comparing the performance of all-male infantry units with mixed units in simulated combat environments. The results? Women in a new Marine Corps unit created to assess how female service members perform in combat were injured twice as often as men, less accurate with infantry weapons, and not as good at removing wounded troops from the battlefield.


In fact, this summary doesn’t do justice to the dramatic disparity the study documented. The women weren’t slightly less capable than the men; they were profoundly less capable. All-male units performed better in 93 of 134 categories evaluated, and there were “notable” differences in accuracy in “every individual weapons system.” Physically, the top 25th percentile of women overlapped with the bottom 25th percentile of men, and they possessed less anaerobic power, anaerobic capacity, and aerobic capacity than their male colleagues. Women undergoing entry-level infantry training were injured at “more than six times the rate of their male counterparts.”
------------
------------
Similarly, while women fought alongside men in pre-IDF Jewish militias such as the Haganah, the instant the IDF began to transition from fighting a “war of survival” to optimizing for combat against modern, well-equipped armies, it transitioned to all-male units. Prior to the transition, “mixed direct combat units had consistently higher casualty rates.” And Haganah commanders had “stopped allowing women to serve in assault forces because ‘physically[they] could not run as well — and if they couldn’t run fast enough, they would endanger the whole unit, so they were put in other units.”

-----------
-----------

Our enemies don’t care one bit for political correctness. They won’t treat mixed-gender units with kid gloves. They’ll exploit those units’ perceived weakness mercilessly, concentrating their fire on the slow and vulnerable. There is no nothing more brutal or ruthless than ground combat.

Women in Ground Combat: Deadly Idea | National Review Online


Putting women into close combat roles isn’t fair to the men who will be relying on them, and isn’t fair to the women who will find themselves continuously at a deadly disadvantage. When we send our soldiers into combat we should be giving them the best possible chance of succeeding and surviving. While women are equal to or better than men at many tasks, they simply aren’t when it comes to combat. Substituting men with far less combat-capable women is profoundly unfair, immoral, and utterly unnecessary.

A recent study, for instance, by Britain’s Tri-Service Review found that mixed-gender combat units have “lower survivability,” a “reduced lethality rate” and reduced deployability. This study, along with countless others done over the last 40 years, demonstrate that combat capabilities are so heavily weighted toward men that the gap cannot be closed. As Marine Corps captain Lauren Serrano put it in a September 2014 article in the Marine Gazette: “Acknowledging that women are different (not just physically) than men is a hard truth that plays an enormous role in this discussion.”

The first and most commonly used argument goes something like this: “Not sure if it’s a good idea, but if women can meet the same standards as men, then I guess it would only be fair to allow them into combat.” But the last 40 years of aggressive integration efforts by the U.S. military have shown that women cannot meet the same rigorous standards as men — and the answer has been to implement different standards for women, while lowering the standards for men, too. A 2011 study on physical requirements necessary for specific occupations in the military conducted by Dr. William Gregor for the U.S. Army’s School of Advanced Military Studies concludes: The Services, especially the Army, have expanded the military occupational specialties (MOS) open to women purely as a part of the social concern for equality and have only paid lip service to combat readiness. . . . The Army’s own research indicates that the vast majority of women do not possess the lean mass necessary to meet the strength requirements for very heavy and heavy physical MOS’s.



What loads do women have trouble bearing? “Women soldiers are challenged by some field combat duties — carrying five-gallon cans of fuel and water, changing armor vehicle track and heavy truck tires, carrying 100-plus-pound loads of ammunition and fighting gear on extended dismounted operations, carrying stretchers of wounded soldiers, and the brute labor required to dig in fighting positions,” retired general Barry McCaffrey explains.


For proof that integrating women into combat will mean lower standards for men and women, just ask the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, who said in 2013, “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary: Why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?” Given the current political environment and the lack of moral courage from our political and military leaders, there’s no doubt these standards will be reevaluated and less-rigorous ones adopted.

This problem is exacerbated by the fact that the military’s physical and psychological toughness standards for men have also declined. The military as whole — even in basic training — has become kinder and gentler, partly in order to accommodate women.


Another common argument is that women are already dying in combat zones, so it’s only fair to formalize what they are doing. But this debate is not about the supreme sacrifice that 144 servicewomen have made in combat zones since 9/11, but how effective women can be in doing a different job — projecting combat power, killing the enemy, and surviving to fight another day. The women who have died in service to their country need to be honored, but they should not be honored by increasing the chances that other servicemen and women will die as well. As former Marine Jude Eden writes in the April 2015 edition of Military Review, “Being in the combat zone, dangerous as it is, is still worlds away from the door-kicking offensive missions of our combat units.” Being killed in a crash or by an IED is not the same as surviving physically demanding combat patrols carrying combat loads of 60 to 140 pounds, which challenge even men’s superior endurance and strength. A willingness to die for one’s country is a noble and a necessary condition for effective combat soldiers, but it is far from sufficient.


The third argument: In other cultures and times, women have performed as well in combat as men. In particular, modern-day Israel is often cited as an example of women successfully fulfilling combat roles. But Israel’s military position is almost nothing like that of the United States: It’s surrounded by hostile nations that collectively outnumber its population by over 20 to 1. Even so, for many of the reasons discussed, women no longer participate in front-line IDF combat units.

So why do men and women perform so differently in combat-related tasks? First, physiologically and psychologically, women and men are significantly different. Men are not simply bigger women with different plumbing. Men’s blood carries 10 to 12 percent more oxygen per liter than does a women’s; and men’s VO2 max, a measure of the top rate of oxygen consumption, is 40 to 60 percent greater than that of women. An average fit man will weigh about 23 percent more, have 50 percent more muscle mass, and carry 10 percent less body fat than an average fit woman. Pound for pound, men have thicker skulls, bigger, stronger necks, hearts that are 17 percent larger, and bones that are both bigger and denser. Despite being much heavier, men’s vertical leap is nearly 50 percent greater than that of women.

In terms of reflexes and reaction times, men significantly outperform women. When confronted with immediate danger, studies suggest men are “more likely than women to take action.” Women are far more likely to experience motion sickness and vertigo. In the Navy women go on sick call 60 to 70 percent more frequently. For the kind of violent events and situations found on the battlefield, women are far more likely to develop post-traumatic stress disorder and experience the symptoms for a longer duration than men. Despite the gender-specific ability to handle the pain of childbirth, “study after study” conclusively shows that men have a much higher overall tolerance for pain than women.


individually, any one of above differences could make the difference between life and death. In the combat environment, the differences between men and women in speed, strength, endurance, agility, physical resiliency, and psychological resiliency represents an unbridgeable gap — and the impact on the battlefield is dramatic.


Mixed-gender units will be both slower in getting to the fight and slower when beating a tactical retreat. They are more likely to be crippled by physical injuries or PTSD. Men will put themselves in harm’s way to assist women in getting over obstacles that men can easily negotiate unassisted. Blows to the head or other concussive events that a man can shrug off will stun or render a woman unconscious, reducing her unit’s chances of survival, especially in hand-to-hand combat. Units will have to deal with feminine-hygiene issues that significantly reduce unit effectiveness.

This is not merely theory: One Army study focusing on Operation Iraqi Freedom found women are almost twice as likely to suffer from non-combat related disease and injuries and are twice as likely to be medevac’d out of the theater of operations. Historical non-deployment rates for women are three to four times than that of men. Women suffer many times the rate of stress fractures and ACL injuries. All of this hurts combat readiness and increases costs. That we will still be able to defeat vastly inferior opponents is beside the point — more of our soldiers will die and our combat units will be less capable.


Putting Women in Combat -- Ineffective, Terrible Idea | National Review Online

Certain European countries are not models for the rest of the world to follow- they simply have their own set of circumstances that mean they have moved towards females in such postions. India is very different (as is the US) where combat deployment is a constant against ruthless enemies, there isn't the luxery to be poltically correct nor the compulsion to bring in women into such postions because of a shortage of recruits. If you'll notice, none of the "hardened" European militaries who reguarly undertake actual military operations (UK, France and Russia) have females in combat.


But this is all off topic as this topic is about female FIGHTER PILOTS where there is no issue with females serving at all- they are just as capable as any man in this role.


@Levina, further to what I was saying:


On a cold night during her weeklong captivity in Iraq in the Persian Gulf war, Maj. Rhonda Cornum was loaded into a pickup truck with another American prisoner of war, a young male sergeant, and taken from an underground bunker to a small prison. During the 30-minute drive, an Iraqi guard kissed her repeatedly, pulled a blanket over their heads so that they would not be seen, unzipped her flight suit and fondled her breasts.
Major Cornum, a 37-year-old flight surgeon and biochemist from upstate New York, had broken both arms, smashed her knee and had a bullet in her right shoulder as a result of the downing of her Army helicopter. She screamed in pain when the Iraqi tried to pull her flight suit down over her untreated and swollen arms. Before the ordeal was over, she told a Presidential commission on women in the military this month, she was "violated manually -- vaginally and rectally."
Major Cornum's testimony stunned some of the members of the commission, which also learned in the hearing that Specialist Melissa Coleman, the other American female prisoner of war in Iraq, was the victim of "indecent assault."

Female P.O.W. Is Abused, Kindling Debate - NYTimes.com


What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch?
What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch? - Women in Combat - Center for Military Readiness
(Extremely graphic link and I would advise against reading it to be honest)

 

[PARIKRAMA]

Even Though debate is quite intense and both sides shooting with barrage of arguments and counter arguments, from physiological and biology POV I can help with some data and reading materials. The selection criterion for all women candidates is strict and is at par with male counterparts.. I am quoting from an article below
++

For IAF the data began in early 90s when IAF started enrolling women in both aircrew and ground crew duties. Women aircrew are employed at present in helicopter and transport streams. Ground duty officers are commissioned in both technical and non-technical branches

A stringent medical examination of the candidates is carried out at entry. The medical standards for this initial medical examination are laid down in IAP(Institute of Aerospace Medicine, IAF, Bangalore) and are predominantly the same as male candidates. The standards for aircrew duties are expectedly more stringent than those for ground duties.

Initial medical examination for selected women candidates is carried out at the Institute of Aerospace Medicine (IAM) and Air Force Central Medical Establishment (AFCME). Periodic analysis of data on medical examination can provide information regarding the nature of the disabilities causing rejection. It also provides inputs on the adequacy of the medical policies governing such medical examination.

This study was carried out to analyse the data on the initial medical examination of women candidates in the IAF.

A total of 331 women candidates (Ground duty N=245, Aircrew N=86) underwent their initial medical examination at this Institute during the period of study. The mean age of the candidates was 21.8 + 0.9 years. Of the 245 candidates for ground duties, 73 (30%) were found unfit whereas out of the 86 candidates for aircrew duties, 47 (55%) were
rejected on medical grounds. Every candidate undergoes the full medical examination irrespective of any disability being detected at any stage of the examination. Some candidates had more than one disability. A total of 81 disabilities among ground duty candidates and 53 among aircrew candidates were found.

The table below depicts the whole conditions and classification

Stature, per se, is more of an administrative requirement. Females in general are shorter than their male counterparts. The minimum stature requirements for the aircrew in the IAF are the same for both male and female candidates. This could be the reason for the high rejection due to anthropometric disabilities found in this study.

A candidate is declared unfit on account of obesity if his/ her weight for height and age is more than 20% above ideal. Obesity formed 21% and 23% of the total disabilities for aircrew and ground duty women candidates respectively. This rate of prevalence of obesity may reflect the societal trends on obesity. Towards minimising these rejections, it may be worthwhile to have the weight for height and age charts available on the IAF website. All aspiring candidates can access this to know their status. This will then give them sufficient time to reduce their weight and be within the required standards before they appear for the initial medical examination.

A candidate must possess normal visual acuity, ocular muscle balance, full field of vision and normal colour perception. Visual defects and ophthalmic conditions were the major cause of rejection and hence the importance of a thorough and accurate eye examination cannot be overemphasised. Visual defects formed 31% of the cause for ground duty candidate rejection.

Similar proportions of ophthalmologic disabilities causing medical unfitness at entry have been reported in other studies on NDA cadets.

The human spine is subjected to various stresses during flying. Pre-existing spinal deformity can get aggravated due to these stresses and lead to backache. Therefore, aircrew candidates are subjected to full spinal radiograph to detect spinal disabilities that are not compatible with flying duties. Spinal anomalies formed 11% of total disabilities in this study. Of these, congenital spinal anomalies and degenerative spinal conditions were equal in number. Similar proportions of degenerative and congenital spinal disabilities have been reported in a recent study

Conclusion
While ophthalmic disabilities and obesity were the leading causes for unfitness among ground duty applicants, substandard anthropometric measurements and obesity were responsible for the highest rejections among
aircrew applicants. No significant trend or pattern was noticed in the disabilities causing unfitness over the period of this study.

Source:

http://medind.nic.in/iab/t06/i1/iabt06i1p50.pdf

 

[Levina]

@Levina, further to what I was saying:


On a cold night during her weeklong captivity in Iraq in the Persian Gulf war, Maj. Rhonda Cornum was loaded into a pickup truck with another American prisoner of war, a young male sergeant, and taken from an underground bunker to a small prison. During the 30-minute drive, an Iraqi guard kissed her repeatedly, pulled a blanket over their heads so that they would not be seen, unzipped her flight suit and fondled her breasts.
Major Cornum, a 37-year-old flight surgeon and biochemist from upstate New York, had broken both arms, smashed her knee and had a bullet in her right shoulder as a result of the downing of her Army helicopter. She screamed in pain when the Iraqi tried to pull her flight suit down over her untreated and swollen arms. Before the ordeal was over, she told a Presidential commission on women in the military this month, she was "violated manually -- vaginally and rectally."
Major Cornum's testimony stunned some of the members of the commission, which also learned in the hearing that Specialist Melissa Coleman, the other American female prisoner of war in Iraq, was the victim of "indecent assault."

Female P.O.W. Is Abused, Kindling Debate - NYTimes.com


What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch?
What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch? - Women in Combat - Center for Military Readiness
(Extremely graphic link and I would advise against reading it to be honest)

And despite this Indian armed forces have allowed women to join combat roles.
Indian armed forces to allow women in combat roles | World news | The Guardian

and here i rest my case...


...

 

[Abingdonboy]

And despite this Indian armed forces have allowed women to join combat roles.
Indian armed forces to allow women in combat roles | World news | The Guardian

and here i rest my case...


...

India to join handful of countries where all fighting roles are open to female applicants

Well it is completly untrue, the navy is opening up to women on warships and the IAF is opening up to female fighter pilots but that doesn't translate into females deployed as "boots on the ground". There is not even a discussion on this matter within defence circles, it simply isn't on the table.

 

[Mentee]

why he's still an A.C.P since 97-----he should have been promoted to, at least a deputy--- @Robinhood Pandey

 

[Levina]

(Extremely graphic link and I would advise against reading it to be honest)

I read it.
Just a humble reminder- Nirbhaya wasn't violated on the borders.
I find her case worse than Jessica Lynch's.

 

[Mentee]

do pakistanis watch cid ?

since shakti man, as i know of

 

[Stephen Cohen]

They should be made to fly Mig 21 s

It's not cultural, it's a biological reality that we cannot ignore- as much as we may like.

The Marine Corps is playing out just such a scenario today. In response to relentless political pressure from social-justice warriors who mistake military service for one long exercise in diversity training, the Marines conducted a nine-month study comparing the performance of all-male infantry units with mixed units in simulated combat environments. The results? Women in a new Marine Corps unit created to assess how female service members perform in combat were injured twice as often as men, less accurate with infantry weapons, and not as good at removing wounded troops from the battlefield.


In fact, this summary doesn’t do justice to the dramatic disparity the study documented. The women weren’t slightly less capable than the men; they were profoundly less capable. All-male units performed better in 93 of 134 categories evaluated, and there were “notable” differences in accuracy in “every individual weapons system.” Physically, the top 25th percentile of women overlapped with the bottom 25th percentile of men, and they possessed less anaerobic power, anaerobic capacity, and aerobic capacity than their male colleagues. Women undergoing entry-level infantry training were injured at “more than six times the rate of their male counterparts.”
------------
------------
Similarly, while women fought alongside men in pre-IDF Jewish militias such as the Haganah, the instant the IDF began to transition from fighting a “war of survival” to optimizing for combat against modern, well-equipped armies, it transitioned to all-male units. Prior to the transition, “mixed direct combat units had consistently higher casualty rates.” And Haganah commanders had “stopped allowing women to serve in assault forces because ‘physically[they] could not run as well — and if they couldn’t run fast enough, they would endanger the whole unit, so they were put in other units.”

-----------
-----------

Our enemies don’t care one bit for political correctness. They won’t treat mixed-gender units with kid gloves. They’ll exploit those units’ perceived weakness mercilessly, concentrating their fire on the slow and vulnerable. There is no nothing more brutal or ruthless than ground combat.

Women in Ground Combat: Deadly Idea | National Review Online


Putting women into close combat roles isn’t fair to the men who will be relying on them, and isn’t fair to the women who will find themselves continuously at a deadly disadvantage. When we send our soldiers into combat we should be giving them the best possible chance of succeeding and surviving. While women are equal to or better than men at many tasks, they simply aren’t when it comes to combat. Substituting men with far less combat-capable women is profoundly unfair, immoral, and utterly unnecessary.

A recent study, for instance, by Britain’s Tri-Service Review found that mixed-gender combat units have “lower survivability,” a “reduced lethality rate” and reduced deployability. This study, along with countless others done over the last 40 years, demonstrate that combat capabilities are so heavily weighted toward men that the gap cannot be closed. As Marine Corps captain Lauren Serrano put it in a September 2014 article in the Marine Gazette: “Acknowledging that women are different (not just physically) than men is a hard truth that plays an enormous role in this discussion.”

The first and most commonly used argument goes something like this: “Not sure if it’s a good idea, but if women can meet the same standards as men, then I guess it would only be fair to allow them into combat.” But the last 40 years of aggressive integration efforts by the U.S. military have shown that women cannot meet the same rigorous standards as men — and the answer has been to implement different standards for women, while lowering the standards for men, too. A 2011 study on physical requirements necessary for specific occupations in the military conducted by Dr. William Gregor for the U.S. Army’s School of Advanced Military Studies concludes: The Services, especially the Army, have expanded the military occupational specialties (MOS) open to women purely as a part of the social concern for equality and have only paid lip service to combat readiness. . . . The Army’s own research indicates that the vast majority of women do not possess the lean mass necessary to meet the strength requirements for very heavy and heavy physical MOS’s.



What loads do women have trouble bearing? “Women soldiers are challenged by some field combat duties — carrying five-gallon cans of fuel and water, changing armor vehicle track and heavy truck tires, carrying 100-plus-pound loads of ammunition and fighting gear on extended dismounted operations, carrying stretchers of wounded soldiers, and the brute labor required to dig in fighting positions,” retired general Barry McCaffrey explains.


For proof that integrating women into combat will mean lower standards for men and women, just ask the current chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Martin Dempsey, who said in 2013, “If we do decide that a particular standard is so high that a woman couldn’t make it, the burden is now on the service to come back and explain to the secretary: Why is it that high? Does it really have to be that high?” Given the current political environment and the lack of moral courage from our political and military leaders, there’s no doubt these standards will be reevaluated and less-rigorous ones adopted.

This problem is exacerbated by the fact that the military’s physical and psychological toughness standards for men have also declined. The military as whole — even in basic training — has become kinder and gentler, partly in order to accommodate women.


Another common argument is that women are already dying in combat zones, so it’s only fair to formalize what they are doing. But this debate is not about the supreme sacrifice that 144 servicewomen have made in combat zones since 9/11, but how effective women can be in doing a different job — projecting combat power, killing the enemy, and surviving to fight another day. The women who have died in service to their country need to be honored, but they should not be honored by increasing the chances that other servicemen and women will die as well. As former Marine Jude Eden writes in the April 2015 edition of Military Review, “Being in the combat zone, dangerous as it is, is still worlds away from the door-kicking offensive missions of our combat units.” Being killed in a crash or by an IED is not the same as surviving physically demanding combat patrols carrying combat loads of 60 to 140 pounds, which challenge even men’s superior endurance and strength. A willingness to die for one’s country is a noble and a necessary condition for effective combat soldiers, but it is far from sufficient.


The third argument: In other cultures and times, women have performed as well in combat as men. In particular, modern-day Israel is often cited as an example of women successfully fulfilling combat roles. But Israel’s military position is almost nothing like that of the United States: It’s surrounded by hostile nations that collectively outnumber its population by over 20 to 1. Even so, for many of the reasons discussed, women no longer participate in front-line IDF combat units.

So why do men and women perform so differently in combat-related tasks? First, physiologically and psychologically, women and men are significantly different. Men are not simply bigger women with different plumbing. Men’s blood carries 10 to 12 percent more oxygen per liter than does a women’s; and men’s VO2 max, a measure of the top rate of oxygen consumption, is 40 to 60 percent greater than that of women. An average fit man will weigh about 23 percent more, have 50 percent more muscle mass, and carry 10 percent less body fat than an average fit woman. Pound for pound, men have thicker skulls, bigger, stronger necks, hearts that are 17 percent larger, and bones that are both bigger and denser. Despite being much heavier, men’s vertical leap is nearly 50 percent greater than that of women.

In terms of reflexes and reaction times, men significantly outperform women. When confronted with immediate danger, studies suggest men are “more likely than women to take action.” Women are far more likely to experience motion sickness and vertigo. In the Navy women go on sick call 60 to 70 percent more frequently. For the kind of violent events and situations found on the battlefield, women are far more likely to develop post-traumatic stress disorder and experience the symptoms for a longer duration than men. Despite the gender-specific ability to handle the pain of childbirth, “study after study” conclusively shows that men have a much higher overall tolerance for pain than women.


individually, any one of above differences could make the difference between life and death. In the combat environment, the differences between men and women in speed, strength, endurance, agility, physical resiliency, and psychological resiliency represents an unbridgeable gap — and the impact on the battlefield is dramatic.


Mixed-gender units will be both slower in getting to the fight and slower when beating a tactical retreat. They are more likely to be crippled by physical injuries or PTSD. Men will put themselves in harm’s way to assist women in getting over obstacles that men can easily negotiate unassisted. Blows to the head or other concussive events that a man can shrug off will stun or render a woman unconscious, reducing her unit’s chances of survival, especially in hand-to-hand combat. Units will have to deal with feminine-hygiene issues that significantly reduce unit effectiveness.

This is not merely theory: One Army study focusing on Operation Iraqi Freedom found women are almost twice as likely to suffer from non-combat related disease and injuries and are twice as likely to be medevac’d out of the theater of operations. Historical non-deployment rates for women are three to four times than that of men. Women suffer many times the rate of stress fractures and ACL injuries. All of this hurts combat readiness and increases costs. That we will still be able to defeat vastly inferior opponents is beside the point — more of our soldiers will die and our combat units will be less capable.


Putting Women in Combat -- Ineffective, Terrible Idea | National Review Online

Certain European countries are not models for the rest of the world to follow- they simply have their own set of circumstances that mean they have moved towards females in such postions. India is very different (as is the US) where combat deployment is a constant against ruthless enemies, there isn't the luxery to be poltically correct nor the compulsion to bring in women into such postions because of a shortage of recruits. If you'll notice, none of the "hardened" European militaries who reguarly undertake actual military operations (UK, France and Russia) have females in combat.


But this is all off topic as this topic is about female FIGHTER PILOTS where there is no issue with females serving at all- they are just as capable as any man in this role.


@Levina, further to what I was saying:


On a cold night during her weeklong captivity in Iraq in the Persian Gulf war, Maj. Rhonda Cornum was loaded into a pickup truck with another American prisoner of war, a young male sergeant, and taken from an underground bunker to a small prison. During the 30-minute drive, an Iraqi guard kissed her repeatedly, pulled a blanket over their heads so that they would not be seen, unzipped her flight suit and fondled her breasts.
Major Cornum, a 37-year-old flight surgeon and biochemist from upstate New York, had broken both arms, smashed her knee and had a bullet in her right shoulder as a result of the downing of her Army helicopter. She screamed in pain when the Iraqi tried to pull her flight suit down over her untreated and swollen arms. Before the ordeal was over, she told a Presidential commission on women in the military this month, she was "violated manually -- vaginally and rectally."
Major Cornum's testimony stunned some of the members of the commission, which also learned in the hearing that Specialist Melissa Coleman, the other American female prisoner of war in Iraq, was the victim of "indecent assault."

Female P.O.W. Is Abused, Kindling Debate - NYTimes.com


What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch?
What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch? - Women in Combat - Center for Military Readiness
(Extremely graphic link and I would advise against reading it to be honest)

@Levina
So what this means is that not only women themselves will die
but in a Mixed unit become the cause of casualties to others

 

[jamahir]

What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch?
What Really Happened to Jessica Lynch? - Women in Combat - Center for Military Readiness
(Extremely graphic link and I would advise against reading it to be honest)

i am in this thread just to dismiss your lie.

jessica lynch in reality wasn't tortured or troubled by the iraqis... in fact she was helped by them.

the wider picture[1] :

2003 was not only the year of lies and falsifications, but also the year of punishment for those who told the truth. British expert on arms David Kelli paid the highest price - he committed suicide after the public learned that he had been the source of information for the BBC report on fabricating classified documents. Employee of British Security Services Katharine Gun was sentenced to two years of imprisonment for revealing the plans of Americans to conduct surveillance over UN diplomats with the purpose of exerting pressure to them during voting in the Security Council. And in the United States Joseph Wilson who confessed that no proofs of the alleged trip of Saddam to Africa with the purpose of purchasing uranium had been found, was punished through the wife Valerie Plame who was named CIA agent.

n many cases falsification dominated over the truth, even in the cases when the truth was accessible. Real Jessica Lynch who confessed Diane Sawyer that "nobody had tortured or beaten her" was unable to do anything with her twin created by mass media and military and shown in the NBC film "Rescuing Jessica Lynch".

her real injuries and then the hollywood rescue[2] :

Dr Harith al-Houssona, who looked after Lynch throughout her ordeal, told the documentary, “I examined her, I saw she had a broken arm, a broken thigh and a dislocated ankle. Then I did another examination. There was no [sign of] shooting, no bullet inside her body, no stab wound—only RTA, road traffic accident,” he recalled. “They want to distort the picture. I don’t know why they think there is some benefit in saying she has a bullet injury.”

Hassam Hamoud, a waiter at a nearby restaurant, said he had been approached by a US advance party and asked if there were any Fedayeen in the hospital. He told them they had already left.

Even so US Special Forces chose to enter the hospital at the dead of night, with guns blazing. Dr Anmar Uday told the programme, “We heard the noise of helicopters. We were surprised. Why do this? There was no military, there were no soldiers in the hospital.

“It was like a Hollywood film. They cried, ‘Go, go, go’, with guns and blanks and the sound of explosions. They made a show—an action movie like Sylvester Stallone or Jackie Chan, with jumping and shouting, breaking down doors.” Doctors and patients had also been handcuffed to their beds.

further[3] :

The situation was further inflamed by Larry Flint, an infamous publisher of "Hustler" erotic magazine. In his possession there are photos of Jessica with open breast and fully naked, together with other soldiers. The photos were taken at the military base where Lynch was preparing to the "responsible mission" in Iraq.

Disputes on whether Flint will publish these photos took more attention in America than the reality of the private Lynch story. At the end of the day, Flint said he would not do this. According to his words, these photos were sold to him by soldiers, "who wanted everyone to see that this lady is no apple pie", but he will not publish them as Lynch "became a small girl in a dirty game of American government", said Flint, and also added: "Some things are more important that money. Time after time all of us need to do good deeds"

abingdon miyaan, what is your next port of call for lie placement?? syria??


@Levina


---

[1] 2003 - year of lies such as the myth of Jessica Lynch - PravdaReport

[2] BBC documentary exposes Pentagon lies: The staged rescue of Private Jessica Lynch - World Socialist Web Site

[3] Jessica Lynch did not make a single shot, but instead shot naked with soldiers - PravdaReport

 

[Abingdonboy]

They should be made to fly Mig 21 s

Why? They will be assigned at the IAF's discretion as with any fighter pilot. Really, no pilot in the IAF should have to fly those death traps but that is another matter....

i am in this thread just to dismiss your lie.

jessica lynch in reality wasn't tortured or troubled by the iraqis... in fact she was helped by them.

the wider picture[1] :




her real injuries and then the hollywood rescue[2] :





further[3] :



abingdon miyaan, what is your next port of call for lie placement?? syria??


@Levina


---

[1] 2003 - year of lies such as the myth of Jessica Lynch - PravdaReport

[2] BBC documentary exposes Pentagon lies: The staged rescue of Private Jessica Lynch - World Socialist Web Site

[3] Jessica Lynch did not make a single shot, but instead shot naked with soldiers - PravdaReport

I'm not getting into this mate, I have stated my case and I trust the sources of information I utilise.

I read it.
Just a humble reminder- Nirbhaya wasn't violated on the borders.
I find her case worse than Jessica Lynch's.

Exactly, and remember the kind of outrage that has sparked? Imagine that multiplied many times if this was to happen to a female combatant at the hands of the enemy.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

Why? They will be assigned at the IAF's discretion as with any fighter pilot. Really, no pilot in the IAF should have to fly those death traps but that is another matter....

.

WHY NOT

There is a saying " If you cant take the heat ; get out of the Kitchen "

So they must start with Mig 21 and then move up the chain

Do you mean to say that it is all right for boys to die while flying Mig 21

 

[Abingdonboy]

WHY NOT

There is a saying " If you cant take the heat ; get out of the Kitchen "

So they must start with Mig 21 and then move up the chain

Do you mean to say that it is all right for boys to die while flying Mig 21

I mean to say gender is IRRELEVENT. Once they are commisioned they are OFFICERS first and thus all officers serve at the discretion of the IAF high command and postings are made accordingly. If a female officer is sent to a MiG-21 SQN she will do as well as if she was sent to a MKI SQN- all have passed the EXACT SAME selection process as their male counterparts and at that point their abilities are entirely dependant on the quality of their training.

 

[Stephen Cohen]

I mean to say gender is IRRELEVENT. Once they are commisioned they are OFFICERS first and thus all officers serve at the discretion of the IAF high command and postings are made accordingly. If a female officer is sent to a MiG-21 SQN she will do as well as if she was sent to a MKI SQN- all have passed the EXACT SAME selection process as their male counterparts and at that point their abilities are entirely dependant on the quality of their training.

What ever ; But it is ALSO necessary to put the girls through the Grind

Secondly it would make for very interesting TV discussions ; IF and when
FEMINISTS protest when the girls are made to fly the Mig 21

It would bring out the latent " sense of entitlement "
and would also make for some very interesting debates about Gender Equality

Boys will never say a word when they are put in Mig 21 squadrons

But I am sure the Women's organisations will come out screaming

If one Mig 21 flown by a girl crashes ; only then we can expect to get rid of them QUICKLY

One PAF girl died in a F 7 PG crash recently