Pentagon to Allow Women in Combat

[Ian]

Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will lift a long-standing ban on women serving in combat, according to senior defense officials. The ensuing administrative process could mean women will serve in front line combat roles, but not until 2016.

The move, first reported by the Associated Press, was not expected this week, although there has been a concerted effort by the Obama administration to further open up the Armed Forces to women.

The Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously recommended in January to Secretary Panetta that the direct combat exclusion rule should be lifted.

"I can confirm media reports that the secretary and the chairman are expected to announce the lifting of the direct combat exclusion rule for women in the military," said a senior Defense Department official. "This policy change will initiate a process whereby the services will develop plans to implement this decision, which was made by the secretary of defense upon the recommendation of the Joint Chiefs of Staff."

Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Gen. Martin Dempsey sent Panetta earlier this month entitled "Women in Service Implementation Plan." "The time has come to rescind the direct combat exclusion rule for women and to eliminate all unnecessary gender-based barriers to service."

"To implement these initiatives successfully and without sacrificing our warfighting capability or the trust of the American people, we will need time to get it right," he said in the memo, referring to the 2016 horizon.

Women have been officially prohibited from serving in combat since a 1994 rule that barred them from serving in ground combat units. That does not mean they have been immune from danger or from combat.

As Martha Raddatz reported in 2009, women have served in support positions on and off the frontlines in Iraq and Afghanistan, where war is waged on street corners and in markets, putting them at equal risk. Hundreds of thousands of women deployed with the military to those two war zones over the past decade. Hundreds have died.

Panetta's decision will set a January 2016 deadline for the military service branches to argue that there are military roles that should remain closed to women.

In February 2012 the Defense Department opened up 14,500 positions to women that had previously been limited to men and lifted a rule that prohibited women from living with combat units.

Panetta also directed the services to examine ways to open more combat roles to women. However the ban on direct combat positions has remained in place.

Advocates for equality in the services will be pleased. On Capitol Hill today retired Chief Master Sergeant Cindy McNally, a victim of sexual assault in the military, said placing women in combat roles would help equalize the services and actually cut down on sexual assaults, which have emerged as a major problem in the military.

"For larger solutions we need to look at integrating women completely into the armed force," she said. "Remove the combat exclusion policy. Then we will be a fully integrated force. Being able to do the job should be the standard, not whether you are male or female. I believe that as leaders we took our eye off the ball. We enabled a climate where our troops became vulnerable."

But the move is not universally popular among women in uniform who cite real-world concerns about the physical requirements that could be required to be a female front-line service member.

A female Army officer who spoke with ABC News on condition on anonymity pointed out that senior leaders feel compelled to open job positions to show how progressive they are. However this officer noted, "every female troop I know (over the age of 25) says publicly, 'Sure, open them up!' And privately, 'But not for me personally' - I know I don't have the brute strength required and I would be crushed to let down my colleagues - so no way, no thanks."

In September 2011 the Obama administration ended the "don't ask, don't tell" policy that had prohibited gays and lesbians from serving openly in the military after Congress repealed the Don't Ask, Don't Tell Law in December, 2010.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/women-co ... d=18295570

[klr]

But women have been flying US combat aircraft (in combat) for years (for one thing), so surely the existing ban is not so all-embracing it might at first seem?

[Ian]

True, there are plenty of jobs which could be considered combat, depending on what happens. Women have been on surface ships for a few decades too, and recently now on submarines. This step means infantry positions (most prominently), if what I'm hearing is correct. As for Special Forces... I doubt that's included.

[klr]

Ah, I see direct combat is mentioned later in the article, and that spells out "ground troops" as clear as anything.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

At least forty years behind some folks.

[Jason]

Hell hath no fury like a GI on the rag behind a M2.

[Audley Strange]

Does this mean women will be subject to the Selective Service system then?

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Hell hath no fury like a GI on the rag behind a M2.

I don't know about being on the rag, but I've seen women swing .50s just as good as I could.

[Jason]

Yeah, but they'd be even angrier.

[Jason]

Maybe use them as shock troops? Plunging necklines and bikini bottoms..

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Yeah, but they'd be even angrier.

If the enemy had chocolate grenades...

[laklak]

Anti-Taliban shock troops. Bacon bikinis with shrimp earrings.

[JimC]

It smacks of desperation to suggest that this move would reduce rape levels in the US military...

[Ian]

It smacks of desperation to suggest that this move would reduce rape levels in the US military...

Not an unreasonable suggestion, to be honest. Sexual assault is a major problem in the military, as it is in colleges and anywhere else you've got plenty of young men around that age. I don't know whether or not this would help or hurt that problem though. There are factors which could influence it either way.

[Svartalf]

At least forty years behind some folks.

more like 70...