women commanders

[mzalen-do]

Old style warfare was highly masculine. Armies of men confronted each other on the battlefield. The macho factor was often at work as virility and valour were intertwined. In most societies throughout history the warriors were overwhelmingly men.

In the course of the 20th Century, three processes tended to increase the proportion of women in military matters. One was the change in the technology of war. Fighting came to involve more and more the pushing of buttons rather than the wielding of heavy weapons. Women as foot soldiers and infantry were still at a disadvantage. But technological sophistication made muscle power less and less relevant.

A second factor which came to increase the role of women in the military in the 20th Century was the women’s liberation movement worldwide. Both governments and the armed forces were under pressure for at least ‘token’ participation of women in military matters.

The third factor that increased the role of women was the emergence of new forms of armed struggle, especially in the developing countries. Guerrilla warfare, liberation wars and even the new strategies of suicide bombers have come to involve increasing participation by women in combat roles.

I am in favour of pursuing the ideal of androgynous armies in which there would be approximate parity between men and women in the armed forces. I support the ideal of such gender parity in the military because I believe if women were equals in decisions about war and peace, the world would have fewer wars. It is not sociologically an accident that women are underrepresented in hard-core prisons for crimes of violence everywhere in the world, as well as being underrepresented within the armed forces of almost all societies.

Women as a force for peace would only succeed if their participation in warfare went beyond obeying the orders of male generals and male field marshals. That is why the truly significant enlistment of women in the armed forces of the United States and Israel has not prevented those two countries from becoming the most internationally aggressive for the last 50 years. Since the 1950s, the US and Israel have engaged in more wars across national boundaries than any other state in the world. The American and Israeli armed forces have a higher proportion of women than most other armies in the world. Yet, the US and Israel have militarily violated the territorial sovereignty of other countries more often than have any other countries, with the possible exception of apartheid South Africa in the 1970s and 1980s.

The conclusion to be drawn is that it is not enough to have numerically more women in the armed forces, if women are to be a force for peace. Women must go beyond saluting male generals. There need to be greater parity in command, greater sharing of military authority.

In November 2002 in my hometown of Mombasa kenya, an Israeli hotel, the Paradise, was bombed by suicide bombers. The bombers were definitely men. On the same day in Mombasa, an attempt was made to shoot down an Israeli tourist plane. This one failed. Again the presumption was that the shooters from the ground were men, but this presumption was based on probability rather than certainty. There may be more and more women sacrificing themselves in Third World Liberation movements these days, but the chain of command is still heavily masculine.

A surface to air missile seems to have been used in an attempt to blow up the Israeli plane over Mombasa. The global media presented this as a wholly new threat to civilian aviation. In fact this attempt to shoot down a civilian plane was not new even in Africa. Sub-Saharan Africa had a 1978 precedent at the level of national terrorism. North Africa was accused of a similar 1988 destruction of a civilian airline at the level of international terrorism.

The sub-Saharan precedent was the shooting down of a civilian government airliner by Zimbabwe liberation forces in 1978, in which about 50 people died. Among those who survived on the ground, Joshua Nkomo’s forces killed several of them. Newsweek carried a photograph of Joshua Nkomo and Robert Mugabe raising their glasses. The caption of the photograph was "We shot it down". It was not clear whether the photograph was not an old one dug up by Newsweek and taken long before the shooting down of the plane.

But there is no doubt that Joshua Nkomo accepted "credit" for shooting down the plane, and he caused an uproar when he chuckled over the incident in a BBC interview. This was all part of anti-colonial terrorism at the national level of the politics of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe. Zimbabwe women participated in the liberation struggle, but had little role in decisions of such magnitude. Less clear-cut was whether Libya was really responsible for the bombing of the Pan-American flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in 1988.

The fact that one Libyan (male) has been convicted by a Scottish court has still left many doubts about the nature of the evidence. But if Libya was indeed responsible for the bomb which destroyed Pan-American flight 103, it was North African participation in terrorism at the international level. While Libyan women have served in the security forces, they have not shared ultimate military authority.If women are potentially a force for peace, no long-term strategy of either counter-terrorism or counter-militarism will succeed without paying greater attention to the sexual sociology of war. In the final analysis, a war on terrorism must include a campaign for the empowerment of women.

[Monty Cantsin]

The basic argument was that women are more inclined towards peace and that military commend structures which have equal proportions of man and women would be more peaceful.

One, its nots not the military commend structure that decides to go to war, it’s the civil government that mobilises the army for war not the other way around.

Two, Women do not have an inherent moral superiority over men. Nor do they have less moral fibre as some religious orthodoxy put forward.

But the idea that women should have equal representation within the military is fair enough.

[TC]

I think this thread is stupid and sexist for two reasons and just plain stupid for a third:

First its stupid because participation an equal basis in all areas including the military is an assumed among socialists, there is no need for discussion about it. Women fought in equal roles in the Soviet Red Army and Chinese People's Liberation Army against the imperialists and fascists eighty years ago. This is not some new trend. Every Communist force currently at war today, the FARC, ELN, Shining Path, Nepali People's Liberation Army, Indian People's Liberaiton Army, People's Mujahideen, New People's Army, all have nearly 50/50 gender balance between male and female soldiers.

Secondly its sexist because your bizzar assumption that women are somehow more "peaceful" and "less warlike" then men. Its the same sexist assumption that women are somehow naturally nurturing, materal, and passive that misogynists have used to justify excluding women from percisely the types of roles you're advocating. Moreover its just not true.

Lastly thinking having more women in military command would have any effect positive or negative in the frequency that people go to war is further stupid because deciding whether or not to go to war is always a matter for the civilian government leadership rather than the military leadership, the military leadership simply acts on decisions that their civilian leaders make in every government but juntas.



Now, because your examples are so not helpful to your point i'll comment on a few of them:

A second factor which came to increase the role of women in the military in the 20th Century was the women’s liberation movement worldwide. Both governments and the armed forces were under pressure for at least ‘token’ participation of women in military matters.

There is nothing "token" about the participation of women in revolutionary armies. Women fought for the Soviet Union, China, Korea, and Vietnam against all male imperialists and fascist enemies, it had nothing to do with pressure for 'token' participation but with the social reality of gender equality in the socialist world.

It is not sociologically an accident that women are underrepresented in hard-core prisons for crimes of violence everywhere in the world, as well as being underrepresented within the armed forces of almost all societies.

Women are under represented among violent criminal populations because violent criminals come from the same macho culture as western US militaries and police so women in the same socio-economic positions are more likely to turn to non-violent crime. As i mentioned women are nearly proportionally represented in the armed forces of socialist societies.

Women as a force for peace would only succeed if their participation in warfare went beyond obeying the orders of male generals and male field marshals. That is why the truly significant enlistment of women in the armed forces of the United States and Israel has not prevented those two countries from becoming the most internationally aggressive for the last 50 years.

Really, thats why? The most disgusting atrocities commited by US forces in Iraq, the abduction, imprisonment, torture, rape and murder of countless innocent Iraqis at Abu Ghraib was done under the command of a female general, Janis Karpinski.

And theres never been a significant percentage of women in the US armed forces, less than 15% of american military personal are women, and neither Israel nor the United States use female combat troops. The closest thing to a female soldier in the United States military are female military police...whose job is, apparently, basically to torture prisoners.

The American and Israeli armed forces have a higher proportion of women than most other armies in the world.

America has a lower proportion f women in its armed forces, its less than 15%, and no combat troops.

Yet, the US and Israel have militarily violated the territorial sovereignty of other countries more often than have any other countries, with the possible exception of apartheid South Africa in the 1970s and 1980s.

Yah and Israeli state-terror and disregard for the territorial soverigty of other countries was at its height under the administration of war criminal Golda Meir. She ordered Mossad terrorists to murder Palestinians and muslims across Europe in revenge for the attacks at the Munich olympic games and fought an offensive war against Egypt and Syria for her entire term in office.

In November 2002 in my hometown of Mombasa kenya, an Israeli hotel, the Paradise, was bombed by suicide bombers. The bombers were definitely men. On the same day in Mombasa, an attempt was made to shoot down an Israeli tourist plane. This one failed. Again the presumption was that the shooters from the ground were men, but this presumption was based on probability rather than certainty.

I don't know what relevence two incidents have. There have been a lot of female suicide bombers in Palestine, some of the most famous American, European and Arab "terrorists" have been women, maybe even more then men if you only consider the communist "terrorists."

There may be more and more women sacrificing themselves in Third World Liberation movements these days, but the chain of command is still heavily masculine.

I don't get why you'd make such an assumption.

What third world liberaiton movements are you thinking of exactly? The FARC and Nepali Maoists and Naxalites have a large proportion of women in every section of their command structure (Omaira Rojas Cabrera of the FARC for instance), even Hamas's 3rd ranked MP is a woman (Miriam Farhat). The highest ranked commander of the Iranian People's Mujahdeen (Maryam Rajavi) is female.

The sub-Saharan precedent was the shooting down of a civilian government airliner by Zimbabwe liberation forces in 1978, in which about 50 people died. Among those who survived on the ground, Joshua Nkomo’s forces killed several of them. Newsweek carried a photograph of Joshua Nkomo and Robert Mugabe raising their glasses. The caption of the photograph was "We shot it down". It was not clear whether the photograph was not an old one dug up by Newsweek and taken long before the shooting down of the plane.

But there is no doubt that Joshua Nkomo accepted "credit" for shooting down the plane, and he caused an uproar when he chuckled over the incident in a BBC interview. This was all part of anti-colonial terrorism at the national level of the politics of Rhodesia/Zimbabwe.

I so don't get how this possibly even remotely relates to your topic.

[Cult of Reason]

There will be no commanders in the People's Militia. :P

[Gura]

Women are not inherently mroe peaceful than men are. If they were, than governments run by women (or in which women have powerful positions) would harldy ever engage in wars or in violent actions. Condoleeza Rice is a woman, and yet as National Security Advisor and Secretary of State the government of which she is a part has engaged in two wars and is preparing to engage in another.

Margaret Thatcher? Madame Nhu? Madeleine Albright?

Surely these women had comparable power to anyone in the military, and yet their presence as women in positions of power did not make their countries more peaceful.

[RedAnarchist]

What is in your trousers does not affect how you act.

[Enragé]

since were talking about bullshit here

dont make women leaders
once a month
they nuke everything

(its a joke ok )

[C_Rasmussen]

Originally posted by NewKindOfSoldier@Apr 25 2006, 02:28 PM
since were talking about bullshit here

dont make women leaders
once a month
they nuke everything

(its a joke ok )

You&#39;ll probably get a lot of heat for that even if it is a joke because some people around here take the internet way too seriously <_<. Anyway though I&#39;d have to xphile2868 that gender shouldn&#39;t really matter.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by NewKindOfSoldier@Apr 26 2006, 06:28 AM
since were talking about bullshit here

dont make women leaders
once a month
they nuke everything

(its a joke ok )

What&#39;s the point of making a joke that isn&#39;t funny?

[VermontLeft]

this thread is just bullshit;.

Women aren&#39;t "better" than men and men aren&#39;t "better" than women.

The only reason that there have been more in wars than women is that patriarchal societies tend to oppose women getting to much power and so dont want them to be armed and trained.

its not about some "natural femal eartth spirit goddess" bullshit. :angry:

im so fucking sick of female stereotypes no matter how theyre presented. women are not more "delicate" or more "peaceful" and we dont fucking need men to fight for us.

i can only assume that the original poster wasa man &#39;cause he complete misunderstood what women are actually like.

(not there arent some stupid women out there though... )

[mzalen-do]

now thats one angry woman...though disrespectful:im used to that shit

[Reuben]

&#39;Women as a force for peace would only succeed if their participation in warfare went beyond obeying the orders of male generals and male field marshals. That is why the truly significant enlistment of women in the armed forces of the United States and Israel has not prevented those two countries from becoming the most internationally aggressive for the last 50 years.&#39;

This argument is bollocks: i take it you haven&#39;theard of golda meir the Israeli president who declaed that there was no palestinian problem because there were no palestinians&#33;

[Monty Cantsin]

Originally posted by mzalen&#045;do@Apr 26 2006, 11:13 AM
now thats one angry woman...though disrespectful:im used to that shit

Who wrote the article? you or do you have a link?

[RedAnarchist]

The nickname may make you think she was delicate, but i know one woman who certainly wasn&#39;t docile and pacifist -

La Pasionaria