Pentagon to allow women in combat
The United States military is modifying its long-standing ban on women in combat roles.
January 23rd, 2013
03:24 PM ET

Pentagon to allow women in combat

The U.S. military is ending its policy of excluding women from combat, and will open combat jobs and direct combat units to female troops, CNN has learned. Multiple officials confirm to CNN that Defense Secretary Leon Panetta will make the announcement tomorrow, and notify Congress of the planned change in policy.

"We will eliminate the policy of 'no women in units that are tasked with direct combat, a senior defense official says.

But the officials caution that "not every position will open all at once on Thursday."

Once the policy is changed, Department of Defense will enter what is being called an "assessment phase," in which each branch of service will examine all of its jobs and units not currently integrated and then produce a timetable in which it can. The Army and Marine Corps, especially, will be examining physical standards and gender-neutral accommodations within combat units. Every 90 days, the service chiefs will have to report back on how they're doing.

soundoff (38 Responses)
  1. General H. "Rodham" Clinton

    Rapid deployment vaccines work on women, too. Vaccinated male soldiers cannot experience an erection for nearly a month, and have diminished se x drives when called home.
    Female pronlems are no problem for modern vaccines already in use by the military.
    Surely you have a better excuse than that, Rascal Rabble.

    January 23, 2013 at 6:40 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bruce Butler

      Yeah, lets do that Emasculate men to make it easier for women to serve in combat. After all, thats the sort of thing we are fighting for anymore, right?

      January 23, 2013 at 8:55 pm | Report abuse |
  2. Entreupenuer

    New business venture: Field abortion services for combatants who become impregnated.
    I will make millions.
    Help me come-up with a name for my new business. Thank you.

    January 23, 2013 at 6:48 pm | Report abuse |
    • Bruce Butler

      How about 'Battlefield Butchery'? Gives the butchery of war a whole new meaning doesn't it? I mean, since the troops are on the front lines to 'Butcher' the enemy anyway (at least that's how some see it), we might as well throw in a 'two-for-one' service and include babies in the equation. Hey-as long as it makes money, right?

      January 23, 2013 at 9:01 pm | Report abuse |
  3. Battlebort, inc.

    Domestic aborters are on a tight schedule, operating within a 28 week timeline to abort.
    However, overseas troops are not beholding to US civil law or international law, and and so my armored abortion clinic would have a 9 month window. (not counting preemies)

    January 23, 2013 at 6:57 pm | Report abuse |
  4. Halliburton, Abortion Svc. Div.

    Halliburton, a cement contractor, was awarded their bid for food services for troops in the field.
    I need to get my operation off the ground before Halliburton get's wind of it.

    January 23, 2013 at 7:01 pm | Report abuse |
  5. banasy©

    I have never seen a person more preoccupied with other people's lovelives...ever.

    January 23, 2013 at 7:28 pm | Report abuse |
  6. Rascal Rabble

    panetta and obama have lost their minds...

    January 23, 2013 at 7:49 pm | Report abuse |
    • jesse j smith

      im only 13 years old and i agree that they have lost there mind

      January 24, 2013 at 6:04 pm | Report abuse |
  7. Rascal Rabble

    how can a 100lb woman pull a 250lb guy downed by enemy fire and shrapnel to safety...mmmm?

    January 23, 2013 at 7:54 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scottish Mama

      We are strong in the face of danger.

      January 23, 2013 at 7:58 pm | Report abuse |
  8. 1608

    If a 100lb. woman can lift a car she can do most anything. I think R.R. likes to troll.

    January 23, 2013 at 8:05 pm | Report abuse |
  9. Scottish Mama

    We cooked ,cleaned, raised children and riveted, we can shoot a gun.

    January 23, 2013 at 8:08 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rascal Rabble

      a dishelveled house, kids, and ahh nagging hubbie is of no comparison to war...

      January 23, 2013 at 9:43 pm | Report abuse |
    • Scottish Mama

      Hello Rascle long time no see, bud. I was talking about when women took over the jobs in WW1. When Rosie Riveter was on a poster. When we worked on planes and tanks? You know bring home the bacon and fry it in a pan.

      January 24, 2013 at 7:26 pm | Report abuse |
  10. ronvan

    And why not? It is our countries "standards & morals" that have prevented women in combat. And why be hypocrites?
    They ALREADY serve in "forward" combat area's, but it is not talked about.

    January 23, 2013 at 9:22 pm | Report abuse |
    • Rascal Rabble

      itsah sign that men have been feminized and want the women to bare their burden of being a man...a momma's boy: one who views his castration as a perk...

      January 23, 2013 at 9:52 pm | Report abuse |
  11. BOMBO

    Battle droids and clones. That's the way to go.

    Yes. I'm a nerd. I know.

    January 23, 2013 at 9:47 pm | Report abuse |
  12. BOMBO

    Like Yoda I will post comments until further notice I will.

    January 23, 2013 at 9:48 pm | Report abuse |
  13. Brubble

    I think this is fine, however with little or no restrictions on where women can serve. Will women now have to register for the draft, just like their male counter parts? I know we don't have a draft, but all males who turn 18 must register or they are not allowed to have federal grants, hold federal or most state jobs. The other question is, if women do not meet or pass the qualifications for what they were guaranteed in their enlistment contracts. Will and can the military put them in a direct combat position?

    January 23, 2013 at 10:20 pm | Report abuse |
1 2