In response to:

Women in Combat

45caliber Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 1:20 PM
The problem is that the libs are so focused on satisfying demands from some of their minority supporters that they don't even bother to look at such data. They don't care if the women are killed or mistreated as long as they can satisfy their voters. The gays and the femnists consider the military as a large sex club rather than a ... well ... military. They deliberately block out what these soldiers (men and women) are supposed to be doing and instead concentrate on the fact that they seldom are in combat even when in the enemy field. As we used to say, combat is 99% boredom and 1% sheer terror. The libs concentrate on the 99% and ignore the rest. And with this change we are going to get a lot of women killed if we aren't careful.
3129 Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 2:04 PM
It will also get a lot of good men killed. The presence of women on a battlefield creates a distraction that keeps the soldiers from concentrating on their job of killing the enemy. Viva la revolucion.
Texas Chris Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 2:36 PM
Maybe that's what it'll take to wake a few people up. Daughters, sisters, and mothers coming home in body bags right along side sons, brothers, and dads.

A senior Defense Department official said the ban on women in combat should be lifted because the military's goal is "to provide a level, gender-neutral playing field." I'd like to think the goal of the military should be to have the toughest, meanest fighting force possible. But let's look at "gender-neutral playing field."

The Army's physical fitness test in basic training is a three-event physical performance test used to assess endurance. The minimum requirement for 17- to 21-year-old males is 35 pushups, 47 situps and a two-mile run in 16 minutes, 36 seconds or less. For females of the same age,...