In response to:

Women Serving in Combat Positions Is a Batty Idea

loadstar Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 9:59 AM
They have been raping captured women since well before the Romans raped the Sabine Women...but perhaps women soldiers have a right to be raped while they demonstrate their equal opportunity! By the way, when it comes to equal pay, women < 30 are AHEAD of men and increasingly among young marrieds the woman makes more. Some women later lag behind ONLY BECAUSE they choose to knock off for a few years to do the Mom thing, then return expecting that nobody would notice they were gone (wanting to be back on the level with the males they had started with years before). More women are getting both college and masters degrees. Some things make sense to compete at....others not so much.
Gilchrist Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 11:02 AM
And since before the Biblical days of Sodom, the vanquished males on the battlefield have been sodomized, not in terms of homosexual behavior, but as a show of dominance. What makes you think Arabs have treated captured males any differently than captured females just because of their lack of a vagina?
loadstar Wrote: Jan 27, 2013 10:03 AM
I have 2 daughters with black belts in tae kwon do...but I am not foolish enough to want to see them fighting Islamists hand to hand or parachuting in behind their lines.

Last Thursday Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta and other U.S. military leaders lifted the ban on women serving in combat positions. I, for one, think this is a great idea and have a few modest proposals, if the brass inside the beltway is open to suggestions, on how they should deploy the dames (and whom they should deploy).

First off, if you truly want to eviscerate the enemy—namely Muslims—then I propose sending the most nerve grating and foul women Hollywood has to offer straight into hot zones as our forward armies. I’m a thinkin’ starting off with Roseanne Barr, Joy...