In response to:

Women in Combat

mgoodell Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 2:38 PM
It was back in the Clinton administration that this issue last raised its ugly head, though Clinton--for all his wretchedness he did actually love his country--didn't pursue the matter. I remember reading the words of one of the feminist advocates of women in combat who maintained that putting women in harm's way might actually "help change the warrior cutlure" then extant in the military. I remember thinking at the time that the one thing I wanted from my military was a warrior culture. Clearly the fellow currently Occupying the White House has different expectations for our soldiers.
traitorbill Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 2:59 PM
Feminist will tell you how uncivilized and barbaric men are in one breath, and then tell you that women can be a soldier equal to a man. They like having their cake and eating it to. I was in the Army, and, at the risk of sounding sexists, I gotta say that women cannot hang with men. The Army shouldn't be used for liberal experiments, but to win wars.
jlucas Wrote: Feb 06, 2013 3:41 PM
I was in back in the 90s. When we were in groups that included women, the men were told to watch what they say in order not to offend any of the women that might be in the group.

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,...