Women in combat?

Hmm, what to think of this.

There is no easy answer to this question right now.

If we are to pull women back from combat then we might help save them from harm's way. But if we pull them back we might push more troops into more-dangerous situations due to a decrease in troop strength.

At a time when our troops are spread so thin with trying to maintain the non-peace in Iraq, how can we consider diminishing troop strength? It's not like the National Guard can make up the entire difference.

With tactics like those being followed by the Iraqi "insurgency", we're already exposing them to horrible injuries and death just because there is no real "field" of battle in a war fought in the streets, so where can the line even be drawn?

With armed forces recruiting numbers coming up short every month, and dishonest tactics being adopted by our military recruiters to try and make up the difference, how can we afford to reduce our battle-ready forces?

But overall, how can we as a society expose women to the potential dangers of battle, or capture and torture? Is it feminist to think it should be up to them? Is it chauvinistic to think they shouldn't be put in that position? Is it a societal trait? Is it a societal positive or negative, if a society is willing to let its women fight and die? If the women are able and willing? What if they are forced via draft?

I can't answer any of these questions. But I know we wouldn't be asking them if W. and his idiot brigade of Chicken Hawks hadn't lied us into Iraq.

mcolley
I'm not liberal, I'm just paying attention