[Bill Russell]

(An upfront "THANK YOU!" to SnoringBear for the NFL analogy I have used in this post.)

[yldstrk]

It’s already “lifted”

[centurion316]

The public pronouncements surrounding this action are pure nonsense. It will be interesting to see if the legal arguments are along the same lines. If so, it will be a hard case to make even given the encouragement and support that they will get from the Justice Department.

Three of the four young women are Reservists. I’d like to hear the legal discussion of exactly what a “career” in the Reserve Components is and why inability to serve in excluded occupational specialties causes great harm to that “career”. As the article points out, women are serving in combat today and not just incidentally. Their mission is different from the mission of all male units, but they are receiving credit for combat experience and they are expected to perform a combat role appropriate to the capabilities of their unit. If they were asked to hump a 90+ pound rucksack up a mountainside at 10,000 feet, most would fail, and would pay a price in the career sweepstakes. The real failure, however, would be on the part of the nation who allowed them to be put in that situation to begin with.

It was once said that you can find no atheists in foxholes. I’d say that still applies to the ACLU.

[Bloody Sam Roberts]

This would be a great mistake.

But why? I don't understand? A woman with a gun can defeat even the most intractable enemy.

And a woman without a gun can whoop even the most highly trained male combat veteran...even in a stand up fight.

The movies tell me so. It must be true.

[MasterGunner01]

I'd be very interested to know who, exactly, are these four females demanding infantry slots. My guess is they are officers who think an infantry posting is a great way to fast track a career to generals’ stars. [Earth to female wannabees: ground combat respects neither rank nor gender and is an equal opportunity killer. You don't have much of a career if you are dead or disabled.]

I don't think there are many enlisted women banging on doors to get infantry ground combat postings. Why is that? Are the enlisted smarter than the officers or are they less power hungry?

[The Great RJ]

I have mixed feeling about lifting the ban. Women I think can serve in some combat roles like being fighter pilots or flying helicopter gun ships and certainly in combat support. Fighting in the infantry is another issue as I agree that women do not have the physical strength to do what must be done. I see this in civilian occupations too women might make great ambulance medics, but when they have to haul 100 pounds of hose up several flights of stairs to fight a fire they physically aren't up to the job.

There is another side to putting women into combat. We have already seen when women soldiers are captured, especially in the Middle East where women are considered inferior, they quickly become victims of rape and sadistic sexual attack. There is also the sexual side of putting men and women together in combat conditions. Unless all the other men they serve with are gay, sexual dalliances are inevitable as well as rivalries and jealousies. I don't see this as a good thing in combat.

[Sergio]

And let us not forget that to men, every tree is their urinal. The gentler sex...not so much.