[A Navy Vet]

"Never before has any society sent its WOMEN into combat without dire circumstances demanding it."

Sorry, but there HAVE been societies/nations who sent their women into ground combat. The most recent being Israel. They stopped because their women weren't efficient ground combat troops.

[Black Agnes]

I would call any war Israel (modern) has fought in ‘dire circumstances’. They’re outnumbered massively.

But, since their cultural and military goal was to PRESERVE Israel as a going concern, when the women in military thing didn’t work out they stopped it before it did irreparable harm to their ability to sustain that culture.

I don’t see that sort of intelligence or protective instinct coming from our government anytime soon...

[PapaBear3625]

Sorry, but there HAVE been societies/nations who sent their women into ground combat. The most recent being Israel. They stopped because their women weren't efficient ground combat troops.

It wasn't so much about the women being inefficient, as much as the problems with the men when women were involved. Men would tend to go save the women, even when it jeopardized the mission. Men would get upset when women were killed, and commit atrocities in response. Plus arabs would fight twice as hard rather than run away from women. So the women had to go.

Women DO have a role in the Israeli military, but it has more to do with being around to protect the children in case the bad guys get past the men, and to function in support and training slots, so as to free up men for combat.