Dubya to kill Clinton proposals to put women in battle zones

National Journal's 'Hotline AM Scoop' via Washington Whispers ^ | October 22, 2001 | Paul Bedard

[umbra]

'Wahsington Whispers' reports, the Bush Administration "is reconsidering-and will most likely kill-Clinton-era proposals to put women into battle zones."

U.S. News and World Report

[umbra]

The adults are officially back in charge..

[Penny1]

Yessss!

Thank you, Lord, for our President!

-penny

[concerned about politics]

Why? Isn't this what the liberated females want?
Let them go. Otherwise, it's discrimination based on gender.

[kassie]

I wonder if clinton had hillary on his mind...

[lavaroise]

'Wahsington Whispers' reports, the Bush Administration "is reconsidering-and will most likely kill-Clinton-era proposals to put women into battle zones."

Clinton is a pig and has no regard for the importance of keeping women in the back for the important maintenance of civilian and balance of power structures in times of war. Women are detrimental to keep the nation free when wars rage in the front, but Clinton and his ilk would rather avoid that, by gutting women and by turning men into cheer leaders.

Worse, the enactment of an era of orphaned children by government policies would be a dream come true for the brainwahsing wishing leftist crowd. Destroy the family and the king shall rule.

[GTYSBERG]

It would probably br o.k.if Monica would supply hands on training!

[umbra]

Not in this administration they wont.

The era of O' Bubba Been Laiden cramming this stuff down the military's throat is over.

[goodnesswins]

Well....there are a few women I wouldn't mind sending into Taliban territory.....BUT, YES...the adults are in charge again. WOOHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

[JJ59]

Good. Why should we be burdened by tales of captured female soldiers? Of raped and tortured female soldiers.

[lideric]

Why? Isn't this what the liberated females want?

Absolutely! After all hasn't Xena the Warrior princess and G.I. Jane flicks proven beyond a shadow of a doubt what great warriors our women are? (Whoops,I forgot to be politically correct again).

[paulsy]

"Why? Isn't this what the liberated females want?"

if it is, then for once i agree with the liberal (and traditional, radical and post-punk riot grrrl) feminists.

"Let them go. Otherwise, it's discrimination based on gender.

against what? getting killed equally? no, don't let them go. they probably would slow and endanger the mission. i say this for a number of sexist reasons i will not go into because it's uncessessary to go into it.

wars are to be won, not serve as examples of non-discriminatory utopia.

[skeeter]

I wonder if this includes service on warships, as areas they operate in during hostilities are considered battle zones, as well.

[concerned about politics]

Not in this administration they wont.

Look, we've had to swallow this liberation crap for years. Why should men alone die?
Those females made their own decision to join the military, and have been paid the same, treated the same.
It's what they've always wanted.
Now, why protect them from themselves?
No, I say send them in.
When it's time to "pay up", it becomes a different story!
The liberals are now complaining about baby killing, yet scream at any attempt to save the lives of American babies from the abortion clinics!
No, they need to be held accountable for their decisions, just like the men. They want equality, give it to them, and everything that goes with it!

[CharacterCounts]

My daugter serves in the Air Force as an air traffic controller. She would agree whoeheartedly that she would be a hinderance to a combat operation.

[Xenalyte]

G.I. Jane was misnamed - Demi wasn't in the Army in that movie. And were I you, I'd watch my back around excitable right-wing warrior princesses - our weapons are sharp and our tempers are short! :)

[USNA74]

Captured and raped female soldiers -- as I recall, we had some female aviators captured and raped in Desert Storm. Someone I'm sure can find an authoritative link on this.

I agree, it's tough enough for a male to focus on the enemy in a wartime environment, without having to also have a natural concern for an injured or otherwise incapacitated woman in the battle area.

[angkor]

Now that its clear our military is for killing and not for social experimentation, most Clinton Kiddie Hour action games will be thrown in the wastebasket.

[umbra]

It is said that the reason women aren't allowed in combat is that they are too brutal and vengeful when faced with portecting their country, families and fellow soldiers.

Beware of all our Repulican Warrior Princesses if the enemy tries to attack our support and supply lines. (Now Rintense will still talk to me!)

[PhiKapMom]

I can't speak for the entire Navy, but my daughter who went in Navy in April and is graduating from an "A" school in FL the middle of November is being assigned to shore duty as an instructor. When I talked to her last night she said that women graduating from all the "A" schools are NOT getting sent to the carriers, but are getting assignments with the large airframe planes stateside or overseas. All the guys are being assigned to fighters and are going to the carriers.

Small sampling but the Master Chief said that this is a first where all women graduating in the next month are getting shore duty and the men are headed for the carriers! May be seeing the beginning of an end of the clinton doctrine for the military and it can't come too soon for me!

[oldtimer]

Let them go? How bout we let the military set up a brigade of bull dykes.

Oh would they bad a@@sd!