Replies

They've been flyin' fighter planes for years now, and actually their relatively smaller frames and particulars in women's physiology make them fairly ideal for the job.

Or just the USAF's version of Affirmative Action..

JHoffa, I know from experience that you have issues, your tired tag line indicates that clearly.

I am not licensed to fix you.

Unless you are a pilot, which I am (civillian) then don't tell me you know more than me about fitting into a little cockpit or flight physiology!

Women are not a strong as a man. But flying is not a muscle-dependent role. An F-16 is a great equalizer.

Don't waste your time. Being conservative on this forum these days means to many(most posting today) that we should applaud having women in combat.

If like me you oppose that for a myriad of reasons, then you are a neanderthal...or G-d forbid the new smear word...Paleo.

Women in combat is an indulgence....as one astute FReeper pointed out on another thread. An indulgence we can afford in a high tech overwhelming firepower superiority war like this one.

The culture warriors on this forum like myself are diminishing as a percentage. I fear it's simply the evolution of "conservatism" becoming more popular to those who have found they can't stomach the excesses of the left anymore or they are simply young conservatives more or less. They bring their PC indoctrination of the past 30 years with them. It's diluting but it's still better than if they hadn't seen the light at all.