Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: birdsman
I'm STILL against it. Because of the situations it brings up (a la, rape), and because of the lessening of requirements to pacify the feminists. But whether I'm for or agin' it, the policy is there.

And it's not like she's in the Rangers or something that would require physical 'grade inflation.'

All that being said, consider: here's a maintenance gal. She's not a frontline combat person, but she did the deed. Picked up her rifle and went down fighting.

Good for her. Well done! She deserves at least two medals that I can think of, and all the accolades we can shower upon her. She DIDN'T GIVE UP. She went down fighting.

And I hope there's some penalty for being shot by a woman in 'the religion of peace.' Maybe the virgins are male, or something.
39 posted on 04/03/2003 4:44:16 AM PST by Mr. Thorne (Inter armes, silent leges)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies ]


To: Mr. Thorne
I'm STILL against it. Because of the situations it brings up (a la, rape)

Just out of curiousity: do you think men should be banned from combat because of the potential for them to be raped if they are captured?

It's one of the things they don't tell you about unless you're in a SERE class.

47 posted on 04/03/2003 5:58:13 AM PST by Poohbah (Crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson