Considering that one of the "lessons" of the now-concluded war in Iraq was that U.S. ground forces could be smaller and still get the job done, we could see more instances of this in the future. The smaller the forces, the more likely they could find themselves cut off or surrounded. A fully combat-capable force could fight itself free, where a force partially composed of soldiers under-qualified for combat operations could face disaster.
You are assuming that the next fight that the US gets in will have "safe" areas where female radar operators, etc., could be deployed. As Jessica Lynch's story shows, there wasn't even such a place in this pissant war. What makes you think that the next one won't have even more dangers for the "tail" of the column?
Only a fool prepares for the best case scenario...
Well this forum is overrun with new age PC "fools". I'm glad there are still a few of us around with some common sense.
The mood here is that thousands of years of practical history was all really just a ploy to keep womyn down....and has no basis in clear reasoning both from a strategic, tactical and cultural perspective.