[PAR35]

Since there doesn't seem to be much discussion on the merits, I'll start with a politically incorrect position:

I'll vote 'no' for women in ground combat or onboard ships. It is almost as harmful to good order and discipline as gays in the military. Female pilots are acceptable, and there are many rear area roles which women can perform.

[Professional Engineer]

I'm undecided on this issue.

On one hand, I don't want to see mothers and daughters put into harm's way. That chivalry thing pops up.

On the other, women have served with distinction since the Revolution and before. Look at the modern IDF, lots of women there. I know that comes from a small populace necessity, but it's real.

I suppose as Bittygirl grows older, my views may solidify one way or another.

[SAMWolf]

I'll vote 'no' for women in ground combat or onboard ships. It is almost as harmful to good order and discipline as gays in the military. Female pilots are acceptable, and there are many rear area roles which women can perform>

That's almost exactly what I told Snippy this morning. ;-)

[snippy_about_it]

I'll give you my two cents worth. I'm a woman and I wouldn't want a women in a foxhole with me and I don't believe they should be with the men either. Our men are good men and I think their genuine concern for the safety of the female troop could interfere with their reaction during battle. Pilots are fine. Navy ships, no way. Training together, no.

Their you have it.

[swmobuffalo]

"It is almost as harmful to good order and discipline as gays in the military. there are many rear area roles which women can perform."

I get so tired of hearing that line. Just how pray tell is it so and by the way did you ever consider that some of us women DON'T want rear area roles? I sure didn't, that's why I didn't enlisted after college years ago. I wasn't raised to sit on the sidelines.