After all who the heck do people think built the WW2 war machine well the men where off fighting the Japanese and Germans. Yep it was mostly women in the mens jobs. "Rosie the Riveter" comes to mind. ;-}

Agree with the Draft also.

You don't have to shout Jerry' ;-}

You are aware that women have been in Combat in many Countries for over a century? Also what is the difference if they are in a forward position delivering suppies, doing communications, or any other logistical support.

If the enemy is close or over runs a position, what is the difference. As long as the position that the woman is assinged to has qualified for the position with no special exemption, i.e. physical qualifacation, I see no reason to not do this.

Could you explain why they are not suited if what I laid out is met? Just wondering.

Well jack, if they are equal why isnt there any female Boston Bruins, Pats or Celtics? In battle do you want your son's or daughter's life determined by political correctness? Well do ya? How many female 20 somthings are ready to face a 6 foot man, 220 pounds stick a bayonet in her gut, well Jack.

By the way Lee when was the last battle you heard of with bayonetes? The size of a guy matter not to a piece of lead or the person firing said lead lol.

Jack, my point is, I know that they are private orgs, but if women were up to it they would be on the team due to their ability to compete with the boys. All combat fighters are issused bayonets and are trained to use them, if a gun jams, or out of ammo there is no other means to protect your self, many guys buy their own bayonetes at the Base Exchanges to get a better weapon. The size does matter in a fair fight the bigger man will usally win. I know this, I was in the military 24 years and am not that big, you can be a good shot like me, qualified M-16/9MM pistol expert, and still need the physical ability. Good example, Bruin Thronton vs Sabre John Scott.

Lee@; In the age of modern weapons for our military anyway, there is a far greater over whelming force in the hands of our miltary.

I hate to keep saying it, but again as long as they qualify under the same rules that apply to every soldier, I see no problem. I will grant that the selection of those who can do it are probably very small. However they should not be denied that right, if they qualify. I also understand the problem of male soldiers who may make a mistake because of generations of upbringing in the way women are looked at so to speak and may take a risk to save a women that in the case of a man would be foolish to try.

I am a vet also as are most of my family including My 90 year old mother. She sees no problem with it either, being Russian. As I said many modern armies use women in combat roles and the evolution of an all volenteer service was inevidably going to go this way.

The clincher in this also is the end of don't ask don't tell also, though many will not admit that, but it is out there. So I see no difference in this as gays have the same stigma as women do in combat. It matters not who is next to you as you know in a firefight. What matters is the individual has your back.

I still think your bayonet assumption does not matter nor size. By that assumption armed civilian women cannot protect themselves against intruders to their home or on the street. The news is replete with examples that disprove that. Also women in the olympic sports does.

PS; My olympic point is that many of the things they compete in there the average man could not do either as well and require enormous dedication, stamina and physical ability. I also know many women who can shoot the eye out of an eagle. Not to mention the best sooter ever "Annie Oakly" Can't think of a man who could do this back then.

Annie Oakley (August 13, 1860 – November 3, 1926), born Phoebe Ann Moses, was an American sharpshooter and exhibition shooter. Oakley's amazing talent[4] and timely rise to fame led to a starring role in Buffalo Bill's Wild West show, which propelled her to become the first American female superstar.

Oakley's perhaps most famous trick is being able to repeatedly split a playing card, edge-on, and put several more holes in it before it could touch the ground, while using a .22 caliber rifle, at 90 feet. :-}.

One more thing on the sports. There is a reason for weight classes in sports as you well know. But if you have a 6' man with a gun or 5'4" women with the same gun. I fail to see the difference when they are both aiming at the same enemy. Both are just as likely to to be shot reguardless of their physical size. Size and weight have little to do with the weapons of today. Those weapons that do require the same size to handle it whether it is a woman or a man. I.E. a 120lb man and a 120lb woman have the same problem with the recoil of a 50 cal. do they not?

Sorry to go on lol. I do not agree with women on Submarines, do to the needs that arise with women that men are not suceptable too. Won't go into that though lol. But because we are talking about long term missions with a sub it does affect things on a sub. I will concede there are no doubt situations that can arise as they do with any human on the battlefield that can be decrimentle to the moral and accomplishment of the mission, but that cannot be predicted with women there or men.

Interesting conversation this is and am sure it will be a forever one as we both have good points and counter points. But in the end,it is going to happen and time will tell the tale. ;-}