The American Spectator

Reader Mail

(Page 3 of 14)

p>We need to face the fact that in modern war there are no non-combat zones for any solider. The women serving in uniform today have shown both courage and dedication; let's acknowledge their sacrifice and the fact that it is their choice. But Rep. Hunter's proposal is not the way to do it. br> -- John McGinnis br> Arlington, Texas /p>

No. George Bush doesn't care about the issue of women in combat. But what were you expecting? He spoke many times of the political capital he earned in the election, and that he intended to use it. On Social Security reform?

p>He hasn't spent one dime of that capital supporting the pro-life movement. Why in the world would he spend any of it to oppose the feminization of our combat units? br> -- unsigned /p>

See this page for follow up.

p>The reality is, I think, that women are self-selecting their way out of the military. Although enlistment rates for women rose dramatically through the '90s, abruptly after 2001, they have begun to drop. There is a lag, due to enlistment contracts holding people in, but I predict this next year, there will be a bigger drop in women in the military, especially the Army and Marines. It would be interesting to see how much the current problem with meeting enlistment quotas is due to failure by women to enlist. br> -- Eddie /p>

topics:
Education, Health Care, Mainstream Media, Business, Social Security, Islam, Abortion, Environment, Global Warming, Books, Law, Military, Iraq, Iran, Fascism, Oil