I have always believed that it's morally evil to knowingly place a woman in harm's way, and that it's evil at a level so basic that only people who've been brainwashed can't see it.

Go ahead, call me a sexist.

I think women can make the decisions about putting themselves in harms way. Ask the women of Israel.

This might seem incredibly bizarre, but the thought that occurred to me while reading Mitch's post was this: Maybe the gazillions of images of Ms. England acting just as depraved as a male soldier would counteract the normal revulsion many would feel at the news of a woman officer (God forbid, please) abducted and slain. Women are soldiers, capable of all the (vast majority) good and (tiny minority) bad of male soldiers. They have chosen to be there, to fight and maybe die for their country.

If this should ever happen my hope is that the country 1) would view the soldier as a true hero, and 2) see the depravity of the enemy in sharper focus and relief.

But probably not. People never seem to catch on the the enemy's transparent attempts to prey on our basic goodness and turn it into a weakness.

You know how many women the Israelis have in combat units today?

Answer: O.

Lars beat me to it; the Israelis withdrew women from combat and combat-support (engineers, combat MP, antiaicraft and so on) roles after, IIRC, the '67 war, for exactly this sort of reason.

Actually it turns out my information was out of date. The Israelis stopped putting women in combat in 1950, but started again in 2000. The policy remains controversial, however, and it does appear the Palestinians are purposely targeting the female soldiers.

The reason the Israelis barred women in 1950, by the way, was because their presence was terrible for morale. Male soldiers tended to protect them rather than concentrate on the enemy. Perhaps we've moved beyond that today, and men no longer feel any obligation to protect women. Now that's what I call progress. (snort)

Hm - that sounds wierd.

I distinctly remember seeing photos of female Israeli soldiers riding in a half-track during the Six Day War. While it doesn't mean they were serving in "combat" roles per se (Infantry, Armor, Artillery or Reconaissance), it does mean that they were in a role every bit as exposed as most female American soldiers today.

I need to look into this.

Wasn't it Patricia Ireland who said, "Maybe when we start seeing women coming back in body bags, we'll wonder why it's okay for men to come back in body bags?"

If our moral imperative in Gulf War II: The Vengeance hangs by such a slim thread (and of course, I would argue it hangs by no thread whatsoever), doesn't that say something about whether this war is proper?

I mis-read the title of this post as "Chick in the Armor" - and then realized, as I read the actual post, how a propos that was!

I guess my feeling is is that women should be allowed to fight but only if they measure up in all the physical tests to the men. Otherwise, it's dangerous for everybody.

Jeff: "Wasn't it Patricia Ireland who said, "Maybe when we start seeing women coming back in body bags, we'll wonder why it's okay for men to come back in body bags?""

Pat Ireland has zero moral imperative on any issue. Period. Patricia Ireland has sided with the greatest victimizers of women in the history of this planet. Like so many Identity Feminists (as opposed to Equity Feminists, one of which I consider myself), she'll sell her "principles" for whomever offers the most political swag. Her comments are of no value.

"If our moral imperative in Gulf War II: The Vengeance hangs by such a slim thread (and of course, I would argue it hangs by no thread whatsoever), doesn't that say something about whether this war is proper? "

Leave aside the fact that you, like most lefty bloggers, are completely wrong about the war, Jeff; the actions (and potential actions) of terrorists *reinforce*, rather than diminish, our moral imperative. This war hangs by a six-inch manila cable; it's only the left's myopia that makes it seem thin.

Red: I agree, and am looking forward to my pal and regular commenter Fingers' input on this (without giving away too much, he has tons of background in the area). As an interesting aside, the special forces of the South Korean army and Polish navy both use women operators, mainly for surveillance and intelligence-gathering. These women must be simply amazing (note to all: feel free to distribute my phone number).

(And I had the same "Chick in the Armor" moment after the fact, too... :-)

Sorry if my comments about Israeli women in the military are out of date or inaccurate. I know from limited reading that they have served bravely and with distinction at certain critical times. As for the larger issue of women in combat, the ulimate decision should be made solely on fielding the most effective fighting force, and I don't know that answer to that.
My larger point is that I'm tired of the enemy saying (in the press, by their actions, or through gathered intelligence), "Hey, we're going to do this really depraved thing because we think you are weak and will lose the will to fight, just like Somalia," and then they do it, and then a large chunk of the U.S. populace wants to act exactly how the enemy expects we will.
When are people going to understand 1) the stakes of what we are fighting for, and 2) that the only enemy that can beat us is our own weakness?

I have to agree with Red on this one. So long as they meet the same requirements (and I'll stipulate "so long as the requirements aren't changed for the purpose of enabling more women to qualify") and can do the job, I think that they should be able to serve in whatever capacity they are most qualified for. I’ll grant that there are some cultural issues such as men worrying about protecting women but IMNHO that’s a training issue and not grounds for disqualifying someone who might be the best candidate for the job.

One can either fight well or not fight well, and it is the responsibility of the professional to maintain that professionalism under all conditions. The fact of the matter is that there are some combat missions that can be executed by some women (one may wish to re-examine the account of the A-10 pilot during the drive on Baghdad) , and we don't have the luxury of wasting talent.