On Sat, 10 Mar 2007, Stefan Wolfe wrote:


"Rudy Canoza" wrote in message
thlink.net...

....snip...


Excellent post. I will add (you may not agree) that women do no belong in
combat, especially in places like Iraq with the exception of those
performing nursing duties; USO work would be appropriate. If they ever do
institute a draft, including women would be carrying PC way too far
(therefore, it is likely they would call women to serve).

I wonder how many women served in Ceasar's armies, or for Hannibal or the
Visigoths?


Every army in the days of Ceasar and Hannibal was accompanied by many
women. The higher ranking officers would bring their wives in many cases.
But even the rank and file often had women along. The historians did not
make a big thing of it because women were not thought to be important.
Women marched the same routes, suffered the same hunger and thirst, risked
death (or worse) at the hands of the enemy.

Did the women fight in the front lines? Sometimes but rarely. Those who
fought were more likely to be archers or slingers and fought "informally."

Are women physically and mentally equipped to be soldiers in combat? No
they are not. But then neither are men. No one is physically or mentally
equipped for combat.

Larry Mason