It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by friday2112
I say as long as they can pass the physical test that the men do and go through the same training as the men do, let them be on the front lines. There are many women who are qualifed to be grunts and any other mos in the military. Like some of the other posters said they can take more pain than men can. They are also more intuitive than men which could be quite an advantage in combat. I would have no problem with a woman fighting along side of me. Hey face it women can kick ass if they so chose to. The mother instinct kicks in watch out.
Originally posted by Rouge_Warrior
I would have thought that the main reason women were kept back from battle is because they were/are the main method of reproduction and in previous wars which were very bloody (as opposed to Iraq where not really that many soldiers have died) and lots of men died. If all or most of your women are killed then you have little chance of survival, however communities can sustain a heavier loss of men.
Originally posted by mwm1331
Actuall its not think of it this way, If you have one man and four women you have the potential for four pregnanacies, however one women and four men and you have the potential for only one pregnancy.