Com­bat risks for women

Los Angeles Times - - OPINION -

Re “Women re­cruits risk more,” Opin­ion, July 25

The ar­ti­cle on the re­la­tion­ship of women in our armed forces and the train­ing re­quired pre­sented a grim view.

Dur­ing WWII, the Soviet army was a mix­ture of men and women as they bat­tled the Nazis. The Is­raeli army is a mix­ture of men and women in all branches and ranks. They have been suc­cess­ful in quash­ing at­tacks against their na­tion.

Var­i­ous youth sports are a com­bi­na­tion of our two sexes. Young girls are treated as equals and are ex­pected to con­trib­ute just like boys.

When charg­ing the en­emy, does it re­ally mat­ter what sex is fir­ing the weapons?

When it all boils down, women are just as ef­fi­cient in killing the en­emy as men are. Bill Ber­múdez Whit­tier

Writ­ers Julie Pul­ley and Hugh P. Scott do an ad­mirable job of de­tail­ing the chal­lenges for the fe­male close-com­bat sol­dier.

What they fail to ad­dress is the cu­mu­la­tive haz­ard fe­male sol­diers present to their com­bat units.

Brave fe­male sol­diers have proven their met­tle as he­li­copter and fighter pi­lots. The ca­pac­ity of high tech­nol­ogy to over­come mere phys­i­cal dif­fer­ences be­tween male and fe­male mil­i­tary is un­de­ni­able.

A prin­ci­pled woman would de­cline in­fantry, ar­mored or ar­tillery duty in fa­vor of tech­nol­ogy-heavy ser­vice that is every bit as im­por­tant (and dan­ger­ous) to sup­port­ing close com­bat troops. David Pohlod Oak Park

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.