Now for something a little different: Women in Combat.
The US House just dropped a bill that would have restricted women's roles in a combat zone. Right now, women can do most jobs in the Army except for front line combat jobs like infantry, armor, artillery and special forces. Women can do all the "combat support" jobs like MPs, engineers, logistics and so on. The thing is, that in Iraq those jobs are in the combat zone too, and 35 women have died in Iraq. Duncan Hunter (R-Stone Age) thought that this would not do, but got shot down by, amongst other people, the Joint Chiefs. The Army is already facing a personnel shortage, dropping women from key roles didn't go over well.
Personally, I think that women should serve in all roles. Yes, men are stronger than women for the most part, but even most combat jobs like driving a tank or pointing an artillery piece don't deal with strength. And for the jobs that deal with strength, sorry a lot of women can't cut it. But some could.
Take special forces for example. Most women would not have a chance of making the cut for SF. Most men can't make it. But I bet you anything that some women could. And those women would be something. I think we could find a use for a few deadly women in this whole shadowy war on terror thing, eh?