.

Wow... aren't we just a happy buncha librul.

None of the above.

I said NO, but I don't think I meant it. Just none of the topics fit.

Women should be allowed in combat. If women are going to serve in combat alongside men, then their PFT standards should be the same. As of now, they are not.

Women already serve combat roles. We have been warring in muslim countries for over 10 years now. For much of that time we have been trying to respect their culture. In their culture, strange men cannot talk to or touch their women. So, there are female troops trained to do this, in combat areas. i think that qualifies as combat. But, they are their own unit.

Maybe women getting killed on the front lines will fuel the outrage than men getting killed on the front lines did not provide? Maybe the public will then demand that wars be justified and necessary? One can hope.

Each person should do the job for which they are best suited regardless of gender or anything else.
And that doesn't apply to the military only.

If women want to go into a combat position, let them. We are long past the time when women should be banned from doing any job they want and are able to do. I always give a thumbs up to any female heavy equipment operators I see when passing by construction. There was a time when you only saw women holding the "Slow" or "Stop" signs on road sites.

Gather a few menopausal women to form a unit and they'd take out the entire enemy camp in the blink of an eye. (j/k, j/k)

That's exactly what I was thinking.

Won't happen.
Too much money is being made from the killing.

Maybe women getting killed on the front lines will fuel the outrage than men getting killed on the front lines did not provide? Maybe the public will then demand that wars be justified and necessary? One can hope.

Not likely. A President without a war is like a fish without a bicycle. They've all got to have their wars.