"...But how different it would be to see present and former female combat soldiers, knowledgeable and strong professionals, face off against professors who are in the ivory towers of their castle keeps not because they were kept there, but because they don't want to come down."

There are instances in the 20th Century (guaranteed, there will be more in this one) when women have engaged in armed combat out of desperate necessity. There are also other nations whose national policy made it equally incumbent on men and women to enlist for combat duty - at least one of those has seen its women, as well as its men, rise to fulfill their roles in the national defense many times.

Unfortunately for what will doubtless become the tenor of this potential debate, all of them were, or still are, "small-s" socialist. Example of the first instance include every country east of Germany that was invaded by the Nazis, plus Vietnam. The post-WWII histories of 'Sovietized' Eastern Europe ensured their inclusion in the second category, but the most fitting example is, of course, Israel. Regardless of the kind of government they served, those women were drawn to service by a patriotism for land and people no less fervent than the men they served next to.

All this is to suggest that inclusion of women in combat, as well as integration into armed force generally, is not a new thing - despite its frequent insistence otherwise, America does not exist in a vacuum.

Finally, and much closer to home - women police officers, fire fighters and EMTs quite often are called upon to perform under conditions much like combat. A long look should be taken at their experiences and the changes wrought by their inclusion, both in the armed forces themselves and in attitudes toward them.

E'