Letter: Don't put Mom on combat frontline
A female Israeli combat soldier of the Caracal light aims her M-16 rifle at a shooting range in Ein Yahav. Credit: Getty/GALI TIBBON
According to columnist Kavitha Rajagopalan , it's "Time for U.S. to promote the women warriors," since the ban on women's full combat participation "acts as a barrier to promotion." So, apparently to give the elite the opportunity to rub shoulders with generals and admirals, we should let the less-able face the horrors of combat?
Rajagopalan cites the feats of fictitious Amazons -- Buffy, the Vampire Slayer, for example -- as reasons to "trust her to defend our actual country." However, the purpose of the military is the defense of society, the basic unit of which is the family. While we all agree it's bad enough to put fathers in harm's way, by what kind of self-defeating lunacy would we put mothers there as well?
Rajagopalan goes on to report that some "suggest that women don't have the strength and stamina of men." Does that mean that all women are weaker than all men? Certainly not. But if women must serve in the military, why not in situations suited to their physical abilities? At least they'd have an opportunity to undertake the rigorous demands of running a family when their tour ends.
As a Navy veteran, I have the utmost regard for the capabilities and the dedication to duty of women, but it's easy to see that we have a much more intimate responsibility to the family than the dad.
Catherine N. Dillon, Manhasset
