Bill Would Bar Women From Combat Support

By DEVLIN BARRETT, Associated Press Writer Wed May 11, 7:59 PM ET

WASHINGTON - Women soldiers in the U.S. Army would be barred from serving in combat support units under language added to a defense bill Wednesday. Proponents of the measure said it would affect only a small number of women, while opponents said over time, it would drastically alter the face of the modern army.

The amendment sponsored by Rep. John McHugh (news, bio, voting record), R-N.Y., chairman of the House Armed Services Committee's military personnel subcommittee, would prohibit women from combat support and combat service support units.

"The current policy does not serve women well," said McHugh. "The current policy places them in a company and treats them as equal until it's time to move forward and then they have to be left behind."

The subcommittee voted along party lines to approve the amendment. The bill, setting Defense Department policy for next year, is expected to be debated by the full Armed Services Committee next week.

The war in
Iraq has tested the military's definitions of combat zones. Soldiers whose roles are categorized as support, where most of the women in the U.S. military are found, sometimes get caught in the line of fire. Thirty-one female soldiers had died in the Iraq war by the end of February.

More than 60,000 women have been deployed overseas in support of the war in Iraq since December 2002. Women are not assigned to combat positions.

Opponents contended that if McHugh's amendment became law, it would over time remove women from all but a few select functions like piloting helicopters and medical work.

"I think it will make most of the women in the Army hopping mad, they'll see it as a slap in the face," retired Navy Captain Lory Manning said in an interview. Manning tracks military issues for the Women's Research and Education Institute in Washington.

Democrats on the Armed Services Committee were quick to criticize the move, saying it was sprung on them without notice and would place additional strains on the military by removing experienced women from important positions.

"We cannot afford to reject the talents of women who have served so well," said Rep. Ike Skelton (news, bio, voting record), D-Mo., the ranking Democrat on the Armed Services committee.

Another noteworthy new policy is the largely uncelebrated little clause in the latest defense bill that would bar women from “combat support” and “combat service support” in our military. A few years ago moderates and liberals would’ve been raising a ruckus about this regressive return to ol’ fashioned values. Today, it’s just another small leak in a vessel that has already has a few noticeable torpedo holes to worry about.

It’s worth mentioning though, if only because we’re at war, our armed forces are missing their recruiting goals to an alarming degree, and suddenly we’re telling Rosie to pick up her rivets and go home. And, um, rivet from someplace safe. Write inspirational letters to our boys at the front. I don’t know - tie a yellow ribbon or something - we’re trying to fight a war here for godsakes.

Actually, in some ways it might be a brilliant strategy. We’re fighting an ideology that more than almost anything else objects to our insistence on treating women as equals in all ways. Once we correct that, they’ll have one less reason to want to kill us. Soon, al Qaeda may look at us and say, “Hey, they’ve curtailed personal freedoms, they’re increasingly intolerant of sexuality in their media, they consider their government to be founded upon religion, and now they’ve started to limit the role of women in their society! They’re just like us! Let’s go and attack the French…”

So not only will this protect our women, it’ll help win the war. Or at least end it. See, ladies? It all works out. And thanks for all the help. Now go cover up - you’re embarrassing us in front of our new friends.