muckles:
Carryfast:
Yes and we also started WW1 and WW2 with a volunteer professional army.Don’t see anything in the article which states that women would be exempt from any potential future draft.Nor does it refer to only special forces.Why is it any fairer to conscript a man who doesn’t want to join, instead of a woman?
I didn’t say it was only Special Forces, but merely pointed out that the Special Forces were also volunteers. The OP’s article made a big point of this change would in theory allow women to join the special forces.
As I said I’d guess that most men still have some protective instincts towards women.My reasoning is no different to the rule women and children first off a sinking ship and an abhorrence of violence directed towards women in that regard.Violence not getting much more violent than all of the potential scenarios involved in military combat.
As for the article it’s what it doesn’t say in the form of exemption of women from potential future conscription which provides the clue to the sinister motivation behind all this.Just as retirement age equality was all about saving pension costs.