after reading the women's war (nytimes; login req.), i'm still holding the openly sexist position combat roles should go exclusively to men. adding to that, forward deployed positions to included supply lines (jessica lynch comes to mind). so with that, if the role of the uniformed military is to win wars (when waged), what to do w/ the women? keep them state-side? if so, is this a step back for women's rights, thinly disguised as chivalry, or shall we acknowledge women in dangerous roles are a liability to the mission?