Printed letters, February 1, 2013

By Staff
Thursday, January 31, 2013

Front-line combat is no place for a woman. There are many positions in the armed forces for women to fill and play a very important part in supporting the troops in the combat zones.

Why was this policy changed? I cannot understand.

Would our commander in chief like to see his daughters in foxholes with men? Knowing what conditions troops have to live with such as facing the enemy night and day in foxholes, why did our generals not say no?

I am a World War II veteran. I served six years as a combat sergeant with the Australian Army and five years and six months of combat overseas. I fought the Italians in Libya, the Germans in Greece and Crete, pro-German French in Lebanon and the Japanese in New Guinea and Borneo. I’ve seen it all.

It’s difficult to even think of what would happen to these young women if captured by the enemy. It was hard on our prisoners of war.

I don’t think front-line troops would like to share a foxhole with a woman.

HENRY A. WHEELER

Grand Junction

Two sides to question 
of women in combat

Women in combat roles. There are definitely two sides to this coin.

On the one side, you have the die-hards who firmly believe women will distract and soften the front-line troops, since it is human nature (as it has been for hundreds of thousands of years) for males to protect females. On this side of the coin, you also have the wives and girlfriends back home that don’t want their men serving in confined quarters with women (for obvious reasons).

On the other side, women have already been serving in forward positions. If you are being shot at, it’s hard to return fire with a medical kit.

Of course, there are a lot more positions involved than just guns on the ground. I have no doubt there are female helicopter and fighter pilots that rival their male counterparts,; they should be allowed to fly comparable missions. However, due to the immediate environment, guns on the ground constitute a different animal.

When one considers that it was primarily women who pushed for this change, then it is only fair that in keeping with “what is good for the goose is good for the gander” that same group must push for female draft registration. To not do so would be the ultimate hypocrisy. If two groups of people are qualified to do the same job, but only one group is subject to draft, is this not the definition of discrimination? We went through this once in our nation where “equal” was determined by race. Now we’re going to do it by gender?

My personal preference would be to leave things the way they were. Women in uniform already provide valuable service to their country. But, no, we have to open another can of worms.

I’ve had enough “progressive” thinking for a while. We need to put our leaders in a “time-out” for say… four years or so.

GLENN MENARD

Grand Junction

 

Spehar converts critic,
at least on one issue

It has happened. There is a sheet of ice over Hell: I have agreed completely with one of Jim Spehar’s columns — that of Jan. 29.

I am sorely disappointed in our three county commissioners and suspicious of the two new members. If they are interested, I will tell them why. But they may not care, as I am not a “real” Republican

CREIGHTON BRICKER

Grand Junction

 

When does federal clout 
over states become facism?

The Daily Sentinel’s editorial on Jan. 25, supporting civil unions, is commendable, and it should be. However, deferring to a national caste system protecting untouchable homosexuals is not.

Colorado law already protects homosexuals from all walks of life, including a caveat of “hate crimes,” a government tactic, by the way, to brainwash.

The U.S. Constitution does not declare freedom to anyone. It prohibits our federal government from taking away the freedom we already have. An open question remains: How close are we to fascism when we are told that federal law dominates over state law?

HAROLD V. BLACKMAN

Montrose

 

Hillary Clinton deserves
Nobel, next presidency

In my opinion, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is one of the most important diplomats in the world today. Her knowledge and strong decision-making skills helped capture bin Laden. If I could, I’d recommend her to receive the Nobel Peace Prize for her steadfast achievements in the Middle East.

If it weren’t for Obama, Clinton would have been today’s president. She will undoubtedly succeed Obama as our next president of the United States.

GORDON OLSEN

Grand Junction