I think the article at Volokh focuses on the effect of women in the army on the effectiveness in actual 'kinetic' warfare. I agree that in COIN operations women can add value in certain aspects. But this advantage can also be realized by adding them as auxilaries to the combat groups (much as is done for interpreters). So the questions remains, to what extend should combat capabilities be compromised in order to achieve some (mythical) equality?

Thinking wishfully this morning?

It is not about equality. It is about combat effectiveness in the current environment.

For that to be most effective women have to be in a position to give orders.

The deal is: men taking orders from women breaks their culture. Which is what we have to do to win the war.

IN Iraq, several key personnel I worked with, especially translators, were female Soldiers. We couldn't have done the mission without them. They went places where combat was a possibility, basically anywhere in Iraq. They weren't primarily trigger pullers though.

While I disagree with some of the assertions on Volokh's post regarding a woman's mental abilities regarding combat, I do agree that the physical demands of combat are more likely to overwhelm women due to physiology. It wears out even the strongest of men.