American women serving in combat roles has been a hot-button issue of late, with Trump’s pick to lead the Pentagon (for now) saying he’s adamantly against it.
A recent Smerconish.com poll question asked: “Should women serve in combat roles?”
85% of respondents said “Yes.”
[The renewed debate about women serving in combat roles follows comments by Trump’s pick to lead the Defense Department: Fox News host, veteran, and credibly accused woman beater with a drinking problem, Pete Hegseth.]
When I ask that question, I get a similar result – from my urban friends.
However, this is the wrong question.
Anyone from a military family knows that the real question is:
“Are you ok with your 18-year-old daughter being drafted and put in a combat role against her will and sent to the front lines?”
Universally, my urban non-military friends say:
“Oh no-no-no – it has to be her choice.”
I’m sorry, but that isn’t how the military works. I’m pretty sure recruitment would go way up if you could simply choose whether or not you could be put in harm’s way over your four-year tour of duty.
When pressed, 100% of people so far have said “no” to their daughter being drafted into a combat role involuntarily.
I suspect the Smerconish Poll would flip if he had asked the Yonkman poll question.
This is a great example of something that drives the urban-rural divide.
When we hear the press, pundits, and politicians going on and on about how a majority of Americans, even up to 85%, think women should be able to serve in combat roles, they all look like idiots.
It clearly illustrates a lack of understanding about how the military works.
