Re: [semi OT] Women wargamers

>Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@sofkin.ca> wrote:
>> Los spake thusly upon matters weighty: 
>> > My beliefs are:
>> > 1. Females that meet a single standard are more than capable of
being in
>> > combat arms. (hell, I think my wife would make a great grunt!)
>> Agreed. That's why the Canadian army officially* has only one 
>> standard.
>
>from a future army point of view, might it be that the introduction of
power armour, with which the strength and speed of the biological
component of the infantryperson are all but irrelevant, would remove
this problem altogether?
>
>it might also be interesting in that the attributes which make a good
footsoldier become not physical (eyesight is less important when you
have a big computerised image-intesified optical/ir scope and a
millimetre-wave radar; fine motor control is less important when your
gun is aimed by a linear actuator controlled by a computer-assisted
neural jack) but mental, eg the ability to quickly perceieve the flow of
battle, figure out where the enemy is hiding, effectively work the suit,
etc.
>
>thus, it is no longer the archetypal/stereotypical big, heavily built,
tough-arse bruce willis type who makes a good soldier, but the
physically inept but quick-thinking nerds. revenge is sweet!
 
You won't always be in the suit. The mission may require reduced
equipment, or your suit may be down (yup, infantry gets system-down
chits!) and you have to abandon it in favor of immediate survival.
 
- Sam

________________________________________
Samuel Reynolds
http://www.primenet.com/~reynol
reynol@primenet.com
samuel_reynolds@csgsystems.com