Women 'bearing the brunt of war'

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by PartTimePongo, Dec 8, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/4077581.stm

    Newsflash for Amnesty International

    It was ever so...
  2. these guys really do have their head in one of three places...

    1. up their @rrse!!!
    2. Buried in the sand.
    3. In cloud cuckoo land!

    Since when were women and children not the single most likely groups to suffer from war. After all most men would fight back and women and kids tend not to be able to!

    I just hope that they are not intentionally tarring the coalition with this same big sticky brush, as in no way do the coalition deliberately aim to hurt or kill women or children.

    Thats left for people like saddam, bin laden and martin mcguiness!!

    agent smith
  3. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer

    Plus Mugabe & his Fifth Brigade in Matabeleland

  4. chimera

    chimera LE Moderator

    In the First World War 80% of casualties were combatants

    In the Second War World war 50% of casualties were combatants

    By the 1990s 10% of war casualties were combatants

    I suspect looking at the recent wars in Afghanistan and Iraq that the proportion is now down into single figures.

    A cynic might say that in 2004 the safest place to be in a war zone is in the Army.