What does /int/ think of women serving in the military? Does

>>74857188
I support it, especially for the draft. Women should be allowed to go an die for their country just like men are expected to do.

>>74857188
Generally speaking women aren't fit for army, but some individuals are and it would be a waste to not let them in.

File: 18404138_1331008963643575_3086724603631229883_o.jpg (110KB, 1333x1000px) Image search: [Google]

110KB, 1333x1000px

They are ok

Armybro here. They're about as useless as you can imagine.

>all of them turn into fucktoys for the entire platoon and end up pregnant in two months of deployment
>except for the very rare case of some turbo lesbian She Hulk, none of them can keep up with a man for physical strength, endurance, reflexes, or coolness under pressure

Try and guess how well a 5'7" 102 pound woman will do carrying almost 50 pounds of equipment around in the hot sun in Afghanistan and not to mention how well the enemy is going to honor the Geneva Convention and care about feminism and women's rights if they're captured.

>>74857315
That's a trainer aircraft, right? I doubt many women can handle being a fighter pilot in an F-16.

Makes the army as a whole look less intimidating. I would feel less pride/respect for my military. Women dying in holes is also the most demoralizing thing I can imagine.

>>74857315
A G U A S C A L I E N T E S

>>74857188
Serving or serving like a gi jane?

For many decades you had to be able to carry an 80kg man on your back over a certain distance the be allowed into the military.

Women literally have to carry a 30kg sack instead because none of them could carry the man.

Also they don't have to be able to climb a 2m wall like everyone else.

It's all a big joke.

I bet they would be the pefect recruiters. 'hey boy hi how are you handsome"

>omg a girl is smiling at me and talking to me

"wanna join the military"

>uh sure.

>>74857580
Yeah most men aren't that beta though to crave attention like that.

>>74857624
Some men are gay, true.

jk I get what you're saying i still bet they'd make good recruiters.

>>74857188
Reserves is fine and Navy/Airforce but not army. Not as infantry/rifleman at least. In such a role physical and mental ability is very important and females are severely lacking, they don't have the same strength and stamina as men; they don't have as long legs as men; they don't have the same mental robustness as men.

Almost every other role outside of this seems fine though. Remember, most roles in the military are non-combat or non direct combat (such as operating a drone).

You think ISIS or North Korea would be shitting themselves over an army with women in front-line action? Lyl.

>>74857532
Not in Australia's military. Requirements are the same regardless of sex, though females can't go into rifleman and various other physically-demanding roles. Each branch has their own recruit training, which is the same for all applicants, then you have role training, which is the same for all applicants. In NZ females can do any role but I'm pretty sure the requirements are still the same, so you only get a handful of female infantry, who are just as physically capable if not more than their male counterparts.

>>74857829
If they adhere to the requirements and are trained well - they will definitely be shitting themselves when they get killed by a woman, lol.

>>74857457
Yes, we use those trainers as light infantry air support and shit, its a transition platform to what ever our cunt chooses to replace our F5 fleet

>>74857829
Actually, apparently, ISIS soldiers fear female soldiers cuz they believe that they will go to hell if they are killed a a woman.
But thats not the case for North Korea

>>74858000
ISIS is probably happy they have the chance to kidnap & rape some western . maybe broadcast it for propaganda

>>74858058
Well they ran like monkeys when the Kurds sent women into their combat lines because ISIS fighters are superstitious

>>74858239
Yeah im sure the writer at the guardian was there to document it all

>>74858269
Didn't get this from gaurdian tho

File: 16788741_1751662548481786_3775591276150259712_n.jpg (77KB, 640x800px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 640x800px

>>74857188
qt soldiers are ok

>>74857675
This is how we got our first female general. Don't google her though.
She was doing recruitment, organizing it and such for years and slowly climbed the ladder.

>>74857188
I support it on principle, but the more pragmatic part of my brain thinks that lesbians are probably best equipped to fill the role of women in the military as it sidesteps the whole pregnancy issue outside of rape.

File: image.jpg (789KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

789KB, 2048x1365px

There should be a separate division for women. That way they can have a "combat role" without dragging down the real soldiers.

Poor idea.

File: 5F4.jpg (63KB, 960x641px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 960x641px

>>74857188

If they do "women activities" it's ok... Now if they can get assigned to combat positions (infantry, cavalry, marines) like here, it's fucked up.

It's a >>74862833

File: 20160402ER_0011.jpg (2MB, 2507x3760px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 2507x3760px

>>74857188
Yes. They're cute.

I fucking hate it when female soldiers wear make up

>>74857188

She looks kinda like Merkel desu, I would smash the fuck out of that cunt.

File: cap1.jpg (69KB, 747x546px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 747x546px

My first command was kind of harder than normal where about half of them where women. But, the upside is that we where not a combat unit and the technical side of being in a signals unit wasn't really an issue.
In terms of productivity, work ethic and so forth, they did ok. What I did have to work around is simple things like moving heavy gear would take a bit longer, but you just sort of work that into expected and actual time it takes to do something, allocate people to do some tasks which they're better at than others. I actually took those poor bastards to Timor- twice!
No one got lost, killed, eaten, pregnant or contracted some horrific disease so I kind of chalk it up to something of a success.

Actual ability to handle stress and deprivation is roughly the same as fellas, but they do handle it a bit differently in how they react to it. Also female NCO's are fairly much the devil incarnate, they hack on troops with no fucking mercy, they're cruel and if you don't quietly rein them in off to the side sometimes, someone's gunna get fucked up. One thing I did have up my sleeve was a lady Lt who I knew pretty well, so she gave me some tips on containing the worst of the terrors women will inflict on everyone. So in hindsight, I kind of think all girls and all boys units aren't a bad idea.

There's literally hundreds of jobs that women can do without issue- if your idea of a job is being covered in filth, smelling like an open drain, being too hot, too cold, not enough water, going hungry, sore, beat up, no sleep and generally hanging out with people that behave like a mix of children and primates if left alone for more than 20 minutes.

Combat units- no fucking way.
You wont cut the physical, you will slow down the combat effectiveness and don't have the aggression we'd want there. Women are terrible infantry soldiers about 99% of the time.

>>74857188
As long as they pull their weight they are fine, that's to say rarely.

File: 1332345453770720.jpg (26KB, 424x423px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 424x423px

In my personal experience some are more motivated and just as capable as men and some are the laziest sloths you'll ever meet, which is interesting because women are not obliged to serve unlike men.

>>74857293
>Generally speaking women aren't fit for army, but some individuals are
I agree.
>it would be a waste to not let them in.
I don't agree. The useless to useful ratio in women is too high. The current system is fine but it would be no "waste" to stop taking women.

>>74857188
They probably shouldn't be in frontline infantry but as pilots etc. it's fine.

>>74857188
Yup. We even had a famous one who fought in elite infantry troops in WW1 even though she initially had to fake a male identity. She also was the first female combat pilot in the world. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marie_Marvingt

File: girls and their makeup.jpg (82KB, 604x453px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 604x453px

I'm all for it, as long as you don't skimp on the requirements to get more females to meet them. I've known a number of competent female soldiers. They will never have the upper body strength of a strong male, but not every task requires that. A female driver isn't going to do any worse than a male one, for example.

>>74870919
>not good enough to be frontline infantry
>still good enough to become pilots
?

>>74857188
flag
no
but should

>>74857188
>What does /int/ think of women serving in the military
They're at best useless, at worst a liability.
>Does your cunt have them?
Unfortunately.

>>74871296
>A female driver isn't going to do any worse than a male one, for example.
Hue!

File: 1485766181145.jpg (40KB, 600x567px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 600x567px

>>74857457

err

If a 105kg/180cm fat guy can outrun a fit woman of 70kg/180cm with 27kg backpack for 8km, I think the results speak for themselves.

Women in military is fine, not every mos is an 11b.
Women in combat is dumb. If they want equality then start with removing the difference in physical fitness requirements.

>>74879345
This, women can do administration and combat support duties

Not in combat. It's just a disadvantage biologically. There is nothing feminism can do about that.

There are plenty of women in the Australian army but they're engineers, nurses, technicians etc. I know one that was a pilot actually.

File: Indo military qts.jpg (206KB, 900x674px) Image search: [Google]

206KB, 900x674px

>ywn have a qt Indo military gf with confirmed virginity

Never trust a roastie with your life or to uphold any sense of duty or moral standard.

File: 1473197217445.jpg (122KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 960x720px

>>74857188
This pic says it all.

>>74857188
We have them yeah. It's fantastic, the less chance of me ever having to waste my life doing military work the better

>>74880491

>qt

>>74879345
>start with removing the difference in physical fitness requirements
Fortunately, that is not a universal thing.

>>74857188
I am ok with as long as they are in separate units.
So if they will be in combat no man could die because of their stupidity.
They are horrible in combat.
Yes we have them.

>>74880638
You have an army?

>>74857188
Very few of them can meet the physical requirements and I don't think it's worth risking them being captured

File: brit army NkEIXq2Tno.jpg (430KB, 1993x2847px) Image search: [Google]

430KB, 1993x2847px

>>74857188
hmmmmm

Women shouldn't be involved in combat roles to be honest

>>74880491
>woman in the military
>virgin

lel

Sure if they meet the requirements. 3 months in and all the women had left since they simply couldn't do shit like carrying 60 kg on your back for 30 km.

Plus in combat men will always try to protect the females which could lead to a lot of casualties that weren't necessary and if they get captured they would most likely get raped.

even if they were just as capable, I'd still be concerned that they could make the men act like retarded white knights that put everyone in danger

File: 14741228267110.png (109KB, 280x276px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 280x276px

>>74882539
>I don't think it's worth risking them being captured
why? because they'll get liberated?

>>74885604
Hardened military women are just as level headed and witty as men. They will kick your balls for just thinking so

There's zero reason a woman shouldn't be able to enter a military, and zero reason why they shouldn't be taken seriously within. Any other opinion is stupidity spawned from the same dumbass gender myths that allow for the patriarchy.

>>74887992

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=UHI6L-KoW80

>>74887992
b8

>>74888265
Not b8, you're just a faggot moron

Fuck your misogynist militarism your fat basterd.

>>74863270
>>74871296
>>74885422
Snowniggers please stop talking you live thousand miles away from any real threat so its doensnt even matter in your case.

>>74888553
We're closer to a real threat than you are, Rastapoupodopoulos. Stop pretending that your NATO allies are going to attack you.

'serving'

>>74889175
Please tell about of that threat

There is two women in my squad, we have been over seas twice (Kongo, Afghanistan) already. They do everything we guys do withut problems.

File: british army-34.jpg (1MB, 2706x2656px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 2706x2656px

only if they've got qt doggos

File: Russia does not learn.jpg (125KB, 595x387px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 595x387px

>>74889337
There's a major kleptomaniac shithole to the east with a chip on its shoulder, a history of bullying its smaller neighbours, an interest in securing the Baltic Sea and a totalitarian leader who likes to use external conflicts to unite his countrymen behind him. We happen to be situated right by the Baltic Sea, possessing a large island in the middle of it that is often likened to an unsinkable aircraft carrier and that is vital to controlling access by sea or air to the Baltic countries. Furthermore, we are not part of any military alliance and would therefore be considered fair game by the kind of cowardly scumbags that live in the large country to the east.