Women in combat

>>127779047
I disrupts the social heirarchy, you unbelievable retard, leaf, but I repeat myself.

Also, losing your soldier factories in battle doesn't make sense on the Strategic level, does it?

>>127779047
because war is a boys club

they should be thankful for that

I'm a woman. I don't think we should be in front lines of combat. Why? Imagine if your fellow soldier goes down and you have to carry him AND your gear to safety. An average male is about 170lbs, and your gear is about another 50-80lbs. Sorry but the vast majority of women can't carry over 200lbs. Ladies, get a desk job for 4-8 years and collect those military bennies, then get out.

>>127779047
This is just an assumption but I would reckon dealing with women in that sort of environment is always tricky because there will be always something to prove for them, and in order hide their own insecurities they create the mirage of toughness while being soft as butter in the inside.

>>127779047
Yep. Perfectly suited to carry hundreds of pounds of shit all over the place and find bombs with their faces. Draft them all.

>>127779047
Fuck your inb4 shit. Women are weaker than men. its all good that we have decent weaponry, but if that weapon cant be carried by a weak feeble woman its useless. As an RAF WSO i think its absolutely bullshit how women can get into our armed services with far lower fitness requirement.

Besides, who the fuck wants to see our women killed and maimed in combat. I don't. Women should be the protected, not the protector.

File: 1495142411443_feminism_victoria_feminists.png (536KB, 378x588px) Image search: [Google]

536KB, 378x588px

>>127779047
1. Virtually no woman is physically capable of performing reliably in combat duties. They can't march far and they can't carry full gear loads for very long without getting tired or injured. They become liabilities. They also cannot carry injured teammates. They contribute nothing that a man can't contribute better while also having weaknesses men don't. They are purely a liability from a physical standpoint

2. Men are biologically hardwired to prioritize the removal of a woman from a dangerous situation and protecting her. They will jeopardize the success of the mission and safety of themselves and their teammates in order to protect just 1 woman. It is a survival instinct and it can't be turned off.

3. Women tend to use their sexuality in order to get what they want from men and men are incapable of not thinking of them sexually. In small groups, this radically destabilizes the social norms and hierarchy and forces new loyalties that are not based on training or the unit itself, and that's only if one man is interested in her. If she is sleeping with multiple men this can create extremely volatile and violent situations within the group.

Women who try to make a living by being men are damaged. The only thing good about "military women" is that they make it obvious that good men should avoid them.

>>127779047
inb4 night witches

>>127779047
Cool sources, fuckwit.

>>127779047
>Ammmmmp

Sending women to die and get raped in pointless wars is stupidity. No one should be sent to war, especially not women. Stop being a faggot leaf.

>>127779047
>Implying that physical strength matters when modern guns shoot over 9000rpm
You have never fired a gun or carried ammo

File: 1462843700881.jpg (121KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

121KB, 960x720px

>>127779047

You tell me, OP. You tell me...

They are selfish as fuck when it comes to taking a risk and thus cant work in a team.

File: Skærmbillede (34).png (187KB, 1330x672px) Image search: [Google]

187KB, 1330x672px

>>127779047
Why don't female canadians just make an army themselves? Make your own fucking combat battalion. Oh yeah, you can't!
http://archive.is/dBehg
Female soldiers are literally as effective as childsoldiers, it can work, but it is a fairly retarded idea best used when all other options are exhausted.
Thread/

>>127779047
Only time I trained with women was at airborne school. The school itself is a joke, not hard at all. Almost all the women washed out (and there were a LOT), and the ones who made it regularly broke down into sobs when yelled at. They got special treatment. It was rotten. Probably the single most rotten thing I've ever witnessed in my life actually.

Airborne school used to be tough decades ago, but the standards were lowered to accommodate women. This is why we can't even win a war against sandniggers.

They fuck everyone on base.They cant carry a full grown man. They really are just shittier at everything actually.

>>127779047
lower bone density

>>127779047
Women on average also have worse hand eye coordination and accuracy than men. The top 1% of women would only be better than the bottom 80% of men. (Not real statistics, but you get the point, look it up leaf)

Women are more timid and less assertive, and will lose 99% of hand-to-hand combat interactions. Reaction time differences between gender have been tested with light boards, and men are significantly quicker with hand-eye (a very important trait in the battle field). That's why race car drivers are mostly men (except Danica, she's a freak of nature, but she's never won a race).

Men fight, women clean and nurture. It's just nature.

Women, stop trying to be men, because you won't like it, you're not cut out for it. We don't want to be you, stop trying to be us.

File: 1495572107824.jpg (285KB, 884x903px) Image search: [Google]

285KB, 884x903px

Holy fuck, this is why Canadians are such fucking little bitches. Common sense, nowhere to be found. Who do you want in a fight with you OP? A bunch of birches or a bunch of men. Answer the fucking question if you don't you're a shill.

>>127781738
Whole airborne program is a fucking waste.

Why do women want to fight in combat which is literally the shittiest job conceivable?

File: William-Donta-blog480.jpg (33KB, 480x382px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 480x382px

>implying the bullet speed of a rifle is irrelevant to the recoil.

Have (((you))) even seen those little goat fuckers try to shoot an LMG.

>When your bait turns into a:
>Canadians are all little fucking cunts that live under daddy and the queen.

GO FUCK YOURSELF

>>127779047
>over 9000
Good leaf post, leaf

>>127782768
This is all so a few well connected female officers can become 3 and 4 stars easier. I'll fuck my own ass with a barbed wire bat when a female rises up to become an infantry CSM.

>>127779047
They are weaker, and physical strength do matter alot.
Everyone who is in or has been in the military know women make worse soldiers than men, just an obvious fact.

The Norwegian military has been really empowering women soldiers, but its all a facade, politics. They made a women only special forces, but they will never see combat in that unit.

>>127779047
One of the most talented and capable crippie I ever met was a woman in the navy.

>>127779047
i dont think they are unsuited for tehm
i just think tis not right for women to do mens jobs

>>127779047
https://www.va.gov/health/NewsFeatures/2013/April/PTSD-Study-Men-Versus-Women.asp
>women are more than twice as likely to develop PTSD

This is a ploy. Think about it..."id rather have fags in combat than women." so government is like "cool we got fags in the military with no resistance."

>>127783352
So you think women are fit for it?

Strength IS important in modern warfare.

Firts, melee is still a thing, especially in the kind of urban, door-to-door combat western troops are engaged in when deployed in Afghanistan and others insurgents-ridden shitholes of the like.

Also, soldiers, especially infantrymen, must carry the weight of their weapons, body armors (wich are becoming heavier and heavier) and ammunition.

Women CAN be soldiers, they have been in some occasions throughout History, but they make inferior warriors than men.
In modern days armies tend to be made of fewer but better trained soldiers than in the past eras, quality versus quantity. And if you want a high quality soldier, a male is a better choice. For a female to be as good a soldier as a male, you would need to train her for much longer.

>>127779047
If women were effective warriors then armies of antiquity would have had woman soldiers. They didn't care about feelings, they worried about not being murdered by foreign hordes. If women could fight like men they would have made up armies instead of history only containing rare, exceptional woman warriors. Those are the outliers.

File: 1496109552791.gif (267KB, 440x512px) Image search: [Google]

267KB, 440x512px

>>127784073
Underated, our, as in the U.S. since you pussies wanted to sell your country, will be doing extreme door to door, ally to ally combat on the final assault on ISIS which will kill everyone of them to make sure they do not return to France and Britain.

>>127779047
before in old times men did the hunting because the women had to feed the kids and stuff
women are inferior and these conditions arent suited for women

Nothing wrong with having a very strict selection process for women assigned to a direct combat role.

Personally, I don't think its necessary to include them in standard infantry units, but they may be well suited to a covert/special operations role. Specifically doing recon, infiltration, etc. I'm sure there are some women in the top 1% that could perform well.

>>127779047
fuckin' leaf, when are we gonna just ban the entire country of Canada

File: War_Cat.jpg (33KB, 636x571px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 636x571px

>>127779047

>Implying that physical strength matters when modern guns shoot over 9000rpm
>modern guns shoot over 9000rpm
>9000rpm
>rpm
>rotations per minute

File: rare trump.jpg (161KB, 895x900px) Image search: [Google]

161KB, 895x900px

>>127779047
Real answer here, men are disposable in contrast to women. IE men can knock up several woman at the same time, but not the other way around.
Also, have a rare Trump.

>>127783506
i dont care whether or not they are fit for it
they shouldnt do it because its not normal
period

Women can't get raped fast enough it seems. No wonder the 'slimes are protective of theirs.

I can't wait for the Christian patriarchy to come back.

>>127785252
>I don't think they are unsuited
>I'm gonna have an opinion but im not going to have an answer

So you think they are suited to be in the military. You are a fucking faggot cuck

Go get your hallahpizza somewhere else.

>>127779047
Child bearing hips.

Shin splints.

Periods.

Pregnancies.

Hormones.

Could go on with this forever honestly... great in admin roles though.

They give a morale boost to the enemy.

If they manage to capture one of your soldiers they gonna have a good time.

>>127779047
>studies have proven
>no link to studies
and an herb for you

>>127785252
Sorry wrong trip meant for the shitstain. >>127784937

>>127779047
Women are weaker then men. They're slower. They're more emotional. And they totally don't work well in high discipline quick thinking situations.

>>127784462
Half the french army is in Africa killing terrorists right now though

And the Brits are in Afganistan

>>127784826
Rounds per minute

Because they can't ruck.

>>127786526
Which is also an absurd number.

File: 1sduxre049fj5ryuaqyfskexi.384x313x1.jpg (12KB, 384x313px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 384x313px

>>127779047
I think women should own their ability to manipulate men and make them forego reality for the sake of that unholy lukewarm hole in their crotch to better incentivize combat effectiveness. Women are natural sluts anyway- sterilized voluntary breeding officers (to avoid complications in the field and prevent people being irresponsible causing the former) should be stationed every so often to increase the tension on our side to not only defeat the enemy but the added instinctual compulsion to save your own genetics.
Everyone wins- men fight harder while letting women do what they do best anyway by being the residential fuckbox with the outliers (non fuckbox women) will have direct enough access to feel useful if the situation allows.

File: Untitled.png (28KB, 634x288px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 634x288px

>>127779047

>>127786448
And who do you think is calling the shots?

You will be the first to put women in the military and compromise your allies. Just like you always lead the way for Karl Marx.

File: 1494695474232[1].png (661KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

661KB, 800x800px

>>127779047

>9000rpm

Find me a Roastie that can carry 9000 rounds

>women are less prone to crumbling in high pressure situations

Then why do Roasties cave to terrorists every time they see a dead baby on the news?

File: 1494400143451.jpg (39KB, 411x381px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 411x381px

>>127780768
Mmmmmm the sting of that pic tho.

File: 1493611114116.jpg (49KB, 407x300px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 407x300px

>>127779047
>studies have proved

>>127787387
That full metal jacket, look at your soul thru the eyebrows look, OP has it, and is unfortunately a faggot.

>>127779047

If/when a woman gets or is in danger shot, her male counterparts will be unable to remain mission focused and detached whilst rendering aid. Protective instincts will kick in.

>>127787049
There are much more women in the US military than in the french and British ones.

Also, the women we do have in the military are basically forbidden to serve in combat units, and are usually in medical or administration corps. Unlike in the US.

>>127779047
I forgot that all that matters in a war is having a gun that shoots 9000rpm

File: 1494007890793.jpg (60KB, 600x450px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 600x450px

>>127787807
>frontline operations

>not unsuited

>>127779047
It has nothing to due with guns being the main tool of combat. most women can't carry a wounded man off of a battle field naked let alone with all his gear on. Men also have an instinct to protect women over men, muddying decision making during combat. Also we want to protect women, not send them to war zones to die. why doesn't that make sense to you people?

File: fitfaggotpepe.jpg (69KB, 481x800px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 481x800px

>>127779047
Terrible, idead if the get captured they will endure endless rape

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMGZtkMS3sQ

>>127787807
I don't remember any women next to me in death valley, Afgan. Fuck off. You clearly don't know what war is you larping faggot. Go snuggle up next to grandma.

>>127787807
Pls tell me moar about U.S military

>>127779047
I don't think you realize how many women go into boot camp and get medically discharged because they fuck up their hips or something carrying half their body weight in gear everywhere they go. It literally has nothing to do with sexism, SOME women can make it combat, but its probably less than 1 percent of the women in the military I'd imagine.

>>127788401
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/us/politics/combat-military-women-ash-carter.html?_r=0

The great United States Armed Forces are made of women.

And faggots. http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/23/us/23military.html

>>127788762
Always use archive.is on sources renowned for crap journalism and clickbait. Thank you.

https://archive.is/23EpI <- nytimes.com article
https://archive.is/RhEdJ <- nytimes.com article #2

>>127779047
Have you ever actually shot a .05 cal machine gun? Good luck getting it to work after a jam if you don't have any strength. Have you marched for 30 miles in a day while carrying 100 pounds of gear? Strength still matters in war.

> op.. 1 post by this id. Sage and move on gents. Stop falling for shills and slide threads

>>127788762
Clicky clicky

>>127779047
You have to be strong enough to pick a 240lb man and carry him around. Women can't do that, therefore women are unable to perform basic tasks. Show me the study that shows women are less likely to get PTSD.

>>127789156
Don't you have anithing to say in defense of your military made of womyn and cocksuckers ?

>>127779047
While there is no social argument because modern nations have enormous population surpluses and cunt isn't valuable, females aren't effective infantry because they are PHYSICALLY WEAK. "Combat" is so vague OP should not have used the term. Non-linear war means anyone can stop a bullet. Females can function in rear areas and in physically less demanding tasks. WWII was a long time ago.

All citizens are expendable in war. Cunt or cock is irrelevant if they can help kill the enemy. Russia had plenty of successful female fighters in WWII so some women can stand up to battle. Even Belgian Waffen SS hero Leon DeGrelle noted brave Russian female fighters and he saw more combat than every vet on 4chan combined ever will.

Soldiery are expendable in the end. It's not fashionable to mention that especially with the rather dishonest post-Nam "everyone's a hero" meme, but in serious wars a few thousand dead isn't shit and their crotches don't matter either.

>>127779047
EMOTIONAL vs Logical. Emotional + PMS means doing stupid shit that gets people killed on the front line.

>>127789559
It's far more powerful than your military has ever been and even if every cunt and faggot died tomorrow it would still dwarf your Eurabian cuckstate.

>>127779047
I'm in the military and I can tell you first hand that a vast majority of them are incompetent, dont understand authority, weak willed, and crumble when they dont get a shower for 2 days.

The military caters to them on a level that borders a discrimination lawsuit by giving them privileged access to showers while in the field, lower standards of fitness requirements and body fat requirements, and higher promotion priority because of their gender.

They pass a fitness test with a score of 100% that on the male scale is equivalent to 50% then gloat about being more "fit" yet cant lift more that 80lbs without struggling. In a profession where being able to move in full kit without getting exhausted it matters alot.

They disrespect authority and use the system whenever it is convinient for them by exploting sexual harassment and equal opportunity policies in the military

Women in combat is a social appeasement experiment that I guarentee will not stand in the face of actual warfare.

>>127791958
>mah dood

File: ARazor.jpg (24KB, 736x429px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 736x429px

>>127779047
Sauses pls? Or are you just a massive pussy?

>>127779047
>1 post by this ID

SLIDE THREAD

>>127779047
>women are less prone to crumbling in high pressure situations AND are also less prone to PTSD after deployment


That's because the women tested hadn't actually been in combat, so they wer neve exposed to real stress or real horror.

>Implying that physical strength matters when modern guns shoot over 9000rpm

demonstrably false. Also shooting people is the least of what combat soldiers actually do. spam post

File: great meme88.png (212KB, 922x882px) Image search: [Google]

212KB, 922x882px

My class will be having a debate on whether or not trudeau has been a good prime minister soon, unfortunately the class is full of liberals who have bought into the "but he looks hot" meme.

If anyone has any factual stats/crazy things he said please post them here, I don't care if i lose every friend I have in that classroom, I will not leave until they change their minds on our cuckminister.

File: america__we_go_onwards__by_americansfr-d8a69yz.jpg (382KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

382KB, 800x800px

>>127791318
Thanks brother

File: b49.gif (1MB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 680x680px

WHY ARE YOU ALL SO FUCKING HATEFUL. THIS COUNTRY IS GREAT BECAUSE EVERYONE REGARDLESS OF WHO THEY ARE OR WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE CAME TOGETHER. YOU SHILLS ARE NO BETTER THAN THE LEFT

File: L6ZwR4K-1.jpg (28KB, 451x437px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 451x437px

>>127795654
Sorry, we will go make a new one

The question shouldn't be whether or not women can perform individually as infantry, but whether or not mixed units perform better or worse than all-male units.

>Implying that physical strength matters when modern guns shoot over 9000rpm
gotta be able to carry the fucking gun to fire it, along with your metric fuckton of gear
>Well, studies have proved the exact opposite, in fact; women are less prone to crumbling in high pressure situations AND are also less prone to PTSD after deployment
>"studies"
Shit man that's some good evidence right there.

File: POTUS.jpg (213KB, 620x412px) Image search: [Google]

213KB, 620x412px

>>127779047
>stupid fucking canadian Ameriboo posts this dumb fucking thread again

>>127779047
Clearly you've never been in combat... I'll tell you what, do three or 4 tours, watch a few buddies die, waste a bunch of muzzles then ask yourself the same thing pussy...

Fuck you douchebag...this conversation is for soldiers not fags..

You have no fucking clue how fucked up combat really is..

>>127779047
It is a proven FACT that women are not the same physically as men. Also try rucking for 9 miles with ~80lbs on your body you ginormous faggot. To most women that's over half their body weight, their fucking bodies would not even be capable of going a few yards with all that shit let alone a goddamn mile. If you can't meet the standards of the male counterpart then you shouldn't be allowed and the standard as it is physically, is pretty goddamn high.