Imagine the scenario, you are up the jungle on a mission with a mixed sex platoon and you get a snake bite on your helmet. Who do you want to suck out the poison, Jane or George?
I don't think we should be too narrow minded about this .... please log in to view this image please log in to view this image
It's a handful of men. It'll be even fewer women. As you point out though, they do a variety of jobs and undercover work can be part of it. Being able to call upon women would open up the possibilities for that area of the job.
It was the undercover work that ****ed his head up - he was almost uncovered a couple of times. The provos did catch one of his best mates. Went to work on him with an electric drill to get what they could from him before they killed him. So Phil knew what was coming if he made a mistake.
Pretending to be somebody else all the time isn't good for you. Doing it when slipping up could get you tortured to death and other people killed must be nightmarish.
It's fine, until artillery shells have to be fired at a certain rate. It's fine, until there is a man down and only a woman to carry him It's fine, until you have to carry x amount of kit a certain distance at a certain speed This can only happen if standards are lowered Women can serve with distinction all throughout the armed services, but NOT in front line combat units. In Australia, they had a women only recruitment drive in the military, and lowered ALL of the physical requirements. "Be the best" eh What is beyond the pale is the women wont have to pass the same standards, OR standards are lowered for everyone. There is a reason there are no female soldiers in the US elite combat forces, they cant pass the tests Now that is not sexist, 99% of men dont pass these physical tests either, but no one cares that 1000 times more men drop out than women drop out Same for science edu, 100 times more males drop out of STEM than women drop out, but the whamenz, it's all about the whamenz I tell you what, If I am to go fight a war, I prefer the enemy field women, because it increases my chances of survival, and that is just a fact
What war are you ever going to fight in? The war between the climate change scientists and the tinfoil hats?
Re if I have to fight a war, I'd rather face women than men in a fight to the death especially hand to hand here is a US female Captain, versus a US male cadet. This is what the SAS are getting? **** me, and it's not sexist, it's biology, and this is just a rules based wrestling fight, if it was to the death, it would have been brutal for this women, captain or no She just hasn't got the upper body strength to compete with a man. Never mind military, war and fighting to the death, look at these three swedish police women trying to subdue one average guy that I'd put to sleep in 2 seconds flat. So while this is all "diverse" and so on, the only reason this is even being considered is, because there are no wars, and have not been a real war since WWII for Britain, which was the last time Britain had to defend itself proper in an all out war, now most of the fighting is done by aircraft and drones The Iraq war, was not a war, it was a slaughter. British or US forces haven't fought a real foe in decades, Britain since WWII, the US since Vietnam and the British military's gear all fell apart in Iraq. Had that been a real war against a real foe, British forces would have been smashed, even their ****in boots fell apart. ****in hell
This female US marine, she gets it. Pity british feminists are such ****tards, and amazingly, most British feminists are MEN!?!?!?!?!?!?! nation of cucks
