Would an army of 5000 trained male soliders beat an army of 100 000 trained female soliders?

Would an army of 5000 trained male soliders beat an army of 100 000 trained female soliders?

Other urls found in this thread:

madsciencemuseum.com/msm/pl/shock_puppy
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Bump

Depends what kind of fight. If they had guns or ballistic weapons the women would probably win pretty easily but if it was like a fist fight or maybe close-quarter weapons (knives or whatever) I'd put money on the men.

would an army of 100,000 soldiers beat the sun?

Women can't even drive

Yes. Melee weapons and were located in a choke point. Men would win

no

Change 5000 to 50,000
and yes

Men, of course. Men are natural born hunters.

Need more information. If the training is very high then women quite handily. If no training, men would win.

...

Yes. Experiments have been done with those Castaway programs where they split men and women up.

Women fail to build anything/hunt and bitch at each other. Men get along, work and devolve jobs to people and get shit done quickly. It's a fact, women fuck up and would rather gossip.

Are you retarded? If it's guns then the 5000 men get BTFO in a heart beat. If it's melee combat they get BTFO in 3 heart beats.

Numbers matter in combat.

No, please don't post battles that are contrary if the smaller side had a fortified position or the larger team had an extremely inept leader.

>tfw no bundeswehr officer qt gf

It depends upon which day of the month it is.

>100,000 menstral cycles all sync up.
>Women are all helpless.
>But the men don't want to go near them.

It would be a stalemate.

>Numbers matter in combat.
Tell that to the Fins, well trained, well positioned soldiers will fight off zergs, sure it's a pain in the bum and tiring and you'll probably die but you'll take a load of them to hell with you.

Do women even know how to use a gun? I don't think so my brown friend!

>larger team had an extremely inept leader

well thats a given in this situation

I think 20 females could beat 1 male in almost any situation. 20 combat trained females definitely would beat 1 combat trained male. You're retarded if you think the women wouldn't win just because they're women. 100,000 trained but suppar soldiers would beat 5,000 trained average soldiers

The women would spend the entire fight arguing over who should be a squad leader and eventually just stop communicating. They'd get destroyed.

Yes.
5000 female soldiers would get pregnant.
20.000 female soldiers would kill each other because tiffany said to carla that she KNOWS michelle is a bitch and slept with jack

Could 6 million transgenders defeat a biology book?

Women would have the advantage due to having no capacity to disobey orders. Men could waver.

See: madsciencemuseum.com/msm/pl/shock_puppy

>no don't post the things that will prove me wrong

Your age is showing

>No, please don't post battles that are contrary if the smaller side had a fortified position

Who is the greatest female general?

depends on terrain and conditions. Women would succumb to disease and elemental rigors (Chills, Hypothermia, Fatigue) much faster. If you could find natural choke point numbers mean nothing. If you can successfully demoralize them (easy for women) they will be less effective.

OP said 5000 men vs 100,000 women. Not 5,000 men fortified in bunkers vs. 100,000 women just rushing them head on.

Maybe you should read before posting.

It's literally 20 against 1 they don't need to work together

Depends on the men fighting. I put my money on the 5,000 men if we're talking actual war and not some hypothetical battle. After all each guy would only have to kill 20 cunts each for the win. Piece of cake!

Would 6 gorillian gorillas riding lions beat them before then?

Fuck me man. Fuck. I knew women were shit but fuck me.

Depends on circumstances but it'd be very easy to psyop the females into submission.

100 men can beat infinite women.

>killing 20 people is easy

okay, maybe if you have a belt-fed machine gun and those 20 people are coming at you from a distance with knives

>numbers matter
Also do strategy and moral.
A smaller group fighting with better tatctics can beat a larger one.
Especially if they are making good use of the enviroment in combination with a formation that negates the enemies strength in numbers to an extent.
Also women are more fragile and less willing to fight to the death, a smaller group of man with no means of escape on the other hand...
If factors like mental condition play no role the women would win, if they do I'm so sure.
20 to 1 is still a pretty big difference.

I dunno. Niggers riding lions sounds like they was barebackin' n' sheit

Life isn't like the movies. 5000 men with guns could not kill 100,000 women with knives in an open field.

>Women
>People
Pick one.

As expected of savanna raised fauna

Gas yourself and your semantics.
It shouldn't surprise me that a faggot would talk about the ineptitude of the leader of a large army over the intelligence of a leader of a smaller army. How is all you know victimhood? Are you Jewish?

>Also do strategy and moral.

Yeah all that German strategy and moral worked really well against those Soviet numbers didn't it?

with fists yes.

Eeh. Guerrilla warfare.

hillary

Do the men have artillery? I don't think women can do the math needed to hit a target.

>nobody posts the picture
well i guess it's up to me to make things right

900 divisions is some shit.

How would we feed them after they all surrender?

Nope

yummy cummies

Burn the stick

absolutely not. that's a stupid question.

The average female Army recruit is 4.8 inches shorter, 31.7 pounds lighter, has 37.4 fewer pounds of muscle, and 5.7 more pounds of fat than the average male recruit. She has only 55 percent of the upper-body strength and 72 percent of the lower-body strength... An Army study of 124 men and 186 women done in 1988 found that women are more than twice as likely to suffer leg injuries and nearly five times as likely to suffer fractures as men.

absolutely yes.

the women could barter sex for MREs from the soldier, it's a pretty good deal. They have chocolate pudding!

then you have millions of stick pieces
stick win everytime

laughing out loud

>this is how modern battles are fought

...

shit,you beat me to it

>thinking my ps paint visualization is a battle plan
pictured: you

>women
>handling weapons
>thinking tactics
lel

One-third of 450 female soldiers surveyed indicated that they experienced problematic urinary incontinence during exercise and field training activities. The other crucial finding of the survey was probably that 13.3% of the respondents restricted fluids significantly while participating in field exercises.

Kessler et al found that the lifetime prevalence of PTSD in the United States was twice as high among women.

Trained to what degree? If the men are BETTER trained they have the higher chance at battle. WHo is to say the womens training has made theirs obsolete? Its the logistics not the numbers. That and technology taken into account.

>trained female soldiers
reading hard

first, women have their period, so only 90k max would be operational at a time

then, women hate each other, they'd divide in groups, that makes easy target

try to scare them with something off the textbooks, they'll collapse

if the leaders, generals or commanders are also women, it's all lost before the fight even begins

>thinking my responses are anything but autistic larping

of course not

One hundred thousand? No.

Unless there is a serious technology handicap they couldn't beat an army of 100,000 child soldiers. Numbers still matter when both sides are trained.

Kek

/threas

It'd probably be a fair fight. Also if you remove guns and boom booms absolutely the men would win.

>MUH FORTS!
Oh please...

>He thinks the 5k men won't fortify against an incoming zerg of batshit insane WHOREmonal womyn of powyr!!!!

Suck a cock.

Yes they do need to work together, don't you lecture me Shitaly, your army is a joke and always has been. You should listen to my PLATINUM dust advice.. It might just save your nation. Huh you think about that whilst you were making your pizza and pasta? You little shit.

Could 100 Russians riding bears defeat 1000 Africans riding lions?

underrated

Also from the Commission’s report:

Non-deployability briefings before the Commission showed that women were three times more non-deployable than men, primarily due to pregnancy, during Operations Desert Shield and Storm. According to Navy Captain Martha Whitehead’s testimony before the Commission, ‘the primary reason for the women being unable to deploy was pregnancy, that representing 47 percent of the women who could not deploy.’

Maybe we need armored strollers.

My friend Catherine Aspy graduated from Harvard in 1992 and (no, I’m not on drugs) enlisted in the Army in 1995. Her account was published in Reader’s Digest, February, 1999. She told me the following about her experiences:

I was stunned. The Army was a vast day-care center, full of unmarried teen-age mothers using it as a welfare home. I took training seriously and really tried to keep up with the men. I found I couldn’t. It wasn’t even close. I had no idea the difference in physical ability was so huge. There were always crowds of women sitting out exercises or on crutches from training injuries.

They [the Army] were so scared of sexual harassment that women weren’t allowed to go anywhere without another woman along. They called them ‘Battle Buddies.’ It was crazy. I was twenty-six years old but I couldn’t go to the bathroom by myself.

Women are going to take on the North Korean infantry, but need protection in the ladies’ room. Military policy is endlessly fascinating.

The male soldiers just have to attack during the one day where all the women get their period together.

Simple, they just hack the lions

5000 trained male soldiers? yes

5000 trained americans? no

It would only take one Russian child riding a bear to win this battle

>No, please don't post battles that are contrary if the smaller side had a fortified position or the larger team had an extremely inept leader.
but this matters because men would have better fortifications and women would have an inept leader.

Yes, depends on deployment. Positions where the enemy must show themselves to attack are ideal. However, if the females have a significant tactical edge with their load out, this will possibly negate individual soldier deployed to strategic positions.

The defending army needs to be merciless and create aerosolized ebola that it can infect the attacking female army with. Then all the male army needs to do is wait it out

You are fucking retarded if you don't think that is how the fight would end up. Men baiting emotional women into oblivion. Fact of the matter is more so who is leading them, 100000 women wont do anything together unless a man is involved you fucking cuckold.

>wants to involve a man in his plans
>calls the other guy a cuckold
hmmm

Terrain? Weaponry? Access to what tools?

I think men can beat women, I think if men stay on the defense they can beat for every one male 10 female.

You can't beat math.

Reddit fags GTFO
They died in their millions. Someone post that battle where Germans wiped out whole division of women in one afternoon. And this was late in the war

The one and only way women would win was if the war/battle took place on a open field were they had to stand parallel to each other and just opened up on each other. History is full of battles/wars were much smaller armies BTFO of much larger armies

No, assuming they each have access to the same tech, modern weapons, and financing equal per capita and equal tactical starting positions.

Trained to the same extent? Absolutely not you fucking mong. That's literally 200-1, it could be an army of fucking autistic 14 year olds and they'd win. Not to mention that modern firearms greatly reduce the gap between male and female combatants (not erase, I mean relative to a man and woman fighting hand to hand).

Even 10,000 women could beat 5,000 men if they were identical in training and equipment.

The
>le women are incompetent men are le natural hunters by instinct
Is a retarded meme developed by people who don't study human behaviour and culture. Female aversion to violence and discipline can be easily weeded out by cultural indoctrination. Physically men absolutely have an advantage in athletic situations, but being that a war between two modern forces would be determined by equipment, training and strategy more than physical prowess, the actual gap is much narrower.

Of course, nothing occurs in a vacuum. There are only a small handful of cultures that actively promote martiality and aggression in females: America is not one of them.

>Terrain? Weaponry? Access to what tools?

The Pacific ocean near micronesia. They are the crew of aircraft carriers, and trained in all positions as needed.

Have you ever seen a large group of women get anything done successfully?

it's not a pitched battle faggot, it's a prolonged engagement between two sides, one of which is outnumbered

the men are going to be able to march longer, move faster, and carry things it will take 2 women to carry.

They will be naturally more aggressive, more decisive. it wouldn't be close.

100k women working in sync. It would be terrible.

Air combat? Men definitely win. Women will just pass out.

Lets be honest. War is all technology now days. It's who has the better tanks, drones, jets, guns and bombs. Whoever has the best tech wins. And if they both have the same tech, then the woman win. (more numbers, more tech)

Who the fuck draws that. That's so weird.

They wouldn't even make it out of the barracks before the first catfight.

Anime. Mai Otome.

if resources are fixed, then the men will survive

men will get butchered 20:1 in open field, straight combat

Nope. Women make fine pilots.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vietnam_War