I mean, yes, in ww2, the Soviets used women as frontline soldiers - resulting in constant rape and many dead women and men trying to save them or being fucked up when the women die.
So, in a modern war, would women make any sense as part of the war machine? Or is their place in hospitals as nurses and in the kitchen to take care of the kids and cook some food for the soldiers who return home for front vacation.
About as useful as extremely weak men with no spatial awareness.
Their place is as nurses and support roles.
For the enemies, yes
they could relieve male soldiers stress.
At least you can use those as cannon fodder. Women get good soldiers to sacrifice themselves to protect them instead.
I really don't care tßh. We need all the women we can to get killed off in the next war so women relearn their place.
maybe as drone pilots. and maybe there will be an exceptional 1 or 2 women who wont get themselves and their whole unit killed. but very few. vid related
youtu.be
Women as soldiers? They can't even kill tiny spiders by themselves, and much less people who are actively shooting at them.
i mean if its total war who cares if some women get raped at that point
Not just this. They also reduce unit cohesion, get captured and raped, and are smaller.
They are good enough. They don't belong in line companies though. Support MOS's only. Women grunts are a solution to a problem that is irrelevant in modern warfare.
>elliotrodger.jpg
Women are the bottleneck of reproduction. Only shit-tier asiatics ever considered that till the past decade.
>a real war
lol
Norwegian special forces
In support roles, probably.
Women buckle under pressure as a general rule, they need constant direction, not left with the lives of their fellow soldiers in their hands
The next world war will make a fine historical precedent
>I mean, yes, in ww2, the Soviets used women as frontline soldiers
Nope, Soviet propaganda to galvanize the population in the war effort and guilt trip men into fighting. Commies may be shitty at economics but they were top tier propagandists.
>>a real war
>lol
What are you loling at? There could be real wars again. Yes, for 40 years there haven't been any real wars, but there could be again at some point.
Enemy soldiers would get tired from raping them.
moar norwegians
Her in Norway we call them "feltmadrass"....
Yes, it means something sexual
There are dozens of specialist roles that women can fill. Logistics, supply, communication, intelligence, administrative, aviation, etc.
But they should never serve as infantry. Never.
This is however is the reality of it:
youtube.com
Pussy delivery
several russian female snipers in WW2 had hundreds of kills each:
I imagine if the enemy were to take them as prisoner 9 out of 10 times they'd get raped, so YES!
>"feltmadrass"....
>Yes, it means something sexual
Feldmatraze.
Spotted the cuck
Have fun with your stretched out 38 yr old career woman. Women basically stopped existing around 1900; what we have now are men-lite running around. They vote, they hold property separately from husbands, get educations, get abortions, sleep around, get jobs. There are basically no feminine women left.
The world champion in women football (USA) just a few days ago lost to a team of 15 year old male younglings.
They have no place in combat roles. They would cause male soldiers to lose their lifes by trying to save them, or their sanity from watching them be killed.
Further more the female body has special needs that males do not. So sitting in a muddy fox hole for a day or so could really give them a nasty vag problem.
They dont have enough muscle mass or endurance to dig said fox hole or fill sand bags for hours on end. (There are a few exceptions but the majority of female forces are not butch.)
Not to mention the rape and mutilation if said female was captured.
>There are dozens of specialist roles that women can fill. Logistics, supply, communication, intelligence, administrative, aviation, etc.
And in all these roles they are inferior to men.
yeah, but you can many watch docs with men crying, passing out and generally bitching out, the whole point is to get most of them out of there.
Japan found a good use for them in WW2.
only against extraterrestrial beings and equiped with big robots
They be great as some type of stealth STD carrier unit I think. Basically poison the opposing force after they rape them. Teach them tricks of how to sabotage safety measures for sex and they will be great warriors.
They would probably be good spies.
Then why do people insist on giving women roles in combat units?? Why? What the hell are people thinking in the name of idiotic "equality"?
Do people in Murrica really not know that G.I. Jane was just a movie?
They're about as effective as the weakest man
fuck no. they get people killed. they are not strong enough for the hell of war. full stop.
Kek soviet women weren't front line soldiers they were typically snipers etc, and they were very good at it. They were found to be excellent because they were typically more patient and cautious, better traits for snipers. Women didn't make the ranks of penal battalions etc which were the ruthless soviet front liners. I'm almost done reading Stalingrad now. Your kraut ancestors got btfo by women.
As sex dolls
Equality is just about it man. The sad simple truth.
They are even now included in the draft.
>I mean, yes, in ww2, the Soviets used women as frontline soldiers - resulting in constant rape and many dead women and men trying to save them or being fucked up when the women die.
What are some accounts of this? It's always people that support women roles that "but Russia used women snipers and shit" ignoring they were in total war fighting to the last person.
>I mean, yes, in ww2, the Soviets used women as frontline soldiers - resulting in constant rape and many dead women and men trying to save them or being fucked up when the women die.
I've read tons about WW2 and have never heard of this.
Cannon fodder and rear support, yes. Carry out missions and completing front lines objectives? No.
they re good minesweepers
There is no military role, with the exception of positive engagement with women in children in cultures were it is taboo for unrelated men to talk to said women and chidren, that you'd prefer to have women in.
has norway ever actually been engaged in a war? and i don't mean just sending two battalions to iraq to placate the US or whatever
It doesn't matter. Real modern wars are decided by nukes.
>Do people in Murrica really not know that G.I. Jane was just a movie?
I can't count the number of times while arguing someone will reference a movie as an example of how things are.
Pointing a gun and shooting is not that hard
Did they do anything in WWII?
The weakest man could still be hell of a good shot as a sniper
...
>believing Soviet and Anglo propaganda
Jesus, Aussies are stupid.
No.
Women are weaker, less aware, zero stress tolerance, extremely cowardly, and stupid soldiers
They're a liability.
No intelligent military uses cannon fodder.
The more soldiers you KEEP shooting the enemy the better.
Women are far far more useful providing support and moral to the soldiers.
They also need to be safe at home taking care of the house.
Seeing some qt female soldier die in front of you on the battlefield is the direct opposite of a good thing for moral
And having female military in charge of you is even worse
hot
with the proper training women would be amazing at infiltration, and marksmanship, i've never understood why their bilogical traits haven't been utilized for this purpose sooner.
SHIT GET YOU NAZI TRASH
sniping from the safety of your cuckshed and frontline engagement is kinda different
even then, men probably outsniped them by hundreds of confirmed kills, but as always, women doing anything even inadequately is praised and "historic" if it's conceived as a male role
IDF girls coming through
>also
wew
KEK CONFIRMS AUSSIE STUPIDITY
...
>pointing gun
But what about all the other shit like carrying their own backpack or meeting the same standard as their male counterparts? I'm being serious, when average women do physical activities they struggle against average men and most weaklings.
>with the proper training women would be amazing at infiltration, and marksmanship
>I have never seen women under stress
Infiltration could work though, but that's not the military's job.
of course not.
ive never met a woman that was better than a man at anything
Is this a rhetoric question?
waste of keks time.
>sovietgrillsnipermeme.mov
Not only was that the last line of defense, they were fighting on their home turf. That's a lot different from other forms of modern war, with more support than being out in the field.
Those same sniper girls wouldn't have lasted a week as a sniper in Vietnam or Designated Marksman in Afghanistan.
We need to make this happen for reasons.
So mote it be
thats why i said with proper training, the fact of the matter women have a much steadier hand then men which makes them suited for marksmanship.
and their small light frame and light breathing makes them very well suited to work as spies and infiltration like assassin type shit.
AUSTRALIA BTFO
If you think women are good warriors, take 12 women and give them spears, then unleash a pack of wolves on them and see if they live.
Hold on a sec, this means I just had a 1 in 100,000 posts post.
Fuck me. I guess I have been around here for a while...
Then just make selection gender equal: everyone has to carry a 50kg backpack, or run a 6 minute mile, and be like at least 1.70m tall, male or female
aussies btfo forever
R A R E
A
R
E
AUSSIES ARESTUPIDDD
this is what happens when you eat up feminist propaganda like a champ
yeah female assassin much nimble wow such silent ninja girl... oh then she gets caught off guard, easily physically sedated, spills all the spaghetti in her pocket with minimum if any torture, then gets raped and probably enjoys it while begging to switch sides
>unironically buying Soviet propaganda
if shit ever gets "real" enough it'll just end up in nuclear holocaust. nuclear powers only keep "classical" warfare armies for extremely lightweight skirmishes, it's never anything "real" as in "fight for your country's future". those days are over, pal.
Checked
This.
Vid related are the most ancient humans on earth being such good warriors that lions are a nonfactor to them.
if they're loyal and can use a gun why not need all the help you can get
>aussies are stupid
>septs
digits confirm, womyn are useless
Something called morale. And lack there of when woman gets killed.
Give them their own female infantry units, minus the transgender bullshit. DO NOT INTEGRATE WITH MALES.
I encountered a few tactically competent females when I was in, but those were truly the exceptions.maybe 1 for every 50
it depends on the individual
the sniper with the highest confirmed kills is female
and they had no safety...they were alone on an unfriendly battlefield
i know this must make you feel like the massive pussy you are since you have never set foot in a real combat theater as an actual combatant and so many woman have been decorated for combat heroism
deal with it, housenigger
Fuck yeah.
sure they did. you're clearly a woman. tits then gtfo
>everything reported by the soviet union must be propaganda
t. kike
im sorry you think anything i said was propaganda when its a biological FACT women are better snipers than men which makes them suited to this role and require much less training.
no feminist propaganda when its true.
In the modern german army they could probably hold off the enemy longer than the useless men by letting the enemy culturally enrich them. In any other case besides the Nordic countries (excluding Finland ) who would apply the same tactics, no. Women are weaker physically weaker, and the psychological impact they would have on the men would impact the men's performance. They would me more useful in support roles.