Does Sup Forums thinks women should be allowed in the military?

Does Sup Forums thinks women should be allowed in the military?
Personally, as long as they aren't involved in real combat i think it's a good thing, because military life has the potential to hardened them, and there's a chance they might become less susceptible for lefty propaganda.

Bomb Israel.

>Does Sup Forums thinks women should be allo-

No. Women should not be allowed to make decisions.

...

Don't you have a better version? can hardly read this shit

No, except as nurses etc. It just leads to trouble. I don't understand why they want to join anyway. The ultimate absurdity is women on submarines. When men are without women, their sex drive naturally lowers. Putting women in is downright cruel. If they absolutely must have submarines, have a sub crewed entirely by women, let's see how that goes.

Sup Forums would say no because they think the military is like Call of Duty. There is nothing wrong with women being in auxiliary and support roles.

Combat is a no-go.

Could you pick a worse example to use. Her hair is down and likely to get pulled into the working parts as she fires.
Her sleeves are baggy impeding her grip. Nails are far to long to operate any platform in a combat setting. No women do not belong in the military aside from clerks

What's that red thing sticking out of the ejection port?

in the sense of expertise and special commandoes, yes. Frontline combat, no.

Evolutionary men are way more expendable than women.

Of course. You could lose half of the male population and it would barely dent the birthrate.
Artificial uterus when?

I support it, but only the best women who's willing to fight and die deserve to fight

Evolutionary women are way more expendable than men.

>there's a chance they might become less susceptible for lefty propaganda
Women should be allowed in the military IS the lefty propaganda you fucking idiot

As more men dying in larger numbers every week, the pendulum swings in favor to bring to women to fight but it will fail miserably. I do want to it succeed but it's wishful thinking here.

potential to harden them? she has her hair done new nails and make-up.

>Combat is a no-go.
They can work well as a female group or unit in rescue mission or work as a tank artillery group or air force.

I like the idea of requiring some type of civil service from every person when they turn 18. Women shouldn't be in combat roles, but they seem pretty well suited to certain types of support roles, and history says they do make good snipers and pilots.


Also, please put women through boot camp so they get bubble butts and low bodyfat percentages from all the running.

Yeah bitches need no positions involving combat at all.

>They can work well as a female group or unit in rescue mission or work as a tank artillery group or air force.
No.

This is a dress up picture. Red thing is a plastic tab inserted between the bolt and breach to show the weapon is safe. Assuming the weapon is real.

Also those nails that get broken off the minute someone combat like happens.

She serves in military police, and they never do real combat. Rifle is mostly for intimidation purposes.
Women who serve in more combative positions gather up their hair and trim the nails.

Yes, so they can get some perspective as to what men go through. My sjw sister in law had the nerve to tell me ww2 was worse for woman than men.

Women are retarded, unreliable and infantile. Letting them in the military is like letting 13-years old to fly planes.

t. Canadacuck

You would agree to with my post

At least 13 years can shoot better guns than adults.

Wut?

the fuck are you doing
get the fuck outta here

Anyone can shoot a gun, they should be allowed in the military

Women should not be allowed. They are proven to be biologically less strong

>get the fuck outta here

You first Canadacuck faggot


biology can change through time user

People who say yes have obviously never served with women.

...

Women must die as much on battlefields as men. Use them as meat.

Sure. After all it wont be you who gets injured and has to be left in the open because a woman isn't strong enough to carry you to cover.

From my experience in an aircraft maintenance squadron, women are very capable in all but the physical aspect of things.

Some form of public national service is the only way I would really prefer giving any women the right to vote, so I would say yes, but only in non-combat roles. Women who prove their dedication to the nation are less likely to betray it over our feels, speaking as one.

Anyone who has been in the military would say no. When I was in the Navy about 60% sadded out or had other mental problems, 30% cried rape or were raped (taking them and the accused out affecting mission readiness), and the rest always talked about how they wanted to get pregnant as much as possible so they wouldn't have to get deployed.

Not to mention that when they were "working" most wouldn't do things as simple as lift a table on the mess decks because it's too heavy for them. Plus the nigs on the ship would spend all day and night hitting on them instead of doing their jobs.

mad little white boi?

women do have different brains than men and dont seem to handle most military shit that well but i do think that everyone should serve a minimum of 1 year of military service

>biology can change through time user

Over millions of years, not over a few generations.

>biology can change through time user
give me the studies that support that fact of yours since time only affects personality and not biology, are they just gonna grow a penis for killing an entire squad of isis you're saying?

1000000% agreed
Women are simply physically AND mentally not able to be good soldiers
There's a reason women aren't allowed in any Special Forces...

Forgot to mention we waste millions upon millions of manhours on SAPR training

Why would she put that red thing if the weapon isn't real?