Given the opportunity and the chance, would women make better soldiers?

Question

Better than men.

Answer 1

than what? mannequins? That is not what ive seen in my five years in, ive had to carry a females ruck and weapon, many a time on many ruck marches because they couldnt hack it. they would fall out of the ruck march and start crying, and i end up carrying their gear for them (along with all my own gear). If they are not physically capable of picking up the soldier next to them, and carry a wounded comrade, then I dont want that person next to me in combat, thats male or female. Ive seen some good female soldiers, but ive seen many more who shouldnt be in.

Answer 2

Women in the armed forces train hard and are equally as capable in their own fields but what you're really talking about is would they be better infantiers? And the answer to that is no.

Women have all sorts of roles within the forces and there are plenty of opportunities for advancement if they are good enough(in the same way as there are in civvie street). The truth is that there will never be a government who is willing to send women to the front line in the sense you're thinking of.

Women, mothers, coming home in coffins in the same numbers as our menfolk?! I don't think so.

It's bad enough that we have our men out on tours losing their lives, leaving wives widows, children fatherless and families devastated without the 'we must be allowed to do it or it's sexual discrimination' brigade getting the hump because they think it would be 'empowering', or even worse, 'glamorous'.

Let's get to the nitty gritty here. Hand to hand combat between a well trained man and a well trained woman? The sensible money's on the bloke every time, and the unpleasant truth is that that's potentially what it comes down to every time you go into combat.

Thumbs down if you like but I'm a woman and in my opinion there are some areas of warfare that are, and should remain, men only.

Answer 3

I do not know? Physically men are better infantry because they can carry heavy combat loads, run faster etc. I think as technology continues to advance any difference between men and women would not exist. I know women can be better riflemen because they have a natural support standing up, which helps them be more steady. I think women should be given total equality in terms of draft and combat loads, but if I was a soldier I would be prejudice because I also have a natural disposition in seeing women whom I have a instinct to protect to be killed. I don't think I could stomach a mass of women being killed in combat.

Answer 4

physically I think women are capable.. but it's not a rights thing it's a biology thing.. first women can not go fight on the front lines... think about it.. men can go days, weeks, and months without showering or changing women are not as lucky, one week out of every month a woman has to change... women need more sanitary conditions then men... if you are out in a jungle for 5 months.. there are no bathrooms and not enough space in your backpack for sanitary napkins for 5 months.. women are more open to diseases and problems from the elements... if you have to lay in a swamp for 2 days hiding from the enemy.. you will either be going home on medical leave .. if you don't die first.. not to mention there is never a way to rule out pregnancy... even if they give women tests before they go.. you had sex before you left they gave you a pregnancy test before they sent you obviously it will come out neg... sucks when you are in the middle of the desert running from the enemy, having a miscarriage, because you didn't know you were pregnant yet...the front lines is not just at base camp.. it's out in the desert, swamp, or where ever else for days, weeks, and/or months.. I am all for women's rights.. but sometimes biology takes over ability

Answer 5

there is the opportunity and the chance and if all military were women with monthly sycronisation taking place for about 4 days a month the enemy would be the ones without opportunity or chance lol

Answer 6

Is there really any point in answering this lol

If they were better do you think after a few thousand years of wars etc that women would be on the front line?

Ive got a thumbs down for answering the question... and you have a thumbs down for just asking the question.... i dont give a toss but it does make me laugh that there are some strange people on here lol

Answer 7

Why would it make a difference? Robots would be best. Or perhaps we could train chimps. We could do some clones, that'd be ok. We could build a load of robots, an army for each side, send them all to the moon, let them fight it out and see who wins while we all watch telly. Or we could scrap it all and just watch telly. We could settle it all over a cup of tea and a game of 'tuppence ha'penny'.

Answer 8

I believe women should have the opportunity to sign up, and take combat training. Why not, as I always say: Theres a lot of gung-ho women out there who prolly would do very well in combat. The policy preventing it will change sooner or later.

Answer 9

I would love it if the original poster was a soldier. Id cover her rear any day!

Answer 10

I'm not really sure about that.

Men are happy to go off & shoot guns & be manly & exert testosterone & at least all the bad feeling is out in the open.

Women tend to talk about each other behind their backs, insult each other & keep secrets from each other & no-on really knowa what's going on.

Although the men option isn't great I'm not sure women doing it all would be any better, if you catch my drift?!