405
Comments (27)
sorted by:
24
Pierre_Delectoes 24 points ago +24 / -0

Doesn't really matter. You're already fucked if you've got women in your squad and we're fighting anyone better trained and equipped than a couple goatfuckers with 50 year old AKs and a Toyota. Go watch Band of Brothers. Now imagine having 5 women in your squad doing that shit.

If women were allowed in the NBA, no team would want them because they are a competitive disadvantage. So why the FUCK would you want one on your team when your LIFE is on the line?

Nothing against women, but they are slower, weaker, more emotional, have less endurance, and they devastate morale. Having a woman in a squad of 18-25 year old men is a morale killer. Not the woman's fault, but that's how it is. Think of how it was when a buddy brought his new girlfriend to a guy's outing. Now imagine that, but instead of getting beers you're sitting in foxholes for days on end shitting in holes.

4
Moltar 4 points ago +4 / -0

As a combat veteran I can testify that women in motor transport and Military Police units during my time in Iraq were badass. We wouldn't expect them to carry us to safety if wounded but they fought like hell just like the men. When It comes to trans I prefer they never serve especially with combat units or any branch in our armed forces.

2
AGuyFromAus 2 points ago +2 / -0

As an ex-Aussie soldier I served with women back in the 80's.

Back then ... no women were permitted in a field force (combat) corps. But there were plenty of jobs for them in non-combat roles. I have never understood the drive towards women in combat roles in the Army. Don't know or care about the Air Force or Navy - different jobs I can't comment on.

As for trans people ... I'm actually what most people would call pro-trans ... in that I believe a very small percentage of the population (0.005-0.014%) has Gender Dysphoria and there is fuck all that they can do about it. They are no more to blame than someone who has a legitimate case of (for example) autism. I have a couple of trans friends (old farts like me from before being trans became trendy and every fuckwit jumped on the bandwagon). They are good people, but they aren't and never were fit to be soldiers.

The reality is that someone who has Gender Dysphoria is NOT fit to serve as a soldier in any capacity. I don't want ANYONE who is prone to serious depression, and all the other problems that Gender Dysphoria brings, in the military.

But it's not just trans ... I don't want anyone who suffers a condition that leads them to be seriously depressed, or any other psych symptom that impairs their ability to do the job. Yes ... you end up with some soldiers who got that way because of what happened to them in combat, and if they want to stay in, finding them a suitable job is right - they EARNED it.

But the rest ... if any army is admitting people with psych problems ... then it's not gonna be worth shit in time.

1
Pierre_Delectoes 1 point ago +1 / -0

I'm not questioning their courage, but I am their ability. Like I said, its one thing to have women in combat roles when you're fighting goat fuckers stuck in the stone age. That's not a fight the US army is going to lose no matter how many trannies and women it trots out.

But, if shit goes south and we're fighting Russia or China (or even Iran) in a peer-scale war, I don't want to go in there with a handicap. Its bad enough most of the military age Gen Z faggots who would be getting drafted first are either obese or subsist purely on soy. Once the navy ships and F-35s start taking casualties from advanced weapons systems, you'll actually have to start sending ground troops to do more than mop up guerillas.

3
MoldyLocksNesMonste 3 points ago +4 / -1

Having a woman in a squad of 18-25 year old men is a morale killer.

Unless she's really unattractive and has good personality.

A couple of moderately attractive girls will really mess morale up.

3
Pierre_Delectoes 3 points ago +3 / -0

Its not even just about looks. Men are always on guard around women, particularly in the MeToo era. Squads need to be close to be effective and fair or not, its much harder for that to happen with a woman in the mix.

There's other shit too. You know 99% of women aren't going to be able to schlep a wounded man to safety so now you dread getting paired up with her on a fireteam. Or maybe you're trekking 20km into some shithole and your gals can't carry the full 60 kilos of gear. Now you're going on your hike either missing gear or that someone else has to carry. That builds resentment.

Some of these problems exist with male soldiers too. Everyone who served knows a fag who everyone hated in their platoon, but at least it was only 1 out of however many men. Every woman solider is going to have these issues.

0
MoldyLocksNesMonste 0 points ago +1 / -1

You're correct.

Imagine how much better it will be with pregnant women who are deployed.

1
Pierre_Delectoes 1 point ago +1 / -0

I sincerely hope even our cucked military wouldn't put pregnant women in combat roles. Flying cargo planes or working on rear bases, I can sort of see letting women continue serving into the middle portion of pregnancy, but all hope is lost if they are actually considering putting pregnant women on the front lines. Nothing like a squadmate who has to piss every 45 minutes, has crazy nausea and mood swings, and can barely walk.

I've never met a woman who wasn't miserable the last month+ of her pregnancy. I can't imagine anyone willingly being deployed in a combat role in that condition.

0
MoldyLocksNesMonste 0 points ago +1 / -1

Dude, it will get to the point that the military is nothing but women and trannies.

8
Brethern123 8 points ago +8 / -0

Strange times.

5
Moebius [S] 5 points ago +5 / -0

Getting Stranger by the Minute...

8
UrTVisLying2U 8 points ago +8 / -0

Wouldn't an unborn child be considered a non-combatant? What is it with these people and killing babies?

1
MapleBaconWaffles 1 point ago +1 / -0

"clump of cells".

6
jennyfrutex 6 points ago +6 / -0

It's bad for the woman, it's terrible for the baby, and it's a liability for everyone else in her unit. It's literally the worst idea ever. Bad, bad bad bad.

6
Mintap 6 points ago +6 / -0

Time to draft newborns.

5
Destineed369 5 points ago +5 / -0

I have no problem with women serving their country. Hell. Sign them up for the draft. But if your sending your women into combat then you probably already lost the war. What are you protecting back home when your women are at war?

Leave women in combat roles to the land invasion of the US. Fuck with a conservative woman’s children and they will kill you.

4
Ricordanza9 4 points ago +4 / -0

sigh Just when I thought nothing else would surprise me anymore with this stupid retarded administration..... this happens.

3
AgnesDomini 3 points ago +3 / -0

Yikes. When you put it that way and WTF? Why put the baby's life at risk, FFS? What mother in her right mind does that???

3
MoldyLocksNesMonste 3 points ago +4 / -1

This is one way to get women out of the military.

Many women get pregnant on purpose to get out of deploying.

2
deleted 2 points ago +2 / -0
2
MapleBaconWaffles 2 points ago +2 / -0

What kind of sick society sends pregnant women to war?

2
consumptiveballerina 2 points ago +2 / -0

I'm teaching my daughter that doing everything men do doesn't make you equal. It makes you stupid.

2
Kn33l2Dominion 2 points ago +2 / -0

You gotta be fucking kidding me. I thought this was a fucking shit post when I saw it the other day. We're so fucked

1
Lordahdaring 1 point ago +1 / -0

But it would be just like in MASH, where they just stopped the war to let that lady have a baby and everyone stopped bombing and shooting and just had a nice Christmas Episode.

-3
Anaconda -3 points ago +3 / -6

Need a real source. Sounds like those fake news places that claim they are MAGA

5
LesboPregnancyScare 5 points ago +5 / -0

there are literal vidoes of him stating just that: maternity flight suits.