At first I was going to vote No way, but then I realised that if there are females at the front line with you, you should train with them to. It doesn't make sense to avoid problems in training, that you will have in the field, does it?
I'd say that you should train for every real possibility, that means with the females. But I'm a newbie here, correct me if I'm wrong

Originally Posted by AlexKall

"Putting young, undisciplined civilian males and females together in a training environment offers nothing but problems."

Its been proved possible in the Swedish military

Where in that statement does it say "Not possible?" Attention to detail

In France, we started to introduce women in combat units around 1985 and we delivered our first female Infantry and Tank platoon commanders in 1987...Nice media show but it did not work really well.
Women are women and just treated as women....even when they try to act macho!
Men see them as potential problems or want to please (and score!). Everything has to change AROUND them (MEN, lodging, showers, bathrooms, language, attitude) and most of the time (because Women are women and just treated as women) things get more complicated with all the effort to make "feminization" work despite everything else.
Women can be good fighter pilots, cops, MPs, or work in support branches.
You don't want them in a Sub, With an infantry or tank platoon manning a fox hole for weeks in a male environment...
Women would be uncomfortable and would make male counterparts uncomfortable...We are not equal! Sorry....we are different and have to live with that and the male-female differences always create "discomfort" especially when coupled with the high testoterone macho and protective attitude typical to the males of our specie in the military! I am sorry to say it but keeping women away makes things a lot simpler on the front line.
Furthermore, when a female soldier is killed, wounded or captured, there is more noise (media, politicians, people) about her than when it is a regular grunt. From the hierarchy through the media, everything focuses on the female side of the victim...things that never happen when Joe Grunt is hit.
We are not talking about the tactics of the "couple" ( base military unit composed of a female and a male soldier) taught and implemented at home, in facilities that have all the comforts and laws and regulations to make it work! We are not talking about women capabilities to fight! We are talking about war and mixed units and macho guys and emancipated women! It does not work because the Macho guy will always try to be liked by the female soldier, to take a peak or score, to get out of his way to help her when in trouble, to compete for her, to stand up and protect her....and all these stupid things men are known for doing around women, stupid things that complicate everything on the frontline!!! It does not work because of the way women might want to take advantage of that, because of that way they have to cry when they cannot do it anymore ( ), because their need for isolation for their own things, because of their natural modesty ( ), because they are more vulnerable to rape than men are if captured....because they are women and need xtra protection according to modern civilization!!!
I am a macho moron and helped so many to carry their backpack, climb the rope, strip the 20mm gun, cross the obstacle....and I HATED EVERY MINUTE OF THIS CULTURAL WEAKNESS!

I'm grateful it wasn't in existance when I went through basic back in '86.

Too many problems. so I voted no

I am so glad the Marine Corps decided not to integrate in training

I say no to integration.
When I went through basic it was just too distracting to have males around. Most of the females were to interested in our brother flight than to focus on our training. After basic/boot camp then fine. It's a critical part of training and to be distracted by the opposite sex just makes you miss critical information.