Originally Posted by BaZoOkAzNgReNaDeZ

lol I don't think a woman wouldn't be able to carry the weapons men carry unless she was just totally not meant for the military. But I don't agree with that anyway. I think the woman and the men should do the same things. Anything the men can do, I would say the woman can do almost all of it.

How it is in the Swedish military, they to the same tests and the same training as anyone else do and they do it with good results, and they are in combat as anyone of the others are. And you allways have the inturpeters that go where the soldiers go but only difference is that they do not have a gun to protect them self with, really tough people

Originally Posted by AlexKall

How it is in the Swedish military, they to the same tests and the same training as anyone else do and they do it with good results, and they are in combat as anyone of the others are. And you allways have the inturpeters that go where the soldiers go but only difference is that they do not have a gun to protect them self with, really tough people

Yeah, the interpreters don't have anything. Actually, I'm not 100% sure about that in America, but I have a pretty good idea that our interpreters don't have any guns. Maybe they should have at least a sidearm for protection because I mean, they are in the front lines too.

Originally Posted by BaZoOkAzNgReNaDeZ

Yeah, the interpreters don't have anything. Actually, I'm not 100% sure about that in America, but I have a pretty good idea that our interpreters don't have any guns. Maybe they should have at least a sidearm for protection because I mean, they are in the front lines too.

Ineed, I think it might be because they are supposed to always be surounded by soldiers, might have a side arm, not 100% sure about that heh

Sorry if this is a repeat. I made it through 3 pages and the last one, but here are my "new" ideas.

I'm forty with 10 years of service in my 20's, so I have a very slim chance of seeing combat unless it's in my own front yard. However, I would definitely prefer to hold a perimeter or set an ambush with several women who want to be there than with several men who were only there because of the draft. I've known several women who could kick my butt, and who wouldn't really mind chambering another round after putting one through someone's head.

Maybe it was growing up with a sister 18 months older than me, but I've never really thought of women as the weaker sex. If they're willing to fight to defend my country, God bless 'em. If they struggle with combat (physically or emotionally), military doctors have had plenty of experience dealing with those issues pre-female soldiers.

Originally Posted by ironhorseredleg

If they're willing to fight to defend my country, God bless 'em.

Amen to that.

Originally Posted by ironhorseredleg

However, I would definitely prefer to hold a perimeter or set an ambush with several women who want to be there than with several men who were only there because of the draft.

Good point

I would go out on the frontlines in a heartbeat.



But my mom, she would flip out if i did that

Hell Yeah because I like to see women more then men lol!

Sure, why not?

Just to add...

I don't think it is a huge stretch for women to become front-line soldiers in Australia [and other countries]. We already allow women into the military, and we expect all members of the military to be soldiers first and foremost. We are expected to use small arms and defend if necessary. So, IMO it seems redundant that women are still restricted from front-line combat duties.