>>15979706>captured women get rapedStop the presses, war is dangerous and involves individual risk for collective aims, who knew? Other than, you know, everyone.
>No I don't view them as defective men in the same mannerYes you do. You see them as men but lacking in the things a man needs to be a good soldier. Which is true.
>Yes they can help in the battlefield or in times of war, there is a role an need for them but in the battlefield it's a different story.Which is why we need to figure all this out now, instead of doing what we did that last two big wars which is use up all our men and THEN figure out how to use women effectively and half arsing it.
>Men can be women, women can be men.No, they can't, that's the thing. Women take longer to train anyway, but it doesn't matter how long you train a woman she's never going to be as capable as a well trained man. It's just not going to happen, biology overrules.
Women can't man artillery for example. They're too weak, they're too slow, they can't handle the shockwaves produced when firing the gun in the way a man can. And we're going to need a fuckton of arty in any future war, so every time we replace a man with a woman somewhere else we effectively add a man to the pool of potential gun numbers.
Helicopter pilot on the other hand is generally accepted by most western militaries to be a woman's job. They're smaller, they're lighter, they have better fine motor control. But helicopter pilots need body armour. So we should probably sort that out.
