- Joined
- Aug 5, 2019
- Messages
- 1,344
- Likes
- 2,024
Sorry, I don't have white bottom-licking genes embedded in my chromosomes.Your opinion doesn’t matter. The law of the land is what matters. If you don’t like it; leave the country or change the law
Sorry, I don't have white bottom-licking genes embedded in my chromosomes.Your opinion doesn’t matter. The law of the land is what matters. If you don’t like it; leave the country or change the law
Then change the law and stop bitching. You have no jurisdiction over a women’s freedom or their bodies. If that causes you pain, there are plenty of counselors who can help.Sorry, I don't have white bottom-licking genes embedded in my chromosomes.
Yeah, we are. We're focusing n the law of grand-ma nature and grandpa evolution and their law takes precedence over anything that's written on a piece of paper not worth more than the paper itself!!Lol, focus on the topic. The law,
Which has been proven to be subpar by multiple studies that have been conducted by professionals over a period of more than 3 decades!! And I'm being generous here.the ability of women to participate in combat.
It's not grief, it's only the sheer astonishment of us looking at your complete lack of basic comprehension abilities that you are witnessing here, nothing else.It’s quite funny to see the grief it is causing you.
No need to, cause I know no woman is gonna ever pass the minimum benchmark unless they decide to lower it for them, which will be a fucking disaster.Then change the law and stop bitching. You have no jurisdiction over a women’s freedom or their bodies. If that causes you pain, there are plenty of counselors who can help.
This has more to do with precedence. Also, combat back in those days was much more physical in nature and given that those women warriors actually won, it sets a rather good precedent.We can't base our combat strategy on a few iffy outliers!!
Tell this to the 5 and half feet tall Gurkhas. A 5.56 mm round fired by a woman or a man will do the same amount of damage regardless.Yeah and then expect them to engage and win against a 178 cm tall pakhtun or a baloch!!
Lots of women will pass. But Mr. Saturday 10:00AM cartoons and porn won’t.No need to, cause I know no woman is gonna ever pass the minimum benchmark unless they decide to lower it for them, which will be a fucking disaster.
If I'm on an ops in the future I would rather have a man watch my back than a woman. This is the case for all the soldiers.No amount of "monkey business" (PUN INTENDED) here will deter me from supporting women's role in active combat. There is too much history to back up what I am saying that I can extrapolate their success. If you are too small minded or fearful of this; then you can work on that by visiting a counselor.
P.S. Bananas are my favorite fruit
For additional help, please refer to:
View attachment 80490
Ok fanboy. Soldiers don’t declare their future ops on an Internet forum, next.If I'm on an ops in the future I would rather have a man watch my back than a woman. This is the case for all the soldiers.
white knights like you come swooping in to save women, dude go home and be a bloody man.
Nope, they didn't win, not on their own. Stop inventing shit just to fit your narrative.This is more to do with precedence. Also, combat back in those days was much more physical in nature and given that those women warriors actually won, it sets a rather good precedent.
You seriously compared a woman from Delhi with a fucking Gurkha of all!! Dude, leave DFI and seek help from some mental health professional pronto!!Tell this to the 5 and half feet tall Gurkhas.
Oh yeah, and who's carry the load of the ammunition and all the other equipment for them?? Your dad??A 5.56 mm round fired by a women or a man will do the same amount of damage regardless.
Which they will fail without any exception. Other militaries have tried that and all those experimentations resulted in utter failures. I just don't see why we need to repeat their mistake just to prove that same old point all over again.Put the same conditions on women that you require from men while recruiting them.
In the end, they will end up lowering the bars for the women, like the others did.Don't go lax, throw them in active combat and observe the results.
The Israelies tried it, as did the Americans and some NATO militaries and none of them could make it work. What makes think we're gonna be an exception?? What's so special about Indian women??If it works, great, if it doesn't then relegate the unit to other menial stuff.
Cultivate as much combat culture among the women as you want, I'm all for it. But what I've problem with is the idea that we should deploy them in frontline active combat. As long as you keep them relegated to rear areas, base security, perimeter patrol, running the comms, etc or even employ them as snipers if they qualify, i'm all for it. But infantry and armor and mech - the women should be kept at a distance.Yes, we have enough able bodies men, but this has more to do with cultivating a culture of combat in our women.
That's your ego saying, but the reality is a different thing, Xeno.Lots of women will pass.
And neither will the bottom feeder.But Mr. Saturday 10:00AM cartoons and porn won’t.
It's a defense forum and many members personally know or at least have interacted with serving soldiers. So yeah, we know. It's honey-boo boos like yourself who need to get out more and have some conversation with the fighting men.Ok fanboy. Soldiers don’t declare their future ops on an Internet forum, next.
What ability huh, I can fuck up any women in combat I've ever seen in my life, men are better at fuckin everything. Actual combat, men are better, simulated combat men are better, physical fitness men are better. Dude we don't need women to weaken us, all they'll be is a big liability who the men have to look out for and give their own lives for.Lol, focus on the topic. The law, the ability of women to participate in combat. It’s quite funny to see the grief it is causing you.
Lol. Serving soldiers have better things to do than talk to 24 year olds. Indian army is professional and cut from a different cloth.It's a defense forum and many members personally know or at least have interacted with serving soldiers. So yeah, we know. It's honey-boo boos like yourself who need to get out more and have some conversation with the fighting men.
why tf do we need to cultivate that culture? And what, battle tests have already shown huge differences in men and women. Why do we need to risk lives of those women and the men with them to give some social justice pussy the pleasureThis has more to do with precedence. Also, combat back in those days was much more physical in nature and given that those women warriors actually won, it sets a rather good precedent.
Tell this to the 5 and half feet tall Gurkhas. A 5.56 mm round fired by a woman or a man will do the same amount of damage regardless.
Put the same conditions on women that you require from men while recruiting them. Don't go lax, throw them in active combat and observe the results.
If it works, great, if it doesn't then relegate the unit to other menial stuff.
Yes, we have enough able bodied men, but this has more to do with cultivating a culture of combat in our women.
Because strong women raise strong men. Rinse and repeat; you will have a superpowerwhy tf do we need to cultivate that culture? And what, battle tests have already shown huge differences in men and women. Why do we need to risk lives of those women and the men with them to give some social justice pussy the pleasure
Chill out dude. No need to throw punches at me.Nope, they didn't win, not on their own. Stop inventing shit just to fit your narrative.
You seriously compared a woman from Delhi with a fucking Gurkha of all!! Dude, leave DFI and seek help from some mental health professional pronto!!
Oh yeah, and who's carry the load of the ammunition and all the other equipment for them?? Your dad??
Which they will fail without any exception. Other militaries have tried that and all those experimentations resulted in utter failures. I just don't see why we need to repeat their mistake just to prove that same old point all over again.
In the end, they will end up lowering the bars for the women, like the others did.
The Israelies tried it, as did the Americans and some NATO militaries and none of them could make it work. What makes think we're gonna be an exception?? What's so special about Indian women??
Cultivate as much combat culture among the women as you want, I'm all for it. But what I've problem with is the idea that we should deploy them in frontline active combat. As long as you keep them relegated to rear areas, base security, perimeter patrol, running the comms, etc or even employ them as snipers if they qualify, i'm all for it. But infantry and armor and mech - the women should be kept at a distance.