You
That is exactly what we thought after 1948, '62, '65, '67, '84, '86,'71, '99, 2008, 2013, 2016, 2019. Now, we're beginning to see war for what it is and has always been: brutal and sophisticated.
As to
@srevster's original analogy about how women fought in medieval times, they fought in armies of thousands back then. For each female fighter, there were probably 100,000 male fighters. And dozens covering the woman's back. And they didn't carry the kind of battle load that is carried today. Women were figureheads. Meant to inspire and goad men. They were still weak links when it came to the actual slugging, but one weak link in a 100,000 is not even a dent.
Now, each section is required to be able to operate on its own. That means each soldier carries his 40kg battle load and needs to be in top condition. Read up on the assault of Tiger hill and imagine the fitness level required. And a woman is physically not as capable as a man with the same training and fitness regimen, and size. That makes one weak link out of 10. This is all not to mention that women need to sleep, piss and shit with men. Women have periods on top of this. And get treated by men in case of an injury. We can't have women and men in an infantry squad. We sure as hell can't have all women squads, army's capabilities would be hampered badly.
Let's stop this meaningless bullshit. Women are physiologically weaker than men and that is that. They.Are.Not.Suited.For.Frontline.Combat. Period.