MilitaryForums.co.uk

I think your first point proves that womens drills can be spot on, I'd never suggest women are not capable of being good soldiers but I just don't think they'd make good Infantry soldiers mainly for the reason in your second point.

The Russian and VC snipers didn't carry a lot of kit besides their rifle which is why being women wouldn't have been a hindrance. But while there's lots of women who are strong and lots of women who have great endurance the numbers of women who have both attributes in sufficient quantity to make it as an Infantry soldier would be minimal.

I generally support womens rights to do any job but you can't ignore basic biology and that does put women at a significant disadvantage to men in these sort of situations.

There's tons of men who don't make the grade, my own knees ended up giving out during my various attempts to join up due to carrying weight and womens skeletons are lighter and less dense than a males skeleton so they'd be even more likely so suffer

I agree as my other posts on this thread suggest. I would be interested to know how much weight the boys are carrying in the Afgan at the moment.

Body armour
Radio
5.56 mags
5.56 link
7.62 link
Smoke
Grenade
Phosphorus
40 mm
Water
Night vision
Medical kits
??????????????????????????????????????????

I understand the whole thing about women not being allowed in the Infantry, but I've never understood why women can't join Armour or Cavalry, but they can join the Artillery? (in the USA, women can't do Artillery, like being MLRS crewmembers but the same/a similar job is open to women here). Isn't the RA quite close to the front line, and there's certain jobs in the RA (like Special Gunfire Observer) which require the soldier to be relatively close to the enemy, right? And according to the Army's website, this job is open to females.

StanpyX wrote:(in the USA, women can't do Artillery.

Really?
I'd love to know where you got that gem from and so would my ex-wife(NCNG(A)(R)MOS 622401Artillery.
Until her needlework took over

Wholley wrote:

StanpyX wrote:(in the USA, women can't do Artillery.

Really?
I'd love to know where you got that gem from and so would my ex-wife(NCNG(A)(R)MOS 622401Artillery.
Until her needlework took over

I'm sorry if the U.S. Army website was a such a bad source of information (did you bother looking at my link? MLRS crewmember = Closed to Women) and the fact that many Americans on the web and Wikipedia say women are barred from all their Combat Arms such as Infantry, Field Artillery (unsure about Air Defence), Armour, Cavalry and Special Operations.

You may not have spotted that I am an American,so is my e-wife.Please continue to spout on a subject that you rely on wikipedia for.
Just more Yank bashing no doubt.
Of course you lot do eveything better than us,apart from winning wars and that kinda stuff.

Defense is spelled with an"S"and Armor has no"U"
But then you know everything..You got it from wikipedia so how can I challenge that?

Now now... play nicely with us brits Wholley

Two words Bill,second one is"off" .
ToThe Biter Bit!
I really do play nicely.....Really I do.

Wholley wrote:You may not have spotted that I am an American,so is my e-wife.Please continue to spout on a subject that you rely on wikipedia for.
Just more Yank bashing no doubt.
Of course you lot do eveything better than us,apart from winning wars and that kinda stuff.

Defense is spelled with an"S"and Armor has no"U"
But then you know everything..You got it from wikipedia so how can I challenge that?

Sorry this is from months ago but I am bored and feel like necroreplying.

Anyway. Sorry that you're so insecure in your nationality that you interpreted it as "yank bashing". I actually don't give a flying f about America (not everything is about the USA), so why would I bash you guys? Plus I cited a good source, which you conveniently overlooked.

Defence has a C in Commonwealth English
Armour has a U in Commonwealth English

You know this, I'm sure but you love your bastardised "American-English". Why are you on a British website if you don't like Britain? The logic escapes me, but yeah, my knowledge from Wikipedia v a random no life Yank who's been on a website since 2003. Hmmmm. We're evenly matched. As far as wars go, we have a well established military history which spans over several centuries.. what does your nearly bankrupt nation have? Revolutionary War, okay, fair play give you that. Last minute royal rumble entrance in WW1 and WW2, okay give you that too.. anything else of significance? Quagmired in 'Nam and left with your tails between your legs.. similar is happening now in Afghanistan/Iraq. Then of course theres the non-incidents that happened where the US military were involved.

Why are you on a British website if you don't like Britain?

Jeez,
I must have missed the part where it said 'British' Military Forums.
Wikipedia admit that some of the information posted is not verifiable.
The USA website is not complete by any standards which again they freely admit.
For Guard units you have to look state to state as their admission criteria vary.
As to me being an Anglophobe check out some of my other posts
You will find,I'm sure,that I am consistent.
I despise everyone equally

bastardised "American-English".

I think you'll find that actually they took our spellings and syntax structures as they were, and it is us that changed things after, creating many of the differences.