Female Killing Machines on the Front Line...???

Are women capable of close quarter combat


  • Total voters
    1
#1
Whilst watching TV and tucking into my second bowl of fruit & yoghurt, I engaged Mrs Baggy in polite and cordial conversation about the pros & cons of women fighting on the front line. I should have known better....The starter for 10 came about from watching the female cops on "The Bill" getting yet another kicking from the villians - with the male cops turning up to save the day.

All I said was "Women find it hard when in close combat with men and therefore I didn't think women made good killing machines when in hand-to-hand combat with some raghead who is determined for you to see your god before he sees his".

I should have read the signs, the reddening in the face and the horns developing....but I ignored and continued..........


I'm sure that in a pure fire fight, the odds are more even....but hand-to hand may be the ultimate test of strength and will power.....can women cut this mustard?? I understand that front line (Cav, Inf) units have no female soldiers for perhaps that very reason, but other (RA, AAC, RLC) units do and with operations in iraq being a simple patrol one minute and a fire fight the next, there is always the possibility of some form of close quarter kill.
I remember the concerns when a female American soldier was captured in the last Gulf War. I don't think we have had a woman killed in close quarter battle yet, but when/if we do, I bet those f&cking ambulance chasers won't be far behind.....

There is obviously more pros and cons to this argument and I'm sure "incoming" will be imminent..so fill ya boots.

Don't get me wrong, there is always a place in HM forces for women, I'm just not convinced its on the front line. Needless to say Mrs Baggy didn't agree and bounced off all the walls in the front room to prove it. Time prevents me from replicating what she said cos the conversation did go on for 2 & half f&cking hours!!
 
#2
BagCharge said:
Whilst tucking into my second bowl of fruit & yoghurt
You, however, sound like a killing machine. :roll:
 
#3
StabTiffy2B said:
BagCharge said:
Whilst tucking into my second bowl of fruit & yoghurt
You, however, sound like a killing machine. :roll:
Can't a lean mean killing machine have regular bowels? I suppose that you (and I) are considerably better killing machines cos we eat other breakfasts?
 
#6
Bloody hell, I'd be impressed if a doris could throw and catch a ball properly, or open a carton of fruit juice. Killing machines? ffs, talk about running before you can walk, most women cant even kill a spider.

Before you all kick off, I'm not a misogynist, I love women, I woudnt sleep with anyone else. :D
 
#8
Lasalle said:
What do you mean by the front line? Where is the front line in Iraq for instance?
Thats my point....if Cav & Inf won't have female soldiers because of the potential for close quarter killing....what happens to female soldiers in a mixed RA patrol who happens across a fire fight developing into something more brutal. It defeats the object of restricted female access to frontline units.
 
#9
Inf wont have women because they do not have the physical strength and stamina to carry AND fight with a combat load. I'm sick of telling non-infanteers on this forum how much an infantry soldier has to carry in combat - a MINIUMUM of 34kg of ammunition and equipment PLUS his bergan. It has nothing to do with the potential for close quarter killing. Please do not confuse "being on patrol in Iraq" with high intensity dismounted war fighting.
 
#10
BagCharge said:
Women find it hard when in close combat with men and therefore I didn't think women made good killing machines when in hand-to-hand combat with some raghead
So you never got to see some of the lezza's in the Mally in JHQ then :roll:
 
#11
As Sandy_Boots says its all about physical endurance. Close Quarter Battle is irrelevant. The infantry is obviously physically intense. There are women who could do for short periods but they would (studies show) injure and downgrade themselves fairly soon. The Armoured Corps is less physically intense but still beyond the scope of 99% of women simply because of the strength and endurance needed.

Sorry, bit serious for the NAAFI!
 
#12
Lasalle said:
As Sandy_Boots says its all about physical endurance.
Ordinarily, I'd agree with you both, but BagCharge seems to be asking about womens ability to engage in H2H/CQB. I took him to mean, do women have sufficent aggression, strength and cojones to close with the enemy and carve his bowels out with a bayonet or cave his skull in with your rifle butt? My somewhat flippant answer (well it is the Naafi) was, no.
 
#13
She has a point, in times gone back the woman would be at the back making tea, winding up the telephones and tapping the type writers that was when we were fighting the Ruskies or Krauts. Now we are fighting rag heads who arnt scared of dieing as they think they are getting a few virgins to break in if they press the red button. Though in terms if they got captured and interogation they would be a lot more vunrable and easily to manipulate than a man.
 
#14
dan_man said:
She has a point, in times gone back the woman would be at the back making tea, winding up the telephones and tapping the type writers that was when we were fighting the Ruskies or Krauts. Now we are fighting rag heads who arnt scared of dieing as they think they are getting a few virgins to break in if they press the red button. Though in terms if they got captured and interogation they would be a lot more vunrable and easily to manipulate than a man.
I seem to recall that the Russian girls defending Stalingrad from the Nazis (very PC) did a sterling job. They certainly frightened the hell out of the Nazis.

Litotes
 
#15
Litotes said:
dan_man said:
She has a point, in times gone back the woman would be at the back making tea, winding up the telephones and tapping the type writers that was when we were fighting the Ruskies or Krauts. Now we are fighting rag heads who arnt scared of dieing as they think they are getting a few virgins to break in if they press the red button. Though in terms if they got captured and interogation they would be a lot more vunrable and easily to manipulate than a man.
I seem to recall that the Russian girls defending Stalingrad from the Nazis (very PC) did a sterling job. They certainly frightened the hell out of the Nazis.

Litotes
Indeed, but if they got captured I'm sure the Nazis would of done some nasty things against them just because they were women.
 
#16
Your naivety would be winsome if it wasn't so f*cking irritating.

"do women have sufficent aggression, strength and cojones to close with the enemy and carve his bowels out with a bayonet or cave his skull in with your rifle butt?" - do you really need to ask that? let me speak slowly so your man's brain can process what I'm saying............ Let me ask you (if you can cope with the mental gymnastics) - Do Men?! Mmmmmmmm, the answer to that would be "Not all - some do" - now, apply that answer to your question.

"Though in terms if they got captured and interogation they would be a lot more vunrable and easily to manipulate than a man. "
Really. On what evidence. Oh, sorry, forgot, you were just saying that to preen your manly appendage, you didn't actually say it as a statement of fact.

"but if they got captured I'm sure the Nazis would of done some nasty things against them just because they were women. "
The last time I looked men had a handy orifice the enemy would take an unhealthy interest in - and do - how very inconvenient for your argument, but true, unfortunately.

And before any of you devastatingly funny, evisceratingly witty comediens produce the only stock riposte I have ever heard a man manage in these situations, no, I don't have PMT.
 
#17
I am past 40 yet I still run my 1.5 quicker than 18 year old females, I can do the CFT faster (if needed) than 18 year old females, granted my knees are F****d but I can do it, same for most forms of endurance. This argument will go on forever until women start to die in battle.

If you are defending you usually have the advantage and women could hold off an enemy, however, even your Ruskies defending Stalingrad didnt get up close and personal 1 on 1 with an SS Stormtrooper. Attacking however is a different ball game, having watched Ladies during bayonet practise, whilst some had the agression few had the power to even do much damage to the dummies.

In the red corner, 6' 15 stone infantryman, bayonet glinting in the sun. In the blue corner 5'6" 9 stone Infantrywoman bayonet glinting in the sun, seconds away round 1. Place your bets...
 
#18
Prodigal said:
And before any of you devastatingly funny, evisceratingly witty comediens produce the only stock riposte I have ever heard a man manage in these situations, no, I don't have PMT.
I think someone's midge is bleeding? :wink:

just as an example I regularly beat my wife, some times for no reason but usually she has done something serious like not made my tea or not ironed my kit!

not once in the 10 years of sometimes horrible violence has she managed to beat me back, I think this shows that birds can't fight! :twisted:
 
#20
the_guru said:
You lie like dormant syphilis.
Go away you i'm trying to pretend im well in charge in my house!
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top