There is not one woman in history who has performed in combat better than a man couldIt destroying your fragile ego to have to face the fact that there are numerous women who have performed extremely well in combat....doesn’t change the facts.
But I’m sure the military will seriously consider the whining of a fifth columnist like yourself
The ability of the S 400 to track stealth aircraft has been well reported on. It also has a long enough range to deny use of air space to air the air refuelers.
It destroying your fragile ego to have to face the fact that there are numerous women who have performed extremely well in combat....doesn’t change the facts.
But I’m sure the military will seriously consider the whining of a fifth columnist like yourself
EMN's issue is that without exception all of these women are far more man than he is and he feels fragile and ashamed that he never had the balls to serve himself, so he tries to tear down people who actually do.
It’s interesting the first place you go to try to disprove an obviously true statement is Soviet propaganda.Valentina Grizodubova - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Lyudmila Pavlichenko - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Raisa Aronova - Wikipedia
Just a few examples literally off the top of my head
The facts don’t care about your fragile ego
So first you argue it has no impact, then admit it’s because the number of people is small. What are these miniscule numbers of people doing that is so special that only mentally ill crossdressers can do?
Armchair psychology noted and dismissed.
For decades the military banned “transgenders” as mentally unfit for military service. This was very sensible and uncontrovsial. Then overnight we had to pretend they were not mentally ill, which they clearly are, and recruit them into the military and pay for quack “treatments” like genital mutilation. Why? What do they offer that a regular straight male without mental illness cannot?
And for over a century there was no ban.
Since when does allowing trans people to join prevent straight males from joining?
No, we don’t. The entire transgender cause is based on social gender theory, a non falsifiable theory of gender being socially constructed. And it’s total fraud.
if so few as one person is off of duty to recover from mutilation then the degradation has happened.
officers who opposed the repeal were politically purged.
except firing of officers.
wrong question, if it leads to some not joining then the small number of mentally ill so called “trans” people are already more liability then benefit.
And yet light years above you, armchair theocratic fascist.
there is no such thing as trans people. There is people suffering from gender dysphoria.
People with schizophrenia exist! Are you going to be recruiting them next?
OK let’s recruit paraplegics. After all 100% readiness is not necessary.
already gave one and of course you didn’t read it.
They were not homosexual. Some groups of them had sex with men or amongst each other. They were not however gay. It’s kind of hilarious that you are insisting we have to identify transsexuals as their preferred identity, and yet you are just assuming the sexual orientation of people absent any evidence. Let’s say this again, having sex with a man does not make you gay.
And I’m sure nobody is going to bother surveying it either.
Yes, there is.
No. What a silly comparison.
Can paraplegics ruck? Carry a rifle? Run? No? Then they won't be recruited.
No, you haven't.
I can't tell if you are just straight up in denial or just trolling.
The Sacred Band are explicitly referred to as lovers and being made up of couples. You are in fact just in straight up denial.
And what can be submitted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
they certainly can’t while transitioning and in any event they can’t do it as well as men.
yes I did. Go back up the thread.
it appears to be you who is in denial or having never actually read and comprehended the practice of sexual unions between members of the same sex in Greece. In the most common form it was pederasty, and usually between men who were married or would become married to women. Among lower classes it was accepted as a bonding measure. It was not a society of gays as we know the concept now.
once by Plutarch and given his writing style it is impossible to prove that without the original sources he cites, which we do not have.
Except when people like you are part of a political conspiracy to suppress evidence. In which case the lack of evidence is your fault and you can’t use it as an argument.
Or. Political leaders of the Soviet Union after nearly losing the country in a violent and deadly conflict decided to throw out ideas that didn’t work well.
It was Polyaenus who described them as lovers.
lol