Female Swedish soldiers renew calls for fireproof undies

"There are still no flame resistant alternatives available"?

Check out "flame resistant underwear" on Google. Masses of it and good stuff as well.

We've had this discussion before. The Swedish Army is just dragging its feet.

Go on strike, girls! Refuse all services!

This is stupid.

The military needs to decide if it wants men only or men and women.

Whoever is in charge of proceurement, obviously should not be in the job.

There are useful jobs women can do in the Army but combat is not one of them.

you can buy flame resistant underwear in women's sizes for motor racing. It undergoes the same stringent testing that is used for fighter pilots pants... what's the problem?

Admittedly I haven't noticed any FIA approved under-wired flame proof brassiers for sale in the motorsport clothing catalogues...

Fireproof underwear will not stop bullets. Are their uniforms are fire retardant? If so, that is sufficient. Let's get on with life here.

@ spy,

You are sadly mistaken.

So in your thinking if I had a rifle in my hands, I would not be able to put a bullet between your eyes. If I had a rifle in my hands, do you actually believe because I am a women, that I would miss you?

Then you would find out what a woman could do in the military.

Your sexism is noted. Women can do every job in the army, including combat.

The more I read the comments on the local, the more I realise how many men who post on this forum, want a man only world, without women around..

Why are you so afraid of people with vagina´s?

You came out of one.

Why are Swedish women going into battle and killing another human being in the first place?

Besides didnt women burned their bras long ago ....

A woman soldier going kommando ... without any bra or underwear ... would defeat the enemy without the need to fire a single bullet.

As a male soldier ... i cant imagine firing my gun against a woman charging towards me .... without any bra!

ha ha

Nemesis

As a former member of the Army I have some observations:

Training standards are lowered as a direct result of women in the forces.

Women generally have a much lower breaking point physically and mentally. Women are at a serious disadvantage when fighting men.

The presence of women among male troops weakens combat readiness. When women are introduced, men stop relating to each other and begin trying to attract the women.

It has been proven that when women are involved in combat male troops forget their tactical objectives in order to protect the women from harm or being captured.

Pregnancy

PMT

PMT= pandered male tantrums? poor ole boys...always the girl's fault they can't get the job done.

Why are you trying to be something which God has not created you for that?

I think women can do better job by cooking, supplying foods, and women are not created for war, They are love and they deserve love and peace :) .

They can do better job as Police officer in the city I think. Otherwise in the army they would have problem with underwear hehe just kidding...

007

It's the feminists that think it is crucial to every women's self-esteem to be able to do exactly what men do even if they are not genetically cut out for it.

Most sane people from both genders recognize men and women are different.

Spy, don't waste your time. The politically correct class have already decided the way things "should" be, and refuse to acknowledge the facts of the real world. These sorts who place feelings over thinking and reason are all too prevelant these days, and are extremly dangerous to our survival. They immediately block out the proof and resort to name calling as their defense. It's the same as putting their fingers in their ears like little children and saying, "La La La La I can't hear you!" Infantile immaturity at it's best.

Some posters seem to forget that this is Sweden, where roles seem to have been reversed in recent years.

The women have the bottle to go into battle,while the guys are back home changing nappies and washing dishes.

why are some men so threatened by a woman doing the same thing he is. many men are not at their best physically, emotionally and mentally for traditional "male" roles and some women are.

seems all you need to defeat today's butch army is a chick flashing her boobs. sniper take that idiot out and that one and that one.

poor argument to need to lower the bar of the men in the military to the ones who can exercise dick control.

Most sane people realize that so-called "traditional gender traits" are actually spread out among genders without regard to biological gender. There are plenty of women who are good for combat and plenty of men who are not. That's why I always oppose mandatory conscription. Not everyone is cut out for combat, and not everyone believes it's right to be forced to support a military in a non-combat position either.

There are a lot of bitter, insecure men on The Local for some reason. You shouldn't be so worried, you still enjoy male privilege even if it's not the same as Victorian Britain or Colonial America. Keep reminiscing about the good ol' days while ignoring reality.

the best argument against women in combat is that while you could pump up a testosterone filled boy and send him screaming charge into a hail of bullets the female peer might query the strategic decision.

I love how a discussion about fire resistant underwear can degenerate into a feminist fist fight.

I think fire resistant underwear is going a bit far as long as your outer uniform provides adequate protection you should be fine in 99.9% of situations. I think the need or not would be dicated by the tactical sitation, if your on a warship or in an armoured vehicle (your more likely to be targetted by a bomb or a missile than a bullet) then you are massively more likely to get horribly burned. Having said that armoured crew are generally issued nomex uniforms so it's less of an issue.

None of the female soldiers I've come across had fire resistant underwear (that I'm aware of) and I served in a army that engages in actual combat not just peace keeping as in the Swedish Army.

Back to the point about women in the army, women are more than capable of being employed in the vast majority of military jobs just not in the infantry. Many studies have shown when women are integrated into infantry units and are actually sent into combat they are unable to maintain the high tempo of operations and (I'm generalising of course) are unable to carry the 60kg that an infantry soldier is expected to be able to hump up and down mountains for weeks or months on end. There is also the point made above that men find it very difficult to deal with female casualties.

Are men better than women because of that of course not. I think if all the evidence points to female infantry soldiers as being probably not a good idea then it would be wrong to place front line troops in an unsatisfactory situation just for the sake of political correctness.

Girls try to use the sandpaper!

Women are just as good as men, and in fact in many areas are superior and function better. However war is difficult enough for all male units. Men alone work well together as a team. Throw in a mix of women and you compromise the effectivness of the males in the unit. It's not the females fault. It's just that you can't expect men to suddenly see the women as comrades. They remain women, and deeply ingrained instincts will lead to the males vying for their friendship and in conflict situations will attempt to protect them. After war men are traumatised by the experiences of dying and injured comrades. This desensitises them and can often be a burden for life. The consequences of desensitivity towards women are however far more serious. I for one, wouldn't want to fight alongside women. I feel it would compromise my effectiveness and singlemindedness. I'm sure all-female units would function well. However, war is a stupid, outdated and senseless activity which we should have grown out of by now. Only 60 years ago Europeans were killing each other and behaving like brutal animals. Now it seems all so pointless and stupid. Maybe one day the whole planet will have matured enough to feel the same. War is wrong, immature and futile. I'm surprised that women feel the need to prove they are as stupid as men.

Scottish Boy

I agree totally, and you are reinforcing my points from #9. Women are not suitible for combat and there is no place for political correctness on the battlefield.

And from my experience in Army very few women actually wanted to join a 'teeth-arm' anyway - they were very happy to play to their strengths which were generally more suited to the REMF-type units - and we should not belittle these units too much as they are critical to military operations too.

And to all those armchair feminists out there ask yourself a question: 'Are you arguing this point to boost your self-esteem or would you like to join the Army and go into combat?'

QUOTE : 'She explained that, until the situation was resolved, women would continue to run the risk of suffering skin burns if their underwear caught fire in a combat situation.'--

Combat Situation? You must be kidding

Your having a laugh the sweds have a army

Regarding the underwear issue.

As someone who has family members who have been burned in tanks when they have brewed up in WW2 and in recent conflicts, fireproof clothes are a must, including underwear. For pilots they are also necessary. In war burns are common.

The fact the Swedish military are not supplying fireproof underwear is an indication of something else. They are probably using it as an excuse to keep women away from the front lines. Such pathetic sexism needs to be rooted out of the military. Any soldier harbouring such backward ideas, should be invited to leave Sweden and move to Somewhere more suitable, such as Saudi Arabia.

@ spy

Have you ever met a women or seen a picture of anyone but Paris Hilton.

Quite a few women are cut out for combat.

If my country was in danger, I would have no problem going into combat. Believe you me, I know how to use a gun and my father and mother made sure I am an experienced hunter.

@ 007

The light brigade days are over.

@ Scottish Boy,

A lot of women mountain climb and hike in the countryside. Climbing takes a lot of Stamina and hiking with a backpack is the same as military weight. I should know, I have went up the mountains with my cousin with his daughter when he was in mountain rescue to bring back exhausted soldiers on excercise. About half of those soldiers couldn´t carry there backpacks either.

Most emergency room surgeons are men. Are you suggesting they would treat men and women differently.

Your arguements are 200 years out of date and have no place in modern society.

Nemesis,

You right in some respects, but put in real terms if injured and your life depended on being carried by someone in a hurry out of fire fight, who would you prefer, it's a one shot chance? Forget theory, politics etc this is your a$$ on the line?

In UK military no one get fireproof kit, men or women. If you outer clothing has burnt so badly it's down to your underwear, then your literally brown bread. 95% burns and will die.

Why do they need an army in Sweden? It's not like they have ever been to war. Only time i've seen the army is when they are directing traffic. Always wondered why they have a yellow stripe in their flag.

Nemesis

Life on operations is a little different to hiking you #¤%ing lunatic! And I don't beleive for one minute the added personal touches you add to all of your posts (on every topic!) - it is clear you are a complete fantasist.

I would happily send you out infront of the troops as an advanced guard if it would make you feel better - it would certainly make me feel better!!! Hell I would even pay for a fireproof bra for you!

Now calm down and take your medication.

@ dsclimb

Thats why I agree with them calling for fireproof clothes.

I have seen the damage burns can do.

Also after Northern Ireland when burns were a regular occurance on the streets of Belfast and Derry, there is no excuse for not issuing the soldiers with better flame resistance clothing as they should have leaned from that.

In a combat situation, you life is on the line all the time.

My great uncle used to make jokes when drunk about the time he was carried out of an ambush by german troops in Caen by a French woman, who literally threw him over her shoulder. He is 190cm and he made clear she was only about 160cm. She was a farmer though. She died last year and we were all at her funeral.

Nemesis, time has moved on, for riots people alredy wear flame proof oversuits, boots, flame proof balaclava, helmet, gloves etcs. but this is a different arguement.

Your uncle was clearly lucky and rightly grateful to be rescued, but your average 160cm female is not as strong as male. It all depends on if you want an 'equal' army or the 'best' army.

If you have ever served, you will know that the addition of a few girls in group, causes complete chaos, the male youths hormones just can't cope and people change, act differently, rivallry starts, jealousy, failed relationships, an all female regiment would work better.

But we degress, either way, if my clothes had all burnt off down to my shreddies, I think I would have other things on my mind!! Probably my unprotected face melting off.

Nemesis

I don't beleive you - there is no great uncle, nor a tank driving relative, no personal experience of burn damage - in fact there is not a lot of anything.

You are a fantasist who will say anything to get a conversation going.

@ spy,

You know what you can go do with yourself.

My family fought the whole way through WW2. QUite a few are buried there.

I would love to see you say that to my face.

@ dsclimb

I see your points, but I do believe the world has moved on.

Also if some guys are uncomfortable around women, that is there problem. It should not be anyone else´s.

Regarding the uniform, I think the entire uniform should be fire retardent, so as to reduce the amount and severity of burns.

Nemesis I think you need a reality check, are you trying to tell me that you or anyone you know has hiked with 60kg + Not even people climbing Everest carry that much. And hiking or climbing does not compare even remotely to the stamina required in sustained combat operations. Sometimes you can go days without sleep (my record is 6 days), no hot food even when it's cold as heat can give your position away and the continual stress of knowing that you could be about to be killed. All that continiung for weeks or months on end.

Tell me Nemesis does that sound like climbing or hiking, I agree with others here that you are a fantasist. Sometimes you make half decent points then you go and ruin it by making ridiculous statements that make you sound mental (equating hiking with combat is one example). I don't like the judgemental way you meat of your views as if you are the arbiter of absolute truth especially as you can be quite rude when you do it belittling other peoples views.

I think women are great, much more rounded human beings than men but you can't deny the biological differences and that doesn't make me unfit to be a part of society as you suggest.

On the question of burns, I have been badly burned and have had 12 painful reconstructive plastic surgery operations so this is a subject close to my heart and one I know a bit about.

Everyone missed the pics. Love it. Checking to see if the rifle is cleared by looking down the business end of the barrel. That's a great way to thin out the ranks. Wish my drill instructor had done that. If this is standard swedish military practice, well, I wouldn't want to fight either.

Nemesis, it's not a matter of if it's the guy problem, the idea is to create the most effective fighting force with least number of people. When girl A dumbs boy B and starts seeing boy C who is in fact junior in rank to B, it all starts going very wrong. You clearly have no concept of the military or group dynamics in general.

Perhaps it is different for Sweden, because it's Army is less combat orientated, so it's more of a show that matters than real combat effectiveness.

There are issues to do with fire retardent impacting the other properties of the fabric needed. It has to be weavable or printable for camo, comfortable for long periods (weeks at a stretch), fairly breathable.

It's not just a matter printing yourself some camoflauge lace knickers.

Best reason women have traditionally not been exposed to combat? The answer is that, biologically and culturally speaking, a society that sacrifices its women will not be making many babies in the future. You need women to replace the numbers lost in war -- men can't do that or else swedish men would be giving birth by now.

@ Scottish Boy

Six days without sleep and you would be in hospital.

What city in Sweden are you and Spy in?

Imagine an all male swedish mums coffee morning, they would be right at home talking hair products etc..

It is of the greatest combat importance that Swedish women serving in the Army in a combat situation should have fireproof underwear.

In fact, there should be a daily inspection of these said articles to check that they are of a satisfactory quality and that they do resist flames. A small flame applied to the garment when held in the hand of the combat soldier should suffice to check that the undergarment is flame resistant.

Soldiers may then proceed to dress themselves on the parade ground to become battle ready.

Nemesis you make me laugh with your absolutism, you can go much longer than 6 days without sleep and you still wouldn't end up in hospital trust me I'm an ICU nurse.

Take a look at: www.abc.net.au/science/sleep/facts.htm

I'm back in Scotland at the moment and am thinking about coming back to Sweden but was living in Lund and Piteå before. The only problem is my Swedish is really rusty so I'm not sure if I could get a job.

Nemesis - you are wrong again.. If the sexists here do not convince, maybe I can (doubtful).

One can see that you have never been in the army. You think that the combat is only laying and shooting and killing and then going home. This is not the case.

After trials with most capable women in some western armies, it was CLINICALLY determined that the skeleton structure of all women is softer than the minimum requirement of a bone stracture of a basic infantryman. What does it mean? When we run, our bones (especially in the legs and hips) are slowly crushed into microscopic powder. When we rest, the bone rebuilds itself and becomes thicker. That is why it is not advised to run every day. If you have only 5-6 hours of sleep, heavy army boots with solid sole, 10-20 kilo equipment on youself every day, the bones are sustaining VISIBLE damage.

When I was in the army, out of 32 guys in my unit, 18 got bone breakage to the length of the bone due to heavy equipment and too fast physical program. I coud see THROUGH my leg bones on the X-ray!

Female legs were physically breaking in a middle of running on some experimental bootcamp programs, even if the muscles of these women were good enough.

In addition, there were injuries like popping out knees, spine damages, ripped muscles, birth system damages.

The pilot females that are prepared in USA and other countries have lighter bootcamp. They are not allowed to carry the same weight and run the same distance. One could ask, why a pilot require infantry boot camp? One obviously was not taken down in a middle of Yugoslavia or Somalia.

In addition, female organism is uncapable of sustaining the same dehydration levels - even if psychologically women are even better than men in suffering ability, they just faint faster.

As for anti-terror training. One of the requirements of these special forces is to be able to sustain heavy beating without losing the tactical thinking. Whenever women (even good fighters) were introduced in these courses - their jaws, knees and shoulders dislocated much faster when confronted with professional men (or terrorists, for the sake of simulation). With a dislocated shoulder, one cannot physically continue to fight even if he/she is eager to.

There is ONE female soldier that got a medal for fighting ability. She is an MP that got ambushed. So from the truck, on the ground, boom boom, cavalry came, medal on the chest.

If she would have to run 120 kilometers with 90 kilos on her body, like the SAS did in Iraq (described in Bravo 2.0), she would probably get a medal post-mortum.

So not sexism. it is just impossible.

Sweden? Army? Combat? When did all this happen?

All you have to do is look at the picture to get an adequate answer about women in the Swedish military. You never inspect a rifle held by someone else, especially not looking down the barrel. It's a good way to get your head blown off.

You know, that it is possible that the rifle is folded? Meaning that it cannot shoot because it is open and the hammer is on the other part of the weapon? In that case one can check from that side without any risk. Furthermore - I am sure that it is open, because it is just dark otherwise and nothing can be seen, so if she sees something (dirt or bullets), there has to be light in background.

I am much more impressed by the other photo - of the hot babe.

It doesn't matter. You never inspect a weapon held by another person. Period.

Nemesis

I say again; as a former member of the Army I have some observations:

-Training standards are lowered as a direct result of women in the forces.

-Women generally have a much lower breaking point physically and mentally. Women are at a serious disadvantage when fighting men.

-The presence of women among male troops weakens combat readiness. When women are introduced, men stop relating to each other and begin trying to attract the women.

-It has been proven that when women are involved in combat male troops forget their tactical objectives in order to protect the women from harm or being captured.

-Pregnancy - need I say more?

-PMT - do you really want unbalanced people to have access to guns even if they are on your side?? (haha)

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS HAS NO PLACE ON THE BATTLEFIELD

Depends on the army and circumstances . When you are coming up to guard, you are arriving at a certain point, where the shift officer is checking your weapon for bullets.

Since there could be 50 people changing the perimeter of a base, the officer cannot cock 50 M-16's or AK-47 every hour. So everyone stands in a line, cocks the weapon, officer/sergeant goes through the line with a flashlight and looks into every weapon.

If the weapon is is folded - it does not matter where you are looking from - it is as safe and as dangerous from both sides. Safe because theoretically it is impossible to shoot, even if a bullet is stuck in the barrel and dangerous, because if the bullet DOES go off, the cartrige will propel into your head from the "safe side" with the same speed as the bullet from the "unsafe side".

In the British Army it is called 'port arms.' On the order the individual checks HIS/HER own weapon before presenting it to the range conducting officer does a second check before ordering 'ease spings' which instructs the individual to bring the working parts forward before firing the gun with no round in the chamber. However in the British Army they look into an open breech and not down the barrel.

Uncle, you and the rest of the highly trained Swedish military can look down the barrel of a weapon held by someone else, not me or anyone else with a modicum of knowledge regarding weapon safety. Hello! They are called accidental shootings for a reason.

Uncle, you make a lot of good points about the physiological differences but the average kilo burden to an infantryman (at least in the British Army) is much greater than 10-20kg. I reckon 10-20kg would be more like a normal civilian load if you were hiking.

I think these items would add up to a tad more than 10-20kg:

Assault rifle(and bayonet) or machine gun

Hundreds of rounds of ammo

Grenades (fragmentation certainly maybe WP or smoke)

Body armour and helmet

Food and water (possibly enough for several days)

Spare Clothing

Combat uniform and boots (worn)

Goretex waterproofs

Personal hygiene items

Cooking gear and fuel

First aid equipment

Tactical personal radio or larger (heavier) long distance radio

Night vision equipment

Spare batteries

Chemical / nuclear warfare gear

Sleeping bag / goretex bivi bag / basha / sleep mat

An anti-tank missile or anti-aircraft missile (I'm not kidding)

Backpack and webbing or chest vest

Teddy bear (I'm really not kidding although this one is optional)

Map / Compass

Notebook / pen

Pocket Knife

Paracord

Torch (flashlight if your a yank)

Other miscellaneous bits and bobs

A nice book in case you get bored

I can attest to the physical damage caused by military service, I have problems with my knees which I'm sure will probably need replaced later in life (I'm in my late 30's now).

Agree 20kg is only a daysack and webbing.

40-50kg can be an infantry Bergen (with the ammo and without the book).

Spy, it night be a very light book like a list of the postive achievements of George W Bush or a weighty tome like the complete works of Shakespeare. Mind you if you ran out out ammo you could always thwack the talitubbies with Shakespeare that would give them a bruise they wouldn't forget although the bayonet is probably more indicated than the book in that situation.

Agree with spy ..today. Why is it so hard for some women / men to accept that we women, are just physically and even mentally different from men? Can we carry the same weight / run same speｅd / have same strength as men? Its rule of nature. We 'can' do pretty much everything that men can, but it's a matter of being 'suitable' or not. There are things that men are just more suitable to do than us women.

And vica verca.

Fire-proof undies because Swedish women ARE SMOKIN HOT!

Eeeeh Scottish boy and spy - you, guys are describing the "field training". This is not done on daily basis in the bootcamp!

Usually, you have a helmet, 5-7 magazines, assault rifle, dummy grenades/rockets (depends on designation) and go ahead and run for 15 hours per day between two poles for no specific reason. Machine gunners, water carriers and mortar guys have a bit harder life, but they are bigger than the rest and the machine gunners do not carry the entire armament, otherwise they get hernia on the first month.

If you, Scottish Boy managed to survive the training in a boot camp while wearing a ceramic body armor on a daily basis - damn, you must be in some some super-duper special forces! As far as I know, even South African "recce" did not have this on a daily basis and only 700 ever passed their training, out of tens of thousands experienced soldiers (their "basic" training was equalized to the training of american Navy Seals and Green Berets TOGETHER. It was about 2 years!)

Uncle... I don't really understand your point, I wasn't discussing basic or field training, I was talking about actual combat operations. But when I did my basic training we carried a lot more stuff on exercises than you are suggesting above and actually learned who to be soldiers rather than just running around for 15 hours a day.

I was a platoon signaller and carried a 10kg radio (and spare batttery etc) so I was actually carrying more weight than a machine gunner and I'm only 167cm. Funnily enough having met quite a few SAS guys in the field or in camp it always struck me how small they were (i.e my height wasn't unsual). I guess small man syndrome helps in Special Forces selection, It's not so much about bulk and height as mental strength and ability.

I was in a Scottish infantry regiment not the super duper special forces and no of course we didn't always train wearing body armour, the use of body armour is based on tactical need. The list I made above is what you may have to carry in high intensity operations against a well equipped foe, if your fighting the Taliban you probably don't need the anti-aircraft missile.

I lived in South Africa for a while so I do know how good the old SADF were. The Green Berets and Seals are pretty good but I would sooner have some Parabats on my side than those guys.

Uncle

A little information can be a dangerous thing - and you clearly have only a little of the information as to how things work in the Army. Frankly I can't be bothered to explain SOPs to an armchair-expert who wouldn't know one end of a rifle from the other.

Then you missed a point where I was discussing the physical inability of women to pass a male bootcamp. Which CAN be proved and WAS proved.

My point was that if they are incapable of passing the basic training of a regular infantryman, then there is no chance there is a need in them in the battle or in any military operation whatsoever.

15 hours was of course a simplification. You get up, eat, run for an hour, run to the shooting range, run between the turns, run to the lunch, eat, run to weapons classes, learn, run just for the sake of running, eat, run for the last class and in the last 2 hours - run just as a punishment for your "screw-ups" and being "ladies and embarrassment for the armed forces". Sounds familiar?

As I said, the basic training has a load depending on designation of the soldier within the platoon. In my unit both of the radio carriers were small also. I think that small guys are faster and have higher endurance levels.

Spy - for 3 years of my life I did not see an armchair, but only a white desert and dust and came up to sergeant first class and served for a while as a drill sergeant for pilots and special designation units in the airforce.

You are not even listening to what has been said.

Uncle

Basic training is the training every soldier goes through regardless of 'designation' as you call it.

So in 3 years you did your basic training, selected-arm training, deployed on operations, rose to sgt, trained to be a drill instructor and drilled 'special designation' units. Was this in the real world or on your playstation?

Also regarding your poor description of weapon inspection in an earlier post anyone who had been in the forces would know that you don't 'fold' rifles to inspect them this is the what you do to shotguns. . .

Again you are not reading and it is getting annoying. Some soldiers IN the basic training have special designation. There are machine gunner, medic, 2 radio guys (seargant and the platoon officer's communication) , 2 mortar guys, 2 grenadiers etc.

That is one point.

The other point is that I was explaining something who has never been in the army and maybe does not understand the basics of the weapon.

Additionally, the only info that YOU have provided is based solely on Wikipedia and therefore puts you in an idiotic position.

Furthermore - as a good reader you did not read what I have described in regards to the weapons check. Nobody said that one SHOULD fold the weapon or dissemble it at all. I described how it is DONE. A line cocks up the weapons and the officer checks the chambers.

IF... IF IFIFIFIF you are a woman sergeant and you do NOT trust women - you make them open the weapon completely. In that case there is no difference from which side you check the weapon... If I were the drill sergeant of women this is EXACTLY what I would do.

And by the way - M16 is foldable, you genius. This shows your familiarity with the weapon...

Give them thier fireproof underwear...the last thing we want is them settingf themselves on fire round an open flame while in the kitchen cooking!!

Uncle

Unlike you I have been there, done that and got the T-shirt. And for your info the M16A2 service rifle as used by US forces does not fold to expose the chamber (where did you dream this up??) - to clear it you lock the working parts to the rear and expose the chamber.

I laughed my head off when you said in 3 years you did your basic training, selected-arm training, deployed on operations, rose to sgt, trained to be a drill instructor and drilled 'special designation' units.

I think we have yet another fantasist on this website!

WOW!! To call this a hot item is an understatement!!

But why have fireproof bras and undies! Their breasts are not so hot, and neither are their private parts. Just ask the men who have to deal with you every day. Cold and sexless, you Swedish broads are.

I don't want to continue the dumb discussion above any further so. . .wow, the soldier girl on the left is really cute. MMMMMMMMM. . .Swedish bikini team army.

spy - you are simply an idiot. Never have I seen a person who does not listen to this extent on this forum, but I already noticed that earlier on. Your info is coming from Wikipedia solely and there is no chance you have served ever in any armed forces.

There is no need to fold the M-16, YOU DUMMY!

BUT IT IS POSSIBLE! It is possible to do if you want to be completely sure that the rifle will not fire, or that the women would not be able to hold the mechanism open for the chamber check. In that case you tell them to open the weapon and check it.

In addition, nobody "locks the working parts in the back of the weapon". You hold he "working parts" while showing the chamber to the officer. Which may be hard for women.

What is more, I think it is more reasonable to assume, if the drill sergeant above made them do it, than decided to look into the dark barrel of an unckocked weapon.

Uncle

You are a liar and you are losing what little credibility that you have left. The more you lie the more ammunition anyone who actually has been in the Army has against you. For example:

1) You can NOT fold the weapon to reveal the chamber

2) To clear the weapon you DO lock or hold the working parts to the rear to expose the chamber

3) Weapon drills are the same for men as they are for women

3) So you have checked my facts on wiki (you sad man) and because they were correct you think that is where I got them from - no this stuff gets drilled into you over years

4) AND A REALLY BIG ONE: You stated you got to Sgt Class One in 3 years (along with another load of lies) - it actually takes over 10 years to get promoted to this point.

5) You are clearly a fantasist - I am happy to discuss this off-line with you - if you have the balls.

I lay down the challenge - send me an inmail. I am sure a short conversation or face-to-face will clear this matter up.

spy - you are continue with being a dummy.

You CAN fold the weapon and take out the carrier in 3 seconds.

To clear the weapon you HOLD the carrier, since in SOME armies (not only the spy armies) officers are putting their finger in the chamber and the mechanism is unreliable

bla bla

who said - American army, dummy?

Ok, you are right, I am a liar and the woman above is suicidal and can see through darkness, because the "bergen 60 kilos" spy thinks so. You win.

And that ladies and gentlemen is what you call a rout.