There are someone women who are well physically built. Like me for example. With the proper training, we could take them. Plus, the men fighting will be less likely to want to harm women so it works both ways.
Few counter points:
If you are in a combat situation, it is unlikely that you will be recognized as a female (helmet covering hair, large bulky equipment, and in my mind, close quarter combat is not in ideal light and primarily on reactions)
Looking at the second picture, each of those guys could probably tear most people apart (me included). Its unlikely that an average female could put nearly that much mass (and by association strength) on.
Im sure you can, with significant training, take one of those guys down. But with the same training, they would be that stronger, and capable of killing you.
Still, there are women out there who can make significant warriors. Valid first point. If the women are trained from a young age though, and join the army: 1. There will be a larger number (though it's quality not quantity.) 2. There can be a larger number of skilled fighters. 3. We all know how aggressive and quick-to-defend-themselves we women are.
I guess im like Kreakin i thinking. In a WWII setting, where training is fast, and battles are close, women would not fair well. There would not likely be sufficient time to train the women beyond a rifle and basic tactics.
I think we could agree that with equal training, a male will win the majority of the time. Though, females may (on account of less physical strength) move tactfully and avoid possible situations.
:p I have a weird brain. That has already been established... BTW, so what if I am willing to defend my country? And yes I do want muscles to defend myself. I'd rather be able to defend myself than be tiny and scrawny and easily taken advantage of. If having those qualities means I am "masculine," then fine. I'd rather be me and be "masculine" than go out shopping while innocent people go out to wars and need help.