My personal opinion is women in support roles, non-deployable, makes a much more steady force.
Dittos to what you said.
I agree.
The military has a term for those in non-deployable support roles. They're called 'civilians'. Why not just come out and say you want women banned from the military altogether.
I'd agree with that idea except that, while I was in, I saw my 4-and-2 rotation get arbitrarily changed to a 6-and-2 rotation just because it wasn't fair not to 'let the girls in'. I got more than a little irritated. Since women couldn't be assigned to sea duty billets at the time, they got assigned to shore duty billets. The men were just expected to pick up the slack. When the Navy started talking about going to an 8-and-2 rotation, I had to bail. With a 1-year-old and a 3-year-old at home, there was no way in hell that I was going to let them grow up without a dad.
(For non-military readers, that means spending 4 years of sea duty to get 2 years of shore duty, changing over time to spending 8 years of sea duty to get 2 years of shore duty.)