Which is more important in combat: Speed or strength?

During our last rotation to Afghanistan you could see a measurable difference in the guys who lifted and those who didn't. On a daily basis we usually run during PT or ruck and these give us increased endurance. But having endurance without the load of is a completely different thing. When a Soldier who has excellent endurance for an APFT is loaded up with gear and forced to jump grape rows and crouch in pomegranate orchards they struggle, I have witnessed the lifters excel because their bodies are used to the resistance and the endurance runners who aren't lifters struggle. I believe you need a balance of both in order to be able to be effective.

I voted Strength, but I'd like to add endurance to that.

Well in Bayonet Training I heard there are two types of fighters.... the quick and the dead.

Neither. Agility of thinking is far and away the most important asset a leader can have.

These attributes are NOT mutually exclusive. Like an alloy, the Soldier is better when both speed and strength are balanced.

I have never been in a combat situation but I believe that a balance of both would be needed. However, I also think that endurance plays a big role in the balance of both because regardless of your speed or strength (or combination of the two) if you cannot maintain it for the situation that presents itself then they are equally useless.

It depends on the situation which is why we don't have one service branch or one weapons system. In some situations you want strength, in some speed and in others both in balance.

I voted combination, however I'd have to say endurance, not so much the other two. You can be strong and fast but if you can't last long and tire out you're done.

"Outwit your enemy with your mind."
Sun Tzu

It is good to have strength. But without intellect, it is difficult to outwit a smarter foe.

Endurance!