View Full Version : Send your daughter to war
clodhopper
06-16-2016, 10:25
While the country obsessed about Orlando, the Congress passed the National Defense Act, which (among other things) requires young women to register for selective service and be eligible for the draft. Headed to O's desk for a signature.
http://www.cnn.com/2016/06/15/politics/senate-approves-women-draft/index.html
http://dailycaller.com/2016/04/27/measure-to-force-women-to-sign-up-for-draft-passes-house-panel/
TEAMRICO
06-16-2016, 10:28
Good.
I don't have a daughter but I have mixed feelings on the issue regardless.
JohnTRourke
06-16-2016, 10:37
Good
You want equality, welcome to the party pal. Shit ain't free.
clodhopper
06-16-2016, 10:41
Good
You want equality, welcome to the party pal. Shit ain't free.
When I think about militant feminists, I have the same thought. When I think about my own daughter, I get very strong NIMBY emotions.
newracer
06-16-2016, 10:44
I only have sons but even if I had daughters I would feel any different about them as I do about my sons.
Also the chance of a draft is slim to none.
I only have sons but even if I had daughters I would feel any different about them as I do about my sons.
Also the chance of a draft is slim to none.
You think so? Might want to take a look at what we're doing in Syria and how we are engaged with NATO against Putin.
Russia could move on the EU tomorrow and the EU would be overrun in a week, EU is DEPENDENT on the US for defense, they cannot defend themselves. We have idiots like john fuckin kerry and his majesty barack the fuckwit obama running foreign policy after the bitchhag screwed everything up she ever touched.
If Russia moves there will be a draft. I just hope all the idiots who think women should be in combat go first b/c they should be the first ones to die in the war their asshole leaders created.
Good
You want equality, welcome to the party pal. Shit ain't free.
+1
Equality means equal draft notices and equal number of deferments. Equal number of occupied body bags coming back home too.
It's the reason so many of us fought "equality" but we were marginalized.
Feminists did the same thing for women in the workforce. Women used to have choice and now most are forced to work. Isn't equality great!
trlcavscout
06-16-2016, 11:14
I have a daughter so i dont like this idea, but women have bitched about equal opportunity for years so now they have it. I dont personally know any women that have been pushing for right to die in combat and my wife bitches about women having to work, but apparently a lot of women just want to be one of the guys, so fair is fair, unfortunetely even at non military corporate jobs they are hiring women to do mens jobs at the same pay rate as men but they get special treatment and the men are expected to do the heavy lifting for them. F- that!
I dont want my daughter (now 8) to have to go through the shit i did, but if she grows up to be one of "those women", then she will have her cake and eat it too! To all the women who pushed for this stuff what ever age they are now, they should be required to go register.
You think so? Might want to take a look at what we're doing in Syria and how we are engaged with NATO against Putin.
Russia could move on the EU tomorrow and the EU would be overrun in a week, EU is DEPENDENT on the US for defense, they cannot defend themselves. We have idiots like john fuckin kerry and his majesty barack the fuckwit obama running foreign policy after the bitchhag screwed everything up she ever touched.
If Russia moves there will be a draft. I just hope all the idiots who think women should be in combat go first b/c they should be the first ones to die in the war their asshole leaders created.
Good points but I think the goose has been cooked.
If the US doesn't have the political will to stay in Iraq (relatively cheap in blood/treasure compared to other wars) how could we fight another world-war scale conflict? We've got an entire generation of folks who think work is a hobby and they're not interested. If a young guy (or gal) won't even work a 9-5 do we really expect them to go to war? Won't pay off their student loans but will march with loads getting ~4 hours sleep a night, sleeping in mud, getting shot at, not showering, eating out of a plastic bag for days (and enjoying all the associate digestive changes that occur).
If Putin wants continental Europe, it's his.
I almost doubt if a direct and substantial attack on the US would unify us at this point. Half the county hates the other half and that hatred increases with each and every day along with moral confusion.
What is gender or sex? To those who profess the fluid nature of sexual identity, registering for a draft is unimaginable. Besides, what types of deferments will be permitted when the draft is implemented X years from now?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
gnihcraes
06-16-2016, 12:17
Leave my daughter, I'll go in her place. Just my feeling on it. But yes, if they want equal rights, then so be it.
I'm always having to lift the heavy objects here at work for my co-worker. 50# computer equipment. Girl can hardly lift her own leg. (fat, lazy)
Great-Kazoo
06-16-2016, 12:21
Our daughter enlisted when she turned 18. She wanted us to sign for her after 9/11, told her to wait, in case she changed her mind. Not a chance, 18 she was off for 5 years. Go Ordnance !
I don't have any kids yet but I don't particularly like this idea. However, when you scream for equal rights, this is what happens.
First thing they can do is put out the fire burning at Fort Carson.
Must be a good one. It's smokey all the way up here.
KestrelBike
06-16-2016, 14:58
Segregate the combat units?
Segregate the combat units?
And miss out on coed showers?
trlcavscout
06-16-2016, 15:28
Front line sammich makers :) Hand me a ham and cheese and another mag!
1) Good. About damn time. You want to be an "equal", this (among other things) is what it means.
2) Barring invasion by space aliens, the potential of the US ever implementing a draft is effectively zero. The days of everyman's army are long long gone.
You haven't lived until you are invited to spend a night in the womens barracks.
You mean that extra cot at the end of the biv?
Great-Kazoo
06-16-2016, 19:15
1) Good. About damn time. You want to be an "equal", this (among other things) is what it means.
2) Barring invasion by space aliens, the potential of the US ever implementing a draft is effectively zero. The days of everyman's army are long long gone.
Between the DADT and gender neutrality acceptance today. It would take who knows how long for an enlisted person to be battle station ready.
Excuse me, is that my sports bra or yours? Oh my bad, these must be your boxers.
Between the DADT and gender neutrality acceptance today. It would take who knows how long for an enlisted person to be battle station ready.
Excuse me, is that my sports bra or yours? Oh my bad, these must be your boxers.
[LOL]
Zundfolge
06-16-2016, 20:54
On the one hand I'm glad because of equality and all.
On the other hand stuff like this makes me think that western civilization is on its way to collapse and/or be over run and humanity is about to be plunged into a thousand years of darkness.
On the one hand I'm glad because of equality and all.
On the other hand stuff like this makes me think that western civilization is on its way to collapse and/or be over run and humanity is about to be plunged into a thousand years of darkness.
Nahh! I've seen the end of this movie. Gollum bites the ring off of Frodo's finger and falls into Mount Doom. Good beats evil.
Sorry about the spoiler. [Coffee]
GilpinGuy
06-16-2016, 22:06
Equal number of occupied body bags coming back home too.
Sadly, I don't think this is true.
JohnnyDrama
06-16-2016, 22:23
About darn time. It'll be interesting to see how this shakes out. I don't imagine the rules will remain the same.
68Charger
06-17-2016, 08:36
I doubt this is really well thought out, and could lead to unintended consequences...
"no Ma'am, it doesn't say anything in the law about pregnancy being an excuse from the draft- off to basic training you go"
clodhopper
06-17-2016, 10:23
I doubt this is really well thought out, and could lead to unintended consequences...
"no Ma'am, it doesn't say anything in the law about pregnancy being an excuse from the draft- off to basic training you go"
Nah, that will certainly be an exception for service, or better yet, just a deferment. I can forsee a lot of young women getting pregnant just as war is declared.
Zundfolge
06-17-2016, 10:32
I doubt this is really well thought out, and could lead to unintended consequences...
Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics don't build their factories on the front lines.
In a protracted war, that's exactly what sending women to the front is doing with our future soldiers.
Nah, that will certainly be an exception for service, or better yet, just a deferment. I can forsee a lot of young women getting pregnant just as war is declared.
That's already been happening-or least with upcoming deployments. My son saw multiple examples last trip to Asshole-istan.
If the president insists all military positions be open to both men and women then selective service registration should also be required of both sexes.
If the president insists all military positions be open to both men and women then selective service registration should also be required of both sexes.
Or, instead of making it worse, we use the common sense of a moral, civilized society and send only our men to war. Feminists be damned.
DenverGP
06-17-2016, 15:09
Or, instead of making it worse, we use the common sense of a moral, civilized society and send only our men to war. Feminists be damned.
As a parent (and a veteran, with a veteran wife), I wouldn't want my son or daughter drafted. If this makes it that much less likely that the government re-instate a draft, then I'm all for it.
Additional, there are millions? of women who have enlisted in the military, many of whom are already being sent into harms way. So we're already sending our women to war.
DavieD55
06-17-2016, 18:06
Or, instead of making it worse, we use the common sense of a moral, civilized society and send only our men to war. Feminists be damned.
This^
Or, instead of making it worse, we use the common sense of a moral, civilized society and send only our men to war. Feminists be damned.
Draft or no draft, how is it immoral for women soldiers to fight?
I think he's saying that is immoral to force women to be soldiers, not to make women who have volunteered to be soldiers actually fight.
clodhopper
06-17-2016, 22:17
Israel is due to need. Every citizen will be needed when that fight starts. Nearly every other example is a communist country, where people are workers rather than citizens in the concept we have here. Workers are expendable and gender has no bearing. Countries that don't treat their people like chattel see a difference and incorporate that difference into societal structure.
idealistic stuff aside, the main reason we keep our women home is you only need one rooster per henhouse to keep your populations up or restore numbers after a high dead rate war. Cold, crass, sure... but it is the truth of biology.
GunsRBadMMMMKay
06-17-2016, 22:49
I don't really agree with this, but I'm hoping that by the time my daughter is old enough she'll be better prepared then the boys peeing in the bathroom stalls next to her in the girls locker room.
Draft or no draft, how is it immoral for women soldiers to fight?
Simple Biology - Testosterone vs. Estrogen.
Throughout the animal kingdom, males and females are designed differently in order to best fulfill their roles.
This was once plainly obvious to all.
When there are enough men to do the fighting, it is immoral to send in women.
As stated previously, Israel does not have an option, nor do the Kurds, and other countries without morals simply don't care.
Simple Biology - Testosterone vs. Estrogen.
Throughout the animal kingdom, males and females are designed differently in order to best fulfill their roles.
This was once plainly obvious to all.
When there are enough men to do the fighting, it is immoral to send in women.
As stated previously, Israel does not have an option, nor do the Kurds, and other countries without morals simply don't care.
You're confused. You're thinking about the real world. That no longer matters.
Decisions are made by a professional screeching minority (our betters) subsidized by our paychecks who make decisions based on platitudes and feels. These decisions are then forced on everyone, because, we still go to work on Monday and follow their rules.
Once it was decided that men and women are perfectly equal (new morality). Any argument, fact, or evidence demonstrating otherwise becomes immoral. The only moral thing to do is ensure equal outcome. And thus, young girls getting killed on the battlefield is a moral imperative.
If women don't like this, it is up to them to fight it. Men aren't allowed to hold a contrary opinion (see above).
I hope that we all keep in mind that registering for a draft is not the same as a draft. If a draft is called, rules for deferments will be made and how individual draftees are handled will be determined by a draft board.
As for women fighting in combat, that horse was never in the barn. While it may not have always been legally sanctioned, women have fought in every war the United States has been involved in and that is fairly easily proven with just a little research.
I believe the number of women actively seeking infantry assignments will be a small percentage of overall recruiting.
I support the volunteer military and believe that we currently field the most capable combat force the world has ever seen. This is in spite of the most disrespectful political leadership the military has had to deal with in decades.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Or, instead of making it worse, we use the common sense of a moral, civilized society and send only our men to war. Feminists be damned.
Exactly how I feel.
Zundfolge
06-18-2016, 13:42
Simple Biology - Testosterone vs. Estrogen.
Throughout the animal kingdom, males and females are designed differently in order to best fulfill their roles.
This was once plainly obvious to all.
If EVER there was a time to point out the quote in my signature, this is it...
Modern liberalism is based on the idea that reality is obligated to conform to one's beliefs because; "I have the right to believe whatever I want".
Sending your women off to war in my opinion is a problem, but not as big of a problem as the lowering and adjusting of standards that is about to come. Unless you've been around women in the military, its really hard to describe how much of a problem they actually are. I believe that in warfare there should be no compromises, no politician micro managing, no political correctness. We fight wars to destroy our enemies plain and simple. I am lucky enough to be married to an Army Airborne combat vet and she hates the typical military women and all the problem that they cause as well.
Simple Biology - Testosterone vs. Estrogen.
Throughout the animal kingdom, males and females are designed differently in order to best fulfill their roles.
This was once plainly obvious to all.
When there are enough men to do the fighting, it is immoral to send in women.
As stated previously, Israel does not have an option, nor do the Kurds, and other countries without morals simply don't care.
I'll just say that I disagree with everything you just wrote.
GilpinGuy
06-19-2016, 05:30
Modern liberalism is based on the idea that reality is obligated to conform to one's beliefs because; "I have the right to believe whatever I want".
I've always loved your sig. [Beer]
tmjohnson
06-20-2016, 20:44
My youngest son is in the infantry, currently at jump school in Ft. Benning, GA and he said if they allow women in combat it will cost a lot of good soldiers lives.
He also said he would get out if they let women in.
My youngest son is in the infantry, currently at jump school in Ft. Benning, GA and he said if they allow women in combat it will cost a lot of good soldiers lives.
He also said he would get out if they let women in.
I have bad news for him. Women have been doing combat missions for a long time.
In fact, the plane he jumps out of tomorrow might be flown by a woman...
Great-Kazoo
06-21-2016, 00:13
I have bad news for him. Women have been doing combat missions for a long time.
In fact, the plane he jumps out of tomorrow might be flown by a woman...
He's infantry, gotta cut them some slack. Where we going SIR? Down that hill soldier. SIR, YES SIR.
And then there is this...
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/06/20/ash_carter_military_brass_consider_high_ranking_co mmissions_for_civilians.html
So, instead of continuing to hire military contractors to fill those high paying positions, we put a uniform on them and give them military benefits? Makes zero sense.
If a situation got dire enough to merit a draft, there'd be plenty of military roles to fill that weren't on the front lines.
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/politics-government/national-politics/article84983262.html
Marine Corps leaders initially balked at allowing women into certain infantry, reconnaissance and combat engineer jobs, pointing to studies that showed mixed gender units did not perform as well as male-only units. But Defense Secretary Ash Carter ordered all combat jobs open to women.
The Marines developed a detailed progression of physical standards that recruits must meet to get into the combat jobs. And officials insist that standards will not be lowered to allow more women to pass.
Nearly 86 percent of the women failed the tests, compared with less than 3 percent of the men.
Men and women are the same [ROFL2]
Men and other men aren't the same.
See: Gersh Kunzman
Objective standards (if they exist or can be established) should determine which jobs should be available to people who are able to meet those standards.
If accurate shooting was the only criteria for infantry service, there are plenty of women that would outpace plenty of men. Clearly there are other areas, both physically and mentally that go into making a warrior.
Of those who have served, how much say did you have on who served in your unit with you? Leadership is about building a team with what you are given to work with and then accomplishing a mission with that team.
Just my $.02
Men and other men aren't the same.
See: Gersh Kunzman
Objective standards (if they exist or can be established) should determine which jobs should be available to people who are able to meet those standards.
If accurate shooting was the only criteria for infantry service, there are plenty of women that would outpace plenty of men. Clearly there are other areas, both physically and mentally that go into making a warrior.
Of those who have served, how much say did you have on who served in your unit with you? Leadership is about building a team with what you are given to work with and then accomplishing a mission with that team.
Just my $.02
Some, but when I served, gays were not allowed - meaning the military was not as much of a political social experiment as it is today.
Also, those who could not hack it were easily removed. I'm not sure today's climate allows the same.
One of the finest leaders I have served under is a woman and she us also one of the best pilots I have flown with. She retired a couple years ago. Uncle Sam screwed up when he let her leave.
Some, but when I served, gays were not allowed.
Take off your blinders, if you think you didn't serve with any gays.
You're always promoting looking at history. Do some research. Gays have been in our society for a long time. They are particularly adept at blending in, when necessary. We often never find out until well after the fact.
Sent via Mobile
Take off your blinders, if you think you didn't serve with any gays.
You're always promoting looking at history. Do some research. Gays have been in our society for a long time. They are particularly adept at blending in, when necessary. We often never find out until well after the fact.
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/5048e660e4b0bd178ab35a57/50f1c974e4b07e77c465685a/5636a00be4b088f9f336258e/1446465972741/?format=1000w
Typical davsel response. No words.
Relying on links, emojis, memes , etc.
Sent via Mobile
I assumed a picture of Captain Obvious would suffice.
If not, here are some words.
I've never said I did not serve with gays.
I've never said gays have not been in our society for a long time.
I'm not sure what your point was, considering you are making statements about ideas I have never promoted.
[Flower]
Some, but when I served, gays were not allowed -.
Just thought this statement was a bit naive. Kind of came across to me as "not allowed-didn't exist" in the context put forth.
Captain Obvious? Not really. Go back and re-read your post. You might see how it could be mis-construed.
Sent via Mobile
Just thought this statement was a bit naive. Kind of came across to me as "not allowed-didn't exist" in the context put forth.
Captain Obvious? Not really. Go back and re-read your post. You might see how it could be mis-construed.
Sent via Mobile
Perhaps if you read past the "-" in my original post, you would have better understood the "meaning" I was attempting to convey.
I'll try to spell it out more obviously in the future.
ETA obligatory emoji: [handbags]
Uh,no. You were still putting it in the context of the military not accepting it, with the implication that it was not an issue.(i.e.: it didn't exist, but it does now due to lax leadership).
Great. Glad your head is not in the sand.
Sent via Mobile
Uh,no. You were still putting it in the context of the military not accepting it, with the implication that it was not an issue.(i.e.: it didn't exist, but it does now due to lax leadership).
Great. Glad your head is not in the sand.
Sent via Mobile
My point being that it was not accepted in the military at the time. Therefore, if gays were "outed," they were removed from service. We were not forced into accepting them into our Units. They were considered incompatible with military service. If they kept a low enough profile, they remained.
Today, our military is forced into accepting damn near everyone, regardless of their compatibility with military service, and any military member who questions this is the one being removed.
It's a bunch of PC, social diversity, feminist nonsense that gets people killed.
Well stated. I fully understand and agree with your statement.
Sent via Mobile
Armies are as political as any other group endeavor.
My point is that as an individual member in a unit, you had no say about who else served in your unit. Your commanders and ultimately our political leaders establish the rules for who may and who may not serve in the military.
I am reminded of all the debate and struggle over the issue of how, and under what circumstances slaves could be enlisted into the state militias and the national army during the Revolutionary War. Some states raised units of freed blacks, while other states paid owners to allow their slaves to serve. Just the system of quotas used to promote general officers in the colonies was totally based on politics and had nothing to do with the merit of the individual. Ask Benedict Arnold how he felt about the politics of his day.
But, devil's advocate, were gays that were better soldiers booted while crappy straight soldiers coasted through?
Not trying to continue a debate, just a thought.
Sent via Mobile
Men and other men aren't the same.
See: Gersh Kunzman
Objective standards (if they exist or can be established) should determine which jobs should be available to people who are able to meet those standards.
If accurate shooting was the only criteria for infantry service, there are plenty of women that would outpace plenty of men. Clearly there are other areas, both physically and mentally that go into making a warrior.
Of those who have served, how much say did you have on who served in your unit with you? Leadership is about building a team with what you are given to work with and then accomplishing a mission with that team.
Just my $.02
We had 5 or 6 women at any given time. One of those women was really good and was quite an asset. The other 4-5 were either injured or pregnant or a combination of both at any given time. My engineer platoon had about 3-4 people injured or sick on any given day and consistently 75% of that group was the few women that we did have. I'm all for women being included in these units if the numbers worked out, but to be honest they don't and they haven't in the past. My wife is an excellent example. Max PT tests, excellent at her job, great leader, expert shooter, combat valor awards and way better at every aspect of the military than I was and yet couldn't ruck march at all. It was just physically impossible for her to carry that much weight for a prolonged amount of time.
US Marines To Accept Chubbier Women (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-06/us-marines-accept-chubbier-women?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedg e+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+fo r+everyone+drops+to+zero%29)
In an effort to maintain the new status quo of cutting standards everywhere in the name of equality and "progress", the Marine Corps announced major changes over the Fourth of July holiday weekend regarding how much it will allow service members to weigh, and the biggest shift comes for women: going forward "larger" ladies will be allowed to defend the country while also standards used within the physical fitness test will also be relaxed.
I pray that standards aren't lowered for combat positions to be filled by women that couldn't otherwise do the job.
Then again, there are a ton of support positions that women could (and do) easily fill: for every soldier in the field, how much support does he need? Who packs supplies on pallets, fills the shipping orders, loads the planes, etc.
US Marines To Accept Chubbier Women (http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-07-06/us-marines-accept-chubbier-women?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedg e+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+fo r+everyone+drops+to+zero%29)
A buddy sent me this yesterday. I had to take a moment to think about it. This is what got me thinking...
A 5-foot-9 woman was allowed to be up to 169 pounds, but can now be 176
That is "overweight" by civilian BMI standards. How long would that hypothetical recruit be in a receiving platoon/on diet? That's not just bad for the Marines, it's bad for that recruit.
And are we really hurting that bad for recruits that can meet standards? How many have been cut in last seven years that could meet standards, some having combat experience. SNCOs have been hit hard by reductions.
I think it's going past political correctness at this point. Someone wants the USMC to fail.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.