So with the Pentagons move to lift the ban on women serving on the front lines, should women now be required to register for selective service? I dont see why not? Discuss!

Yes, girls should have to the draft. And no exceptions for mothers. That's the way the Israelis do it. Women should be all in.

As much as I wouldn't want a woman in my unit (if I had a unit), I think women SHOULD get drafted, go to front lines, get shot at, get head blown off, etc. etc. ONLY because for the last 30 years they have been bitchin' amd moanin' about how they are equal in everything and all aspects......well bitches, it's time to put up or shut up !

Besides it would decrease the number of men getting drafted (when time comes).

HA! what goes around comes around ladies...you can't have it both ways.

If a woman gets shot in combat and, while shes bleeding out, you bend her over a tank and hit that shit, is that rape? Shes dying anyways, right?

Barabra, the Cuban Barbie SOUL TRAIN!!!


Nice youtube video indeed!

Now if you don't hit that then you are gay!

Sgt Penis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So with the Pentagons move to lift the ban on
> women serving on the front lines, should women now
> be required to register for selective service? I
> dont see why not? Discuss!

There is no correlation between these two things - kind of like there is no correlation between guns and cars. Addressed separately, women should probably be required to register. But with an all-volunteer military, I don't see anyone being called up, short of an unforeseen catastrophe.

In any case, women should be allowed to serve on the front lines, but should not be required to. We're born to nurture, not kill. And no - that's not hypocritical - it's just the way it is. Women can do lots of things in a support capacity without being on the front lines. People should serve in a position for which they are best suited.

Not So Fast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sgt Penis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So with the Pentagons move to lift the ban on
> > women serving on the front lines, should women
> now
> > be required to register for selective service?
> I
> > dont see why not? Discuss!
>
> There is no correlation between these two things -
> kind of like there is no correlation between guns
> and cars. Addressed separately, women should
> probably be required to register. But with an
> all-volunteer military, I don't see anyone being
> called up, short of an unforeseen catastrophe.
>
> In any case, women should be allowed to serve on
> the front lines, but should not be required to.
> We're born to nurture, not kill. And no - that's
> not hypocritical - it's just the way it is. Women
> can do lots of things in a support capacity
> without being on the front lines. People should
> serve in a position for which they are best
> suited.

No, dunce. There is a huge relationship between military service and the draft. If we don't need the draft then get rid of it. But if we do have draft registration women now need to be included. It's all about equality, remember.

And no women anywhere currently serve on the front lines. Even in Israel, where women are drafted, they are forbidden from the frontlines, even though most specialties are open to them.

Oh and Israel does NOT exempt mothers from service.

Sorry "Not So Fast".........you don't get a choice. Armed Forces are ruled by discipline.

You sign up and you do what they tell you to do. Otherwise NO ONE would choose to got to the front lines and then where would we be.

Can't have it both ways.

Not So Fast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sgt Penis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So with the Pentagons move to lift the ban on
> > women serving on the front lines, should women
> now
> > be required to register for selective service?
> I
> > dont see why not? Discuss!
>
> There is no correlation between these two things -
> kind of like there is no correlation between guns
> and cars. Addressed separately, women should
> probably be required to register. But with an
> all-volunteer military, I don't see anyone being
> called up, short of an unforeseen catastrophe.
>
> In any case, women should be allowed to serve on
> the front lines, but should not be required to.
> We're born to nurture, not kill. And no - that's
> not hypocritical - it's just the way it is. Women
> can do lots of things in a support capacity
> without being on the front lines. People should
> serve in a position for which they are best
> suited.

Women are best suited for making sammiches and babies. On the front lines, I want somebody who can pick me up and get me to safety after I get my leg blown off, while firing an M4 with the other hand.

Sgt Sexy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There is a huge relationship between
> military service and the draft. If we don't need
> the draft then get rid of it. But if we do have
> draft registration women now need to be included.
> It's all about equality, remember.

You completely missed the point. Either women should be drafted or they shouldn't. This has nothing to do with the recent decision to ALLOW them to serve on the front lines (hence the gun analogy).

The draft currently serves as a fallback position which will probably never be used for either men or women. Whether the draft should continue is a different discussion. However it appears that to you and the other posters here drafting women is about revenge, not 'equality'.

> And no women anywhere currently serve on the front
> lines. Even in Israel, where women are drafted,
> they are forbidden from the frontlines, even
> though most specialties are open to them.
>
> Oh and Israel does NOT exempt mothers from
> service.

From what I've read, I don't believe that either of these statements are true.

Not So Fast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Sgt Sexy Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There is a huge relationship between
> > military service and the draft. If we don't
> need
> > the draft then get rid of it. But if we do
> have
> > draft registration women now need to be
> included.
> > It's all about equality, remember.
>
> You completely missed the point. Either women
> should be drafted or they shouldn't. This has
> nothing to do with the recent decision to ALLOW
> them to serve on the front lines (hence the gun
> analogy).
>
> The draft currently serves as a fallback position
> which will probably never be used for either men
> or women. Whether the draft should continue is a
> different discussion. However it appears that to
> you and the other posters here drafting women is
> about revenge, not 'equality'.
>
> > And no women anywhere currently serve on the
> front
> > lines. Even in Israel, where women are
> drafted,
> > they are forbidden from the frontlines, even
> > though most specialties are open to them.
> >
> > Oh and Israel does NOT exempt mothers from
> > service.
>
> From what I've read, I don't believe that either
> of these statements are true.

Well, both of those statements are indeed true. You need to read more. Ask the IDF Rabbinate. Yes, there is one.

of course girls should be drafted. but each platoon should be made of women only and lead by a woman for time to prove themselves on the field. but there should be NO extra care for these women when they are captive.killed, raped, i.e we should not embark on crazy rescue missions we we would not do for men. we did this missions during Iraq to save woman that we would not have done for men and this is not right. if there is a draft even the pretty barbie doll should have to go and carry a rifle and fight with her female unit. this way they can compare results with woman and men filled units. there is no more spoiled female on earth than the american...most now do not appreciate what men actually did do for them from fighting to building dams with there hands- now with all the technology they think men are obsolete-we are becomming rediculous.trust me on this folks: if we need to tabgle with N Korea it will not be a video game war. the military is now in place for the advancement of equal rights not to be the toughest, baddest fighting group possable.when women are in charge who will they promote? that's right, it's war...before we even go to war.

Not So Fast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The draft currently serves as a fallback position
> which will probably never be used for either men
> or women. Whether the draft should continue is a
> different discussion. However it appears that to
> you and the other posters here drafting women is
> about revenge, not 'equality'.
>

If it will probably never be used, then what's the big deal with women registering for selective service? You want the option but not the chance of being drafted too. If we have a draft (agreed, VERY unlikely), why shouldn't women be part of the draft? Women not being required to register for selective service suggests that they are not as valuable as soliders as males are. That should be the next target in your feminist campaign.

First, I wonder just how many women are going to sign up for 11B school?
Second, Will they lower the physical requirements just so they can say
women are now in the Infantry?

The WACS in my outfit in Nam were a disaster. They were given Monday through
Friday 9-5 desk jobs and exempted from any kind of shit details. No guard duty,
no Charge of Quarters, and no filling sandbags or building bunkers. As soon
as they were settled in they started playing a game of Who Gets the Pussy First.
Not worth the money the Army spent training them as Commo Techs.

Jesus Phreak Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If it will probably never be used, then what's the
> big deal with women registering for selective
> service? You want the option but not the chance of
> being drafted too. If we have a draft (agreed,
> VERY unlikely), why shouldn't women be part of the
> draft? Women not being required to register for
> selective service suggests that they are not as
> valuable as soliders as males are. That should be
> the next target in your feminist campaign.

I specifically said that women should probably be subject to the draft. I just think that most of them should not serve on the front lines. I'm just under 5' tall. I can't imagine even holding a gun, let alone shooting to kill. I'd probably try to understand and help improve the lives of the 'enemy', not kill them. Do you really want someone like me up there with you?

As to the other poster re captured women...I agree - no special treatment. Nonetheless, you can't deny that women have a high probability of being raped - an issue most men don't face. But the bigger problem is the frequency of rape and assault in our own military, a problem we're not doing enough about.

Not So Fast Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Jesus Phreak Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > If it will probably never be used, then what's
> the
> > big deal with women registering for selective
> > service? You want the option but not the chance
> of
> > being drafted too. If we have a draft (agreed,
> > VERY unlikely), why shouldn't women be part of
> the
> > draft? Women not being required to register
> for
> > selective service suggests that they are not as
> > valuable as soliders as males are. That should
> be
> > the next target in your feminist campaign.
>
> I specifically said that women should probably be
> subject to the draft. I just think that most of
> them should not serve on the front lines. I'm just
> under 5' tall. I can't imagine even holding a gun,
> let alone shooting to kill. I'd probably try to
> understand and help improve the lives of the
> 'enemy', not kill them. Do you really want someone
> like me up there with you?
>
> As to the other poster re captured women...I agree
> - no special treatment. Nonetheless, you can't
> deny that women have a high probability of being
> raped - an issue most men don't face. But the
> bigger problem is the frequency of rape and
> assault in our own military, a problem we're not
> doing enough about.

The average combat load is about 91 lbs right now. Some platoon members have more, others less. Winter load is even heavier. How can a 4'11 woman handle that? Men are just bigger and stronger. And they will resent carrying the extra stuff the women aren't carrying.

http://m.csmonitor.com/USA/Military/2013/0123/Women-in-combat-Will-they-have-to-register-for-the-draft this is a good article for laymans terms of the legal side of this question. Yes, the lifted ban of women in combat roles IS directly connected to selective service enrollment as the Supreme Court decision that exempts women was based on their exclusion from combat roles specifically. So yes, women between 18/25 should be required, the same as men in the age category.

Don't think anyone should be required to register for Selective Service - it's a horrible way to get a military with high morale. It should be optional for men AND women to put their names in once they hit 18.

If the government would like to appeal to more than just those who are likely to volunteer for the military anyway, they could do something a bit more palatable to those who don't want to be in the military at all - such as a small financial benefit (a tax cut or rebate) for being registered. Being paid to be on call, so to speak.

The government could also (or instead) present a questionnaire so as to get estimates for how many people they could call up for each type of service and for other types of work that would help the country. Filling this out could be a requirement for anyone upon turning 18. To keep it current, updates could be required every year or two until age 25 and every 2-3 years thereafter or until age 30 or 35.

If I've missed an obvious military option, go ahead and point this out minus the nasty comments. I don't have a military background, clearly.

I am a:
[] citizen
[] non-citizen on the path to citizenship (estimated achievement date:_____)
[] non-citizen planning to remain a non-citizen

To do your duty to help your (this) country, we may require of you two years of paid service (with the option to renew for additional terms).

Which are you willing to do? [put an X by all that apply]
[] any job my country needs me to
[] active military
[] reserve military
[] draft military (if a draft is required by law)
[] one or more of the above, but will also do non-military work

[] non-military ONLY (working for the US Government in a non-military capacity)

If you selected "any job" or one or more MILITARY options, how are you willing to serve? [put an X by all that apply]
[] front lines
[] other combat
[] support personnel, in the field
[] support personnel, stateside or in another not actively hostile position

If you selected "any job" or one or more MILITARY options, note branch/type of service of interest? [put an X by all that apply]
[] anywhere my country needs me
[] Army
[] Army Ranger
[] Green Beret
[] Navy
[] Navy Seal
[] Air Force
[] Marines
[] Coast Guard

... [put an X by all that interest you]:
[] FBI
[] CIA
[] Homeland Security (if it still exists then)
[] Education
[] STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Mathematics)
[] Politics (making elections run properly)
[] Health (medical, dental, psychological)
[] Environment
[] Primarily physical labor (building or maintaining infrastructure and/or lands)

[] Outdoor work
[] Indoor work



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2013 02:00AM by longtime NoVA res.

Sgt Sniper Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> The average combat load is about 91 lbs right now.
> Some platoon members have more, others less.
> Winter load is even heavier. How can a 4'11 woman
> handle that? Men are just bigger and stronger.
> And they will resent carrying the extra stuff the
> women aren't carrying.

I'm pretty strong and I'm not a girly girl, but I don't think I would make a good marine. I only weigh 105 pounds, plus, I need certain things.

I need my face cream, and if I don't have my shampoo, my hair goes crazy. And, I must have a good hair cut, or I become depressed.

Also, and this is important, I couldn't share a tent with men, because I'm neat and require a clean tent. My tent would need a sink and an adequate reading lamp... and a bathroom within 10 feet.

And, I need kleenex 'cause dry air makes my nose bleed. And, I don't like rough toilet paper, so kleenex and soft toilet paper are a must.

Also, I need time to myself, to relax with a glass of wine and reflect upon my day. I can't have people barging in and bothering me while I'm having my "me" time.

And, here's the worst part. After shooting someone, I'd probably stop and give him CPR. Then, as I'm admiring my newly renovated and nicely appointed tent, my platoon would be wiped out by the guy I just saved.

I would slow down the war....

You don't want me in a combat zone.

Take Hillary Clinton instead.

You act like you are high maintenance Alias, yet you have unkempt fingernails with fungal infections. Plus you don't shave your arms or legs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 01/25/2013 05:32AM by eesh.

eesh Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> You act like you are high maintenance Alias, yet
> you have unkempt fingernails with fungal
> infections. Plus you don't shave your arms or
> legs.


I'm less maintenance than you, eesh.


which isn't saying much.......