Women and Draft Registration
May 4, 2016 20:46:53 #
May 4, 2016 21:54:14 #
DaveO wrote:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/04/28/house-panel-approves-measure-require-women-register-draft.html?ESRC=army-a_160504.nl
Seems only fair. If a women want the same jobs as men they sould have the same obligations.
May 4, 2016 22:07:16 #
boberic wrote:
Seems only fair. If a women want the same jobs as men they sould have the same obligations.
a draft won't get that type. lol :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
May 5, 2016 06:50:20 #
boberic wrote:
Seems only fair. If a women want the same jobs as men they sould have the same obligations.
Also, depending on the source,80 to 85% of jobs are non-combatant to begin with. :thumbup: Plenty of room for everybody.
May 5, 2016 07:17:57 #
DaveO wrote:
Also, depending on the source,80 to 85% of jobs are non-combatant to begin with. :thumbup: Plenty of room for everybody.
At any time, that may not always be the case. I was in the Marines 60-68
being there and talking about it are two drastic differences. The Commandant of the Marine Corp doesn't think it's a good idea. I would put weight on his opinion than those who have only had to worry if the beer is cold and the pizza hot.
May 5, 2016 07:30:56 #
micolh wrote:
At any time, that may not always be the case. I was in the Marines 60-68
being there and talking about it are two drastic differences. The Commandant of the Marine Corp doesn't think it's a good idea. I would put weight on his opinion than those who have only had to worry if the beer is cold and the pizza hot.
being there and talking about it are two drastic differences. The Commandant of the Marine Corp doesn't think it's a good idea. I would put weight on his opinion than those who have only had to worry if the beer is cold and the pizza hot.
We are not discussing theories on women in combat,but rather that there are a vast number of non-combat jobs available that would preclude any able bodied person being unable to serve. I would put more weight on actual published statistics. When I joined the Corps in '68, I don't recall it being a widely discussed topic. Could be wrong.
Anyway,the last sentence in the article summed up the intent quite well.
May 5, 2016 08:31:15 #
DaveO wrote:
We are not discussing theories on women in combat,but rather that there are a vast number of non-combat jobs available that would preclude any able bodied person being unable to serve. I would put more weight on actual published statistics. When I joined the Corps in '68, I don't recall it being a widely discussed topic. Could be wrong.
Anyway,the last sentence in the article summed up the intent quite well.
Anyway,the last sentence in the article summed up the intent quite well.
It wasn't we (USMC) were involved in Nam and Tet. PC at that time was just two letters in the alphabet.
May 5, 2016 11:29:09 #
We are only equal when it benefits somebody to be so. Being equal seems to be a selective process usually for some kind of gain but if theirs real meat in it then it's different. The film Oklahoma Crude, by way of Jack Palance. " The trouble with women is they want to be treated like one of the boys and when they are they cry." I remember back in about 1967 hearing from several females, that being eligible for the draft wasn't such a big deal. That's kind of tough talk for someone who has no chance of getting their ass shot off. :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:
May 5, 2016 11:34:53 #
In the past, men went to war to protect their women and children. Forget this equality, p.c. business as far as the military goes and just do what is right.
May 5, 2016 18:10:39 #
DaveO wrote:
http://www.military.com/daily-news/2016/04/28/house-panel-approves-measure-require-women-register-draft.html?ESRC=army-a_160504.nl
I totally agree. The little jerks want equality only if it is convenient and to their advantage. Every one wants equality then remove ALL restrictions. Draft them and force them into infantry like most draftees. Then when they fail and cause untold deaths due to the real rigors of battle and they get raped by the opposing forces they will see what EQUALITY means.
I am totally tired of demanding equality but only in advantageous situations to them at the detriment to men.
Yes make all totally EQUAL in absolutely everything and throw in restrooms in as well. Absolutely no sexual discrimination.
May 5, 2016 18:18:11 #
Architect1776 wrote:
I totally agree. The little jerks want equality on... (show quote)
Don't lump all women into that group.
May 5, 2016 18:41:47 #
SteveR wrote:
Don't lump all women into that group.
As a white male I am lumped into a group all the time by every other worthless liberal organization and disparaged daily.
Beg forgiveness for the crap I face including discrimination and cease and desist I will quit lumping others until then never.
May 5, 2016 19:07:11 #
mas24
Loc: Southern CA
The military is half the numbers it was during the Vietnam War. It is more high tech now, but strength numbers are important too. True equality is 50/50. I can imagine what the U.S. Army or U.S.Marines would be like as 50/50, male/female. Fathers don't like sending their sons to war, as well as daughters. A bullet does not discriminate.
May 5, 2016 19:17:23 #
If you read Calvin's Institutes, you'll find that the Christian rationale for war is to defend the nation...and that means the loved ones that the men leave behind. I'm sorry, men are meant to be men and women are meant to be women. They're not meant to be filling the role of infantry and getting blown apart and shot. I guess I come from a totally viewpoint of God's view of how men are to be protective of women. Today's totally equal in all things, including war, is not God's. Read the O.T., the armies of Israel did not include women. It was Joshua and Caleb, not Joshua and Rebecca. I do not want my daughters or any granddaughters I might have going to war. They do enough bearing and raising children.
May 5, 2016 20:28:49 #
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.