It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Foderalover
Its called equal rights.
originally posted by: JDmOKI
We haven't had a draft since Vietnam.... nor will we have a draft anytime soon
no army ever wanted conscripts
originally posted by: Annee
I also think everyone should require physical, intelligence, and psychological testing.
originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Restricted
So do I, if there IS a war it could DECIMATE a generation or 2.
Not to mention I thought it was wiser to let the realm of close combat fall only to those who can stand up to it.Second place is dead.
I don't doubt women in support roles but NOT kicking in doors or on LLRPs.
At this point, I’m sure some readers are walking away in disgust at the very idea that a woman could be infantry. See you guys later, hope you open your mind someday. On the other side of the debate, “social justice warriors” who know nothing at all about the military won’t read past the last paragraph before proclaiming, “See? Women are the same as men! Open the infantry to all women, you cismale gendernormative fascists!” Well, screw you simpleminded “I put lofty ideals over reality” idiots.
In Iraq at least one Marine base had a “convoy rest stop”, a big open bay full of beds where units passing through stopped for rest. There were no separate areas for females. Nobody went insane with lust. In Afghanistan I saw Civil Affairs teams, MP platoons and an engineer detachment house males and females together. Nobody went insane with lust. When our replacements arrived in Afghanistan, they had one female soldier. She slept in the same tent with all the males, with only a couple of ponchos hung for privacy. Nobody went insane with lust. I was on a French firebase in Afghanistan, and for a time males and females shared a shower tent partitioned into individual cubicles. We used the same latrines. And nobody went insane with lust.
However, women may have an edge in some physical tasks. Because women usually have more body fat and may be better at burning fat as energy early on in exertion, they could have better endurance than men, according to a 2001 study in the American Journal of Physiology, Endocrinology and Metabolism. Men have more muscle mass and greater levels of circulating testosterone, on average, which also means they use more energy than women do. And men's muscles tend to fatigue more easily than women's, possibly because women recruit muscle groups to share the load more efficiently, according to a 2003 study in the Journal of Applied Physiology.
originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: VoidHawk
No,,,, learning to defend you, your country and lifestyle. Killing is a matter for the enemy or invading force to decide upon. Tragically you need to learn to kill to defend yourself, family and country. It's a skill not given to the greens or romantics until death and destruction comes their way.
Then they complain, "where is the army." Sadly the armed forces are destroyed because there was no support for enlistment and equal rights for men and women to combat insugents. Accept death, albeit beheading, shooting, raping and piliging if you are not trained and depended upon to fight back.
If you get killed because you are a pacifist I say, "bad luck". Me, I'll go down fighting to protect my family first, my local lifestyle then country. Luckilly I have had military training to enable me to do such.
I won't hide behind a military apron and later complain that not enough was done or complain about colateral damage.
originally posted by: seagull
The absolute last thing the US military wants is a draft.
A bunch of people who have no interest in being there...hate the idea of being there...and might do anything to not be there. Recipe for disaster.
Vietnam comes quickly to mind for some odd reason...