Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Selective Service for Women

page: 1
1

log in

join

posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 10:25 PM
link   

Selective Service for Women


news.yahoo.com

Posing a question that few, if any, of the candidates had fielded before, one voter asked whether young women should register with the Selective Service, as do young men in case the draft is reinstated.

Clinton, Obama and Sen. Chris Dodd of Connecticut said yes.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 10:25 PM
link   
Is this setting the stage for a draft?

IMO I have to say yes, that there will be a draft resolution in 2009

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 10:43 PM
link   
There wont be a draft.

Not only would most of the Congress and the American people be against it,
the Pentagon has outright said that a draft is a bad idea.


The question, which is one I actually thought about when I filled out my selective services stuff,
is an interesting one, why do women not have to be included, I mean it's not like they cant fight.


The article did'nt mention that Senator Gravel also agreed that if we're going to have
it than women should be included as well.



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 10:47 PM
link   
Women cry for equality yet they never have to fulfill it fully....damn right they should have to register. There are plenty of roles women are VERY good at if ever called on in a time of need..aka..a draft. Sooooo make it maditory that they have to register. They can serve their country just like the rest of us, they are proving that on their own.

I asked some women around here I know about this...they are 50/50 on the topic. Some say yes they should have to register and do what the men do, others say its unfair and that they don't belong in situations like that. Oddly enough the women who said they don't belong in those situations ALWAYS complain that they don't have equal rights, blah blah blah....well guess what...if you have to register as women and bitch about it, or refuse to do it, then you have to FINALLY admit MEN are better then women!!
Equality isn't convienence ladies!!!!



posted on Jul, 23 2007 @ 11:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Not only would most of the Congress and the American people be against it,
the Pentagon has outright said that a draft is a bad idea.


When has that ever stopped the government from doing what it wants?
Remember Pearl Harbour, 9-11? If the government wants the draft it will find a way to convince the population of it's necessity...



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 12:16 AM
link   
Anyone who thinks women are interested in the least in equality has a loose connection somewhere. Women want all the benefits without the responsibility or accountability.

Beyond that requiring women to register for the draft will do nothing but double the paper work without any real advantage to the military.

Yes, I know that women are serving in large numbers, but under no circumstances will their numbers be equal to those of men in the service, nor should it.

Civilized nations protect their women and children at all costs. They are the future.

Women have more important duties at home.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 04:50 AM
link   
Thank you for posting this.

I have to say my anger was 10 fold after hearing this. First off everyone of them said “Yes to women but no to the draft.”

Ok, if no to the draft then just get rid of it all together. But, no they won’t do that cause a draft will come when they are ready.

Second, if a woman wants to sign up for the military fine let her. But, no way should it be mandatory that she sign up. That is just so wrong. You can’t make 1000’s of orphans of our children because the government thinks but sexes should sign up.

I don’t want my son going off to war, much less my daughters.

I believe that not one of those candidates would send their daughter in too war. They should not ask the same of us.

This truly pissed me off.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 06:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
...why do women not have to be included, I mean it's not like they cant fight..

Well, it's the law that women can't be sent to the front lines. Sexual discrimination perhaps, but I still think that's a good idea...At least, in this particular case. But still, women do join the Armed Forces & can do pretty well for themselves in more supportive vocations behind the lines.

If women were allowed to go up to the front, think of how much more expensive it would be to require seperate quarters & other facilities. And let's not forget that, in stressful situations under combat conditions, that some of the soldiers may get...distracted...in the trenches.
This could lead to serious problems if the enemy comes over the hill at "just the wrong moment."


Originally posted by shadow_soldier1975
...then you have to FINALLY admit MEN are better then women!!
Equality isn't convienence ladies!!!!

A sexist remark if I ever heard one...I fully consider men & women to be equal, just different (& thank God for that!). Man alone is useless...Men still need women & if you don't recognize that basic fact, then the whole human race would've been stillborn before we could even develop a history.


Originally posted by Shar
I believe that not one of those candidates would send their daughter in too war. They should not ask the same of us.

In my opinion, if those delgates want war, make them go fight it out with their own "enemy delgates" on the other side...We'll see how long the concept of war (for the sake of politics) will last then, won't we? The problem is that those who want to declare war are those least likely to fight in it. So they just use the media to whip up a public frenzy & beef up recruitment.

Our soldiers should be defending the Nation, not trapsing all over the globe for political reasons.


apc

posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Anyone who thinks women are interested in the least in equality has a loose connection somewhere. Women want all the benefits without the responsibility or accountability.

Possibly... I tend to think that women want the ability to exercise equality, but in the end would rather not do so. This is reflected by the growing number of women who prefer to be stay at home moms or work part time rather than take on a full time career. The rights movements opened the doors, but now women are choosing not to use them content knowing that they're open.

But I generally agree with the rest of your post. Depending on the circumstance, I don't really have a problem with women in the military. Only if the number of men diminishes would I support placing women in combat. And only by draft if almost every man is dead. After all, women can make babies if all the men get killed. Men are screwed without chicks.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 07:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by apc
Men are screwed without chicks.


That's an interesting paradox.

Actually, the race is screwed without either men or women, but as I said, the future is assured as long as there are plenty of women and just a few men and the children they produce.



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 08:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott
Anyone who thinks women are interested in the least in equality has a loose connection somewhere. Women want all the benefits without the responsibility or accountability.


You surprise me with a comment like that Grady. To me it is akin to the feminist argument saying women hold all the responsibility (home, children and career) without any of the benefits afforded to men (equal pay). Neither is right and you should know better.

If you remember when the IDF had an integrated military - which put women in the same roles as men - it wasn't the women who let down the unit, it was the men. Men who couldn't get past the protector role. That was their shortcoming, not the womens.


Women have more important duties at home.


pffft - all of their responsiblities are important, not just the ones at home.

As to "selective service" for women. Why not? And while we're at it, why not mandatory two year federal service in either the military or a volunteer organization like Peace Corp.? Personally, I think it would help find direction to the directionless and remind youth of their responsibility to give back to their country and not just take.


Love you in spite of your chauvanistic tendencies - Bleys



posted on Jul, 24 2007 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by GradyPhilpott

Originally posted by apc
Men are screwed without chicks.


That's an interesting paradox.

Actually, the race is screwed without either men or women, but as I said, the future is assured as long as there are plenty of women and just a few men and the children they produce.


Actually, if men were to die out right now, the Human race would survive, since there is
enough viable frozen semen for en vitro pregnancies, plus it would only take 10-30 years
to create the technology to allow women to procreate together.









 
1

log in

join