Should women be drafted into the military?

[Renew Deal]

If there draft is reinstated, should women be drafted?

(I know it's not being reinstated.)

47 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Yes
	40 (85%)
	No
	5 (11%)
	Not Sure
	0 (0%)
	Other
	2 (4%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[Aerows]

1. If men and women make a stupid decision

we should have the best men and women our nation has to offer on the sacrificial altar.

[LittleBlue]

2. If men and women are ever again drafted

it should be to defend this nation from a threat and to protect her people, not to maintain a global empire.

[elleng]

3. Yes and there SHOULD be a draft,

with few if any exemptions so EVERYONE, including members of congress and the 1%, will have skin in the 'game' when they send our/their children off to war.

[hack89]

16. That would result in a military so large as to make war more likely

just to justify the enormous resources spent on it.

[ohnoyoudidnt]

19. I think the idea is that everyone is up for the draft, no exceptions.

So Americans would pay more attention to where we are sending troops and why. That could make needless wars less likely. We are not talking about mandatory service, but a draft when we declare war.

[SteveG]

20. One of the things we learned from Vietnam

Is that if a war is unjustified the people will figure it out eventually. If they have skin in the game (their kids) they figure it out quicker and do something about it. Professional (volunteer) army's make it easy for governments to have wars of choice. If we still had a draft, I doubt that Afghanistan or Iraq would have gone on as long as they did.

[BlueJazz]

79. Yep. You nailed it.

[Warren Stupidity]

135. We killed 2 Million Vietnamese people while "figuring it out".

And we had to have riots in the streets and soldiers firing on citizens before the government backed down.

The draft just provides more soldiers cheaper. Arguably in the permanent recession of the 21st century a de-facto draft exists anyway, as the military has no shortage of "volunteers" and is effectively an employer of last resort, a government jobs program.


If we still had a draft, I doubt that Afghanistan or Iraq would have gone on as long as they did.

Doubt all you want, but you have no evidence. Besides ending the draft the government learned two other lessons from Vietnam:
1. control the media message.
2. limit casualties.

They have another lesson learned ready to go if needed: stop domestic unrest before it gets started.

[Jackpine Radical]

181. I've made that same argument for decades.

I'm an ex-draftee (Vietnam), and I can tell you it's a lot harder to keep having wars when most of your lower-echelon forces are not there by choice. That puts a definite twist in the knickers of society, in a way that we haven't seen since the 'Nam era.

[hack89]

21. We would never fight a war with conscripts

There will be no shortage of volunteers.

[Ken Burch]

65. There was exactly such a shortage in Vietnam.

Especially among the children of upper-class white people. That's why the draft was used there, and that's why the draft over-represented working-class kids of all races(including a disproportionate number of Latinos, African-Americans and Native Americans).

[hack89]

74. Two thirds of those who went to Viet Nam were volunteers

Those from well to do areas had a slightly higher chance of dying because they were more likely to be pilots or infantry officers (the two most dangerous jobs in VN).

86% of the dead were white. 12.5% were black.

[Jackpine Radical]

182. All the enlisted men E-5 & below in my infantry company

were draftees. Only the officers and senior NCO'S were volunteers.

Edited to add--
I don't dispute your numbers; however, many of the enlistees did so in order to exchange an extra year of duty for a preferred (read: "safer&quot specialty, or MOS. It was a lot better to be a supply clerk at Cam Ranh Bay than a rifleman in the Central Highlands.

[gladium et scutum]

174. So President Johnson's

primary concern on relying on the draft instead of the Reserve and Guard was to mollify the upper-class white people. He preferred sending Latinos, African-Americans and Native Americans to Viet-Nam?

[Ken Burch]

185. Well, he wasn't gonna come right out and SAY that...

...but by their deeds shall ye know them.

[gladium et scutum]

199. I am not sure

that was his motivation. But you are correct in the way it appears.

[One_Life_To_Give]

145. Is that why WW2 had 10 Million Draftee's

Some parts of the services need draftees. Note during Nam many Enlistee's did so to have some level of choice in where/how they served as opposed to being drafted and told.

[hack89]

156. What potential enemy would we need that large an army against?

nuclear powers are not going to fight a multi-year conventional war. How do you stop the loser from going nuclear?

We are the dominant military power on the earth - we don't a larger military. Especially one filled with poorly trained unwilling draftees.

[fadedrose]

26. And age limits should be broadened...

A lot of people are now 40 or more who escaped the last draft, so even they should be in on it - maybe like the National Guard in the US/ floods, etc., or training people in some specialty, health services, etc....

Employers would have to go along with losing men/women for a couple of years......

What a great way to unify the country. No war could last with folks who want to get back home fighting it from every direction...

Even us old people could find someway to help - read or write letters or emails, wrap packages to offspring and assist handicapped people, stuff like that.

[rainbobryte]

39. Kind of like...

...World War 2.

[fadedrose]

43. 'zackly

People were proud to be part of it....those not called ran in to sign up, even if too young, too old, or 4F....

[rainbobryte]

206. Those were amazing times.

[Ex Lurker]

48. There's no need for a large conscript military

Even the Chinese and Russians are moving away from it. Modern warfare requires skill, experience, and technical training, which can't be acquired in the year or two an average draftee spends in uniform.

[A Little Weird]

4. I don't see why not

I hope there aren't any more drafts, it seems like the well-connected always get out of them and everyone else gets screwed.

[pnwmom]

37. I do.

The Equal Rights Amendment never got passed. That has to come first.

[stone space]

82. Pass the ERA, and eliminate draft registration.

Amendments don't demand a human sacrifice.

[pnwmom]

88. I agree. I think we should have an ERA regardless.

But nobody should support a draft unless and until there's an ERA.

[stone space]

90. Nobody should support a draft ever.

It's never a good time.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

5. Only if Canada will accept them as refugees along with men.

[leftofcool]

10. Canada won't do that anymore.

[sadoldgirl]

6. If we would get back to drafting

people to fight, yes, of course.

It might actually keep us from interfering
everywhere in military ways.

I doubt though that any Repug in Congress
would vote for this, because they love wars
too much, but only if it does not hurt them.

[BainsBane]

7. There won't be a draft

1) the military doesn't want it. 2) govt has turned to private contractors instead. 3) a draft makes it more difficult to wage war, and the govt doesn't want that, nor does the MIC.

But yes, whatever national service is required of men should also be required of women.

[stone space]

86. This male voter has two daughters.

It won't go down well with me at all.

[Warpy]

8. Sure, as soon as men start producing babies.

Until then, forget it guys. Safest years for childbirth are 18-26. Spending any of those years in the military is just plain stupid, counterproductive, and unhealthy.

Not to mention the double jeopardy of childbirth and war.

You guys seem to love the wars, you go fight them.

Some women will always volunteer. Leave the rest alone.

[KMOD]

12. +1

[Warpy]

14. Funny how males never think in those terms

Since they're spared the messy, painful and dangerous business of childbirth, they simply assume that it's effortless.

[leftofcool]

76. Reminds me of a Gloria Steinam quote

"If men could have babies, abortion would be a sacrament."

[Bluenorthwest]

95. 'If men could get pregnant, abortion would be a sacrament'.

That's the quote and Florynce Kennedy said it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Florynce_Kennedy

[stone space]

103. War is a sacrament.

And a sacrament that some men now want to force on women.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

18. Why should the ability to give birth

have anything to do with whether or not someone is drafted? Obviously, if a woman is pregnant, she shouldn't be drafted but other than that, I see no reason why women shouldn't be drafted just like men.

I have two daughters and no sons, but my daughters are no more precious to me and to my ex-wife than sons are to their parents.

My preference would be no draft for anyone, but if there were to be a draft, my daughters should have to stand tall with their male friends and colleagues and face the same possibility of being drafted.

[KMOD]

29. Are your daughters aware of this?

Or are you making that decision for them?

[PersonNumber503602]

40. If there was a draft, people would be making that decision for his boys too.

[KMOD]

41. Lol,

get back to me when his daughters are treated equally to their boy peers.

Oh, and let me know when you are fighting for women in the workplace, home, doctors office, etc., and not just a military draft.

[PersonNumber503602]

70. How much do you know about me?

If this thread was about equal pay for women, I wouldn't tell you or anyone else to get back to me when women can be drafted. I would, however, discuss my views on women receiving equal pay (which is that they should, duhh) Do you know why I would discuss equal pay in that thread? You are correct, because that would be the topic of the thread in question. So in this thread, I, and others, discuss the topic women being drafted, because that's what this topic is about. For other discussions, we might try something like this https://www.google.com/search?q=equal+pay+for+women&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&gws_rd=ssl

https://www.google.com/search?q=gender+equality&sitesearch=democraticunderground.com&gws_rd=ssl

Pretty cool, huh? You can actually have discussions about many different topics on here. So like you might have one topic that discusses one subject, and then another that discusses another subject. The best part is that you can keep various topics focused on a specific subject so that they don't end up all over the place. For example, I'm a huge supporter of gay rights, but it would be silly for me to assume that just because someone doesn't mention they support gay rights in a thread about a video with a kitten playing guitar, that it must mean that they don't care about gay rights.


But to address the points you're attempting to make. Would you apply the same logic to any minorities with regards to the draft? Non-whites often times face discrimination due to their skin color. Since they may be more likely not get a job, or get paid less, or receive other disadvantages such as education opportunities, should black, Latino, or any other non-white males also be excluded from the draft?

*I don't think there should be any draft regardless of gender, race, or pinky toe size.

[stone space]

89. Of course they should.

should black, Latino, or any other non-white males also be excluded from the draft?

The draft nothing more than legalized kidnapping and slavery.

Let the rich white men who want war go and fight those wars themselves.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

73. What decision?

And yes, my daughters are well aware of my opinion on this.

[forsaken mortal]

35. I've met plenty of warmongering women

and men who are anti-war. Why paint with such a broad stroke? Your last sentence should apply to men as well, some men will volunteer, leave the rest alone.

[Warpy]

50. Oh, I wholeheartedly agree with that

No draft, not in peacetime or during wars of corporate convenience, not unless we are being directly invaded, and then one would probably not be necessary.

However, the original question was whether a draft should apply to both sexes. I answered why it should not apply to women.

[Bluenorthwest]

105. If childbirth and war were the only dangers, your point would be stronger. 2013 US child birth

maternal deaths, just under 800. Shockingly high. Same year, workplace fatalities, 4,400 of which over 90% were men. Men do the bulk of the most dangerous jobs in construction and food production. Then also in 'defense'.
If it's about the numbers, childbirth looks like a pretty good choice over fishing, mining, roofing, waging war, construction, demolition and refuse collection. Thousands a year, every year. Since forever.

I'd say construction and food production are so dangerous that the draft should not apply to men. Childbirth plenty dangerous and very vital, so the draft should not apply to women. This is why I've always opposed the draft. Life is risky enough without it. No matter who you are.

[TM99]

38. I totally agree.

Women between those ages should forget college and professional career development, stay home, and produce babies.

That will keep them safe and peaceful.

[KMOD]

42. Yes, because you can just as easily raise a child while in college, or in a career as you can

in a warzone.

wait....what?

[TM99]

53. Sorry,

you want equality. You get it all. If men are to be drafted again, damn skippy, women should be as well.

In this day and age, siblings, parents, and husbands can raise a woman's child for her while she is off fighting for her country next to the men who have left their wives, children, and families behind.

If you want to start discussing the reality of biological determinism, well then 'equality' starts to erode real fast.

[KMOD]

58. OK, I'll go to war, and you can give birth.

(kidding, kind of)

You say, if women want equality, they get it all. How about we start with at least some, since we aren't considered equal, yet. Then, and only then can we move on to all.

And yes, anyone can raise a child, but not just anyone can give birth to a child. For instance, you can't.

[TM99]

67. This a false equivalency.

If you are only capable of doing things that biology dictates then your 'equality' can only be based on that determinism.

In most ways, yes, women are far more equal than they have been in centuries. When it comes to war, women are now in the military full force. They are in numerous leadership positions hard earned. They have fought for the ability to join combat specialties including special forces even if only a few qualify. If they deserve that equality, then they deserve to be drafted as much as any man. Whether they can give birth to babies or not is truly irrelevant. Do all women give birth? Should all women during child bearing years be forced to do so since biology dictates. What about transgenders and lesbians? Should they be forced to pop out babies?

Yours is a 'cake and eat it too' argument. You want biological determinism when it suits you and freedom & equality as well. If equality is not to be based on our biological realities but rather our abilities, our ideas, our capabilities, and our choices, then absolutely, women should register for Selective Service like all men must do, and women should be drafted during any time of conscription. Period.

[KMOD]

133. I think any woman who wishes to serve, should serve.

I don't want to see anyone drafted, and I'm not even sure why this topic is being asked because I don't believe anyone in power is considering bringing back the draft.

That said, women of child birthing age, who wish to have children, should absolutely be exempted. People die in war, and women are the ones who can help repopulate it.

[TM99]

155. I am not in favor of a draft.

However, if one is implemented, there is no reason whatsoever that women and men should not be equally drafted. We are over-populated as it is on this planet, so that is hardly a reason for exemption.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

159. +1

[Jamastiene]

197. You sound like those assholes who slam doors in a woman's face

and say the reason they are doing that is because "You got your rights now."

[TM99]

198. And yet I am not.

Sorry you have issues with men.

I am actually quite old fashioned when it comes to how I treat my S.O. with regards to opening doors, cooking for her, romancing her, etc. She and I are different and yet treat each other with great respect and honor. We support each other in our individual endeavors as well as those things that make our relationship so strong.

She has expressed no complaints over the decade we have been together, so your issues really don't affect me in the least.

[lumberjack_jeff]

46. Thanks! I momentarily forgot that military service is dangerous and thus for men only. n/t

[KMOD]

47. Childbirth is dangerous and it's for women only.

Just sayin'.

[TM99]

68. Are you seriously conparing modern childbirthing

with combat?

Wow!

[seabeyond]

92. i am thinking you do not have a real idea about "modern" childbirth so some info.

The researchers estimated that 18.5 mothers died for every 100,000 births in the U.S. in 2013, a total of almost 800 deaths. That is more than double the maternal mortality rate in Saudi Arabia and Canada, and more than triple the rate in the United Kingdom

http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/maternal-deaths-in-childbirth-rise-in-the-us/2014/05/02/abf7df96-d229-11e3-9e25-188ebe1fa93b_story.html

Table 1. Overall Casualties in OIF, OND, and OEF, 2001-2014
(as of October 30, 2014)
U.S. Servicemember
Deaths
U.S. Department of
Defense Civilian
Deaths
U.S. Servicemembers
Wounded in Action
Operation Iraqi Freedoma 4,412 13 31,949
Operation New Dawnb 66 0 295
Operation Enduring Freedomc 2,,346 4 20,037
Operation Inherent Resolved 2 0 0

i do not know how valid these numbers are, and not into comparing who dies more, just a soft comparison. but, i am thinking you do not get how many women die in birth, so this is just a rough idea.

i rounded it 7000 deaths in 14 yrs and got 500 deaths a year. now, without argument at all, i am sure that is not over all military death. but, like i said, i am not about comparing the deaths of women giving birth to people (not all men, though mostly) dying in military. just a general idea.

[KMOD]

131. can you tell me what modern childbirthing is?

[TM99]

152. With the advent of modern medicine

risks of death during and shortly after giving birth are staggeringly low. Less than 300,000 in 2013 recorded world wide. So no giving birth is not an equivalent risk of danger as going into combat. But you know this.

[KMOD]

161. I've had two modern childbirths

The first one I carried twins. My son, born eight minutes after my daughter, became detached from his placenta, was delivered breached, and nearly died.

3 days after my second modern childbirth, I hemorrhaged and nearly died. Yes, I'm very thankful for modern medicine, and that I live near excellent medical facilities, and that I have insurance that covered me, but neither of my experiences were easy. Like combat, of course not, but not no big deal either.

[TM99]

187. I am sorry you had difficult pregnancies,

and most women do not in modern times. Women who give birth to not in general suffer from PTSD. I have not met a soldier, male or female, yet who has been in combat who has not suffered or still suffers from PTSD in some shape or form. These just are not the same.

[KMOD]

193. I didn't have difficult pregnancies.

I experienced difficult labor and delivery.

Take my first one, for instance, I delivered twins, vaginally, at 40 weeks. That is historically normal. What wasn't normal was that I didn't have a C-section.

Most women do not carry multiple births full-term and not have a C-section in this day and age.

Why you wish to have child bearing women to suffer from PTSD because young men do, is beyond me. I don't get your logic.

I don't like war, I don't want anyone to be subjected to war, but it's insane to think that child bearing aged women, should serve, just because you think that's fair.

And for what it's worth, a very close friend of mine was not only sent to NY to search the rubble for remains, he was also sent to Iraq. And yes, he has PTSD of some sorts because of it, anxiety, depression, and I know he would find your argument of drafting women for fairness absolutely ridiculous.

[TM99]

195. I have seen combat.

You assume I want anyone to do so. I do not. I do not want the draft.

However, it is not just that only young men in this day and age are expendable psychologically and physically during times of war. Things have changed. There are no longer any solid reasons in this progressive age for women and men, if a draft is to be re-instated, to not have to both deal with its tragic reality.

Equality is equality unless it is not. So many seem to want to have it only with the good shit and never the bad. Some men choose to stay in the military. Others during conflicts like Vietnam did not. They had zero choice. Women have clamored for the ability to rise in the ranks and to enter combat specialties. Some choose to make the military there career. But during a time of war, only the men are the ones forced to whether or not they desire to do so. That is not just. You and your friend may find it ridiculous. So be it.

[seabeyond]

96. except women serve also, and it has been womens groups fighting for womens right to serve.

the battle women have faced, as you well know.... is not women saying they should not serve, but men saying women are not capable.

[lumberjack_jeff]

126. Right? Perhaps. Responsibility? Obviously not.

None of the rationales that were used by the Supreme Court in 1980 to establish that gender discrimination is legal (and that men aren't entitled to equal protection) hold true today.

You'd think that the most foundational court ruling that institutional sex discrimination is legal would be challenged by feminist groups.

[seabeyond]

128. feminist: womens issue. mans battle. go out and fight it. i will support YOU!

[davidn3600]

138. So feminism is about women's rights and not necessarily equal rights?

How interesting...

[seabeyond]

139. feminism deals with womens issues and often overlaps to the rights of all.

so? men have no desire to right their wrong done unto them? they only insist that women stop dealing with our issues as rapes are allowed, congress tell us to put an aspirin between our knees while making law to stick a plastic thing up the vagina for the only reason to cause pain and humiliation in a legal medical procedure, while listening to rush cal our college students sluts and whores and tell them to video their sex so men can jack off too......

[lumberjack_jeff]

188. Yes. If we consider equality a goal, it's incumbent on only men to advocate for it. n/t

[stone space]

102. Forcing women to kill and die in war is ok.

But forcing women to get pregnant and have children is not, and we routinely criticize Republicans for it.



I'm not sure how folks hold both ideas in their heads simultaneously.

It would make mine explode.

[TexasMommaWithAHat]

157. Oh, for goodness' sake

I have counseled all my daughters to wait until they are older and settled to have a child. Just how many feminists on this board really think it's a good idea for young women to have babies when they are that young? Get settled. Get your career going. I hope none wait until they develop fertility problems, but I sure hope they wait until they are at least a couple of years out of college!

I voted "yes" but I don't believe in lowering standards for any position in the military just to include women. However, if women want equality, we have to be willing to be drafted according to our abilities - whether that is flying a fighter jet or cleaning the latrine.

[RB TexLa]

184. counterproductive to what?

[RobertEarl]

9. Interesting question

I often wondered why it was that women never had to fear being drafted.

I know I sure wouldn't have wanted my dear mother to have been drafted. Maybe other sons felt the same?

[MrMickeysMom]

141. We would need another version of, "Where have all the flowers gone?"

Yes?

[gwheezie]

11. Yes but

If children are involved one parent should be exempt. Doesn't matter which one or if it's 2 dads or 2 moms one of them should be able to stay home.
I think we should raise the draft age to start over 65. This way we won't have to pay SS for us old slackers.

[sadoldgirl]

13. Love your idea about us oldies

I can just see an 85 year old lady driving tanks
and lifting those anti aircraft guns. Man, would that
be fun!

[leftofcool]

78. Will the phrase "Hell no, I won't go" work?

This old granny probably couldn't pass the physical exam, much less fire a gun from a tank.

[bigwillq]

15. Yes (nt)

[Orsino]

17. No one should be drafted into any military.

Ruling classes and governments should make their nations so good that more people want to defend them.

That doesn't answer your question, but since we don't have one now, we don't need to be talking about who gets picked.

[Rex]

22. Yes. Even better! Should all american animals be drafted? YES!

The horse, the fox, I say we draft the calf and cow! Sign up a canary and a cougar! Let the lions sign on the doted line! X works!

I think the eagle should be wearing smart bomb laser guided freedom missiles! I think it selfish to deny the other God fearing, born in America, animals to participate in human kinds favorite activity!

Laser guided shark wielding gorillas! Even the small critters like cats, would make excellent sappers! Plus cats have great ninja potential!

Er yeah draft the FUCK out of everyone! Everything! Trees can stand, arm them with cluster bomb guided laser fists. Everyone remembers Lord of the Rings! Just like that except with Bazookas!

You know what to hell with that, we need to get Monsanto to start working on a Grute tree warrior ASAP!

Let's see...what did I leave out...Pit Bulls! Olive Garden genetically modified Eggplants cluster bomb with a 5 layer detonator!

POW! BAM!

[Renew Deal]

31. Nice post, Noah

[Rex]

33. Are you calling me the father of Ham?

TY SIR.

[uppityperson]

23. No draft, period. eoom

[Iggo]

24. Just women? That's messed up, man.

[KMOD]

27. ;)

[Brother Buzz]

25. Lots of ifs; including or excluding women would be decided by the Supreme court

Bank on it.

[Nye Bevan]

28. Yep. I'm all for equality for women (nt)

[KMOD]

30. For just a hypothetical draft?

Or for other issues such as equal pay, equal rights, etc., as well?

[Nye Bevan]

32. I fully support the Fourteenth Amendment (nt)

[valerief]

34. No one should be drafted into the military. nt

[pnwmom]

36. Hell no. Not before an Equal Rights Amendment is passed. n/t

[stone space]

97. Hell no. And not after, either.

Hell no. Not before an Equal Rights Amendment is passed.

[DEMTough]

44. I'm opposed to the draft itself.

[lumberjack_jeff]

45. I'll take "How to end war immediately for $100, Alex".

If we a) know what equality is and b) support it, then the answer is obvious.

[MADem]

49. I'd prefer that NO ONE be drafted, but if there's a draft, that's what EQUALITY is all about.

Shared sacrifice.

[pnwmom]

57. But we aren't equal. The Equal Rights Amendment failed, remember? No ERA, no women in any draft. n/t

[Manifestor_of_Light]

52. Everybody???

What about young people with health problems that make them ineligible to serve? Like, say, menstrual cramps, which are exclusive to women?? Are they going to give a young woman three or four days off thirteen times a year? There are 13 lunar months in a year.

[Humanist_Activist]

55. There are active duty women in the military now you know,

and other countries have fewer restrictions on their roles and universal service, such as Israel. How do they handle it.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

60. yes, but they probably don't have health problems.

I don't know how they would handle a periodic disability.

[Humanist_Activist]

61. So they are magically heathier? I just find your objection rather...

Uhm, stupid. First off, menstral symptoms vary a lot, and are easily treated in most women with hormonal birth control or certain other medications that can control the symptoms. In addition, symptoms so severe as to disable a woman temporarily are rare, so can be dealt with on a case by case basis. This isn't an argument against universal registration.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

72. You don't know very many women.

At least the ones with severe cramps. Rare, huh? If you're the woman with the severe cramps, statistics don't matter.

Like anything else that happens. If it's rare, and you are the one that gets it, statistics don't matter.

Menopause can be the best thing about getting older.

[Humanist_Activist]

75. Again, what you said isn't a reason to not have universal service, indeed you seem to be arguing...

that women should have their career opportunities limited.

[Manifestor_of_Light]

172. I didn't say ALL WOMEN.

I was referring to particular cases of bad health.

[Humanist_Activist]

173. In that case, why are you posting about this again, do you think the military is going to want...

to draft sick people? Hell, my dad, if he wasn't just a shy too young for the draft, didn't qualify to be drafted, he had a crooked eye from a childhood injury and was born with a tail. Do you honestly think that the military would want people who can't function due to severe symptoms of any condition to join or be drafted?

[lumberjack_jeff]

189. Newt? Is that you?

If combat means living in a ditch, females have biological problems staying in a ditch for thirty days because they get infections and they don't have upper body strength. I mean, some do, but they're relatively rare. On the other hand, men are basically little piglets, you drop them in the ditch, they roll around in it, doesn't matter, you know. These things are very real. On the other hand, if combat means being on an Aegis-class cruiser managing the computer controls for twelve ships and their rockets, a female may be again dramatically better than a male who gets very, very frustrated sitting in a chair all the time because males are biologically driven to go out and hunt giraffes.

Newt Gingrich - 1995

[Manifestor_of_Light]

196. Newt doesn't know the diff between a period and an infection.

[Skittles]

54. when they have enough political influence to stop the insanity

no

no one should be drafted

[TwilightGardener]

59. Technically more fair, but won't happen.

[Marrah_G]

62. Not if they are the primary caregiver of their children

That would create more issues then it fixes.

[HeiressofBickworth]

63. I'M OPPOSED TO A DRAFT, REGARDLESS OF THE APPLICATION

Draft is involuntary servitude (slavery) and should not be applied against any category of people -- not by gender, not by age, not by financial status, not by educational status, not by marital status.

So what's up with the multiple draft questions showing up on DU? Is there an effort to try to gin up support for a draft? How many different ways is the question going to be asked? Know this: to all draft questions I say the same thing: Absolutely NO DRAFT.

[Ken Burch]

64. If we have a draft, draft everybody.

It's the same thing to get your daughter home in a flag-draped coffin as it is to get your son that way.

And if we do have it, mandate front-line service for the children of any presidential children of military age, all children of members of Congress, and all children of the judiciary(excluding only those who publicly express opposition to the war in question and seek conscientious objector status).

[Bluenorthwest]

115. You suggest punishing children for the views of their parents? Seriously? People of draft age are

legally adults. And you are saying that if some 24 year old has a parent who is in Congress or a judge should be forced into service if their parent does not oppose the war?
Many people could point out to you that many adults do not at all agree with their parents, nor the reverse. You are saying that some asshole could disown their gay kids, then later you'd have the gay kids rounded up and punished because their bigoted parent who hates them is for the war.
Utterly chilling right wing concept you have there. Sins of the fathers must be visited upon the sons.

[yuiyoshida]

66. I have mixed feelings about this...

I for one would not like to go.. why do we need to go to war anyway? We are protecting some Corporations oil wells in the middle east? We are sticking our nose into somewhere it doesn't belong, okay...if Kim Jong Il lobbed nukes at us, than..yeah.. lets go take him out.. but come on, why do we need to go fight for some Corporation's interest some where?

[djean111]

83. You are not playing the game correctly!

But you are right.
More and more, it seems to me that the real business of the USA, now that manufacturing has fled and so many good jobs have been outsourced/H-1B'd - is war.

Heh, somewhere someone will look at a poll like this and say hey! Americans are for war! And think everybody should go!

It is extremely naive to think a draft and wars will unify the country and stop wars. No, the police have been duly militarized, weapons and training, and demonstrators will be swiftly dealt with. The media won't cover stuff they are told not to cover.

The CIA is being real up front about expanding so they can monitor everything, all the time, all over the world. Or universe, as they put it. Remember how the Occupy people were herded, arrested, tear-gassed, raided, etc? That was just practice. I doubt anti-war demonstrators will affect anything but arrest rates and more overtime. Sad, but, IMO, true.

Voting against war? With the current hawks-in-waiting? Don't think that will have any effect for years. If at all.
We will just keep getting the Russia boogeyman stories and clips of beheadings. Well, not the beheadings carried out by the Saudis, of course, Those, evidently, are GOOD ones.

So, back to your post - evidently "we" are going to keep on sticking our nose in where it does not belong, in the name of peace and Democracy.

[steve2470]

69. only if a mandatory draft is started again nt

[JonLP24]

71. It depends on the occupation the military is using the draft for

If they using the draft to fill slots in transportation, military police, EOD, medic, 92G (in deployment, with all the migrant labor cooking the food they just sit on their thumbs or used for other tasks).

This is basically a general question so my general answer is Yes. Regarding combat MOS or more specific ones like 11B they already aren't allowed but if they're using the draft to fill coed MOS, it is inherently unfair.

Over danger or risking the danger to women, 88M & the MOS which is basically a medical first responder on the battlefield rank among the male only MOS which the top 10-15 most dangerous MOS are made up of.

[MadrasT]

77. Other.

Pass the ERA, then yes, absolutely.

No ERA, no draft.

[smirkymonkey]

143. This!

[stone space]

80. No. Hands off my daughters!

And my grandchildren as well.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

85. No draft. Period.

We're already at the economic whims of our plutocratic overlords. They shouldn't also have the right to demand we get shot at for their enrichment. Bad enough they're killing us off in so many other ways.

[davidn3600]

91. Apparently some want to pick and choose what to have equality in

You can forget about the ERA if this bothers you.

You can't cherry pick what parts of society you want equality in. It don't work that way.

[seabeyond]

94. feminists are not excluding women from the same obligations to service. it is repug male that says

no.

go after the right people, when accusing. especially as you tie it to the ERA

[davidn3600]

98. I didnt say it was only feminists...

(although there are a few openly feminist people here who have said no...even one using the "dangers of childbirth" as an excuse).

And it is sort of tied to the ERA already since the draft is the main excuse people used back in the 80s for not wanting to pass that amendment.

It only makes sense, if you want a truly equal society, that if there were ever another military draft to include both men and women. Not doing so and finding excuses for not doing so only sets up the situation for women to continue to be infantized and viewed as weak and needing protection.

Norway and Israel already conscript women (along with men). They have certain exclusions of course. And military isn't the only way to fill the obligation in case of conscientious objectors. But I wouldnt be opposed to something like that here.

Plus as others said, if you got more skin in the game, including rich kids and women, the politicians in Washington would be less likely to want to engage in any war. Right now it is too easy to go to war. You got a volunteer military with mostly men, and a high number of minority men. And most are middle or lower class. Meanwhile the main policymakers in Washington are almost entirely upper class.

[seabeyond]

99. "I didnt say it was only feminists..' again, feminist fight for the right of women to serve.

not even kinda tricky of ignoring fact and once again, presenting a false claim

since this was the first comment you made, that i felt i had to readdress, i read no further in your post. i am not here to reassemble a whole post of wrong.

it is not feminist that deny women the right to serve, and tying ERA into that is bullshit.

[davidn3600]

104. Have you even looked at the posts on this very thread!

There are people right here on this thread who are saying no to women serving and claim to be feminists.

Why aren't you giving them hell?

I've never said no to women serving in combat. So I don't know why the hell you are attacking me for. If someone really has a problem with women serving or being drafted, why would they support ERA then? If you pass ERA, you can't cherry pick things to be equal in. That's the point I was making.

[seabeyond]

106. third time... feminists position is FIGHTING for the right for women to serve.

tying it into ERA (and do you support ERA?) is BULLSHIT!

[davidn3600]

109. For some reason you are trying so very hard to find a way to disagree with me and start a fight

I'm not going to play your word games. If you want to fight someone, fight with the feminists on this thread who say women shouldn't serve.

Have a nice day.

[seabeyond]

111. what i am doing is presenting fact instead of your fiction. fact is: feminist position supports and

fights for women to serve.

your position in each post is blaming feminists, and that is incorrect.

[stone space]

116. This thread is NOT about the "right of women to serve".

It's about whether or not women should be kidnapped and forced to kill and die against their will by others who want to tell women how to live their lives, rather than letting women decide on their own how to live their lives.

The real question here is whether or not we trust women enough to make their own decisions.

[seabeyond]

119. i specifically addressed a poster that consistently blames feminists for the ills of this world.

i did not share my opinion about the OP.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

136. then, please - share it. I want to hear your opinion about the OP. n/t

[seabeyond]

137. here are a couple subthreads of opinion in different Ops. i really did not want to participate in

this battle. i have too many times in the past. i also did not think it prudent to allow certain accusations toward feminists to stand without challenge. that is why i addressed what i did in this OP


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6331228


http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6331281

[Tuesday Afternoon]

140. Personally, I think this OP is very badly worded but, I voted, yes.

[seabeyond]

142. ya. i did not vote. if boys have to, then girls do. neither should. is my stand. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

147. I think education should include some type of service to our country, as in, Peace Corp --

or National Guard or Coast Guard or, in some capacity to help with our infrastructure.

I do not think anyone should be forced to go overseas to fight in some war that somehow our politicians have managed to justify/rationalize.

But, I am not opposed to 18-20 y/o doing some type of Civil Service no matter the gender.

[seabeyond]

148. then again, if the are spending 6 or 7 yrs old more, in higher education to make a wage....

that time demanded elsewhere takes them into their 30's before they are providing for themselves. ideally, i think it is a great idea. not seeing it practically.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

149. I am not understanding you. Please clarify.

[seabeyond]

151. i use to like the idea of a mandatory service. i can so see the education for boy in peace corps...

and i think it would be excellent in giving, and creating a better whole for all of us. now that oldest is in school, looking at 4 yrs in university and then another three for advanced degree, that takes him to 26, 27.... before he is able to start providing for himself.

i am telling him after the first 4 yrs, he is going to have to start paying for his own damn insurance.

university is so expensive. he got an athletic and academic scholarship. the athletic scholarship that has significantly cut costs, is allowing him to go to that school. otherwise we could not afford. it is also taking up as much time as any full time job would be. it seems like the kids are getting much older before us adults can cut the financial cord.

add two years, .... and wow. i have to retire in a decade and half.

and i have another to put thru in a couple more years.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

158. you are thinking private pay. I think not. I think they should get room/board/stipend

Tricare (current military) insurance.

[seabeyond]

154. also.... if they do it freshly out of highschool, then i also feel that can stop a lot of kids

making it thru college. man... it is pure momentum of getting it done, to continue on with college. have two years out of academics, and it makes it that much harder, i feel.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

160. It should/could be included as part of our edcuation system based on a more European style.

of educating our young.

IIRC, Israel has mandatory male/female two year service. I am NOT saying that we should do EXACTLY like Israel, mind you but, I do think Good Citizens should be CIVIC minded. I also don't think our high school/college system is the best way for our young people in helping them determine what is best profession for their future.

Trade Schools used to be more prevalent and should also be considered as an honorable way to make a living.

[seabeyond]

162. i agree with all you are saying. and further, i do not buy in all kids should go to college.

a lot of kids for different reasons should not go to college. and there absolutely should/must be other options for these kids. one being peace corp type, military, and trade schools.

my youngest, from what i see and know, regardless how smart and his desires.... may not be one to go the college route. for his specific reasons.

same with me. lol

and my niece.

not indicative of abilities, smarts, or other.... just needs to be applied in other areas, not college.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

163. Yes. And now we understand why this OP is -so-badly worded. Thank you. -

always a pleasure, sea

[seabeyond]

164. back atcha. kinda like a .... discussion, of thought! fun to be had. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

190. Which has nothing to do with the point of this thread.

For men, being prepared to fight isn't a right, it's an obligation. Equality would require an equal obligation.

Feminist organizations don't support draft registration for women, so they don't support equality. QED.

[seabeyond]

194. it has everything to do with the post i replied to

[kcr]

183. Oh, most definitely. Some people DO want to pick and choose

It sure is funny how so many want to ignore equality until these ridiculous never happen in a million years hypothetical draft scenarios come up. Then they're all about equality. Hell yes women should be forced to go get blown up in war, too! Fair's fair!

[JonLP24]

191. Do you mean for combat MOS or you just mean the draft?

If you just mean the draft than ignore but I can take your post another way as well.

I know regarding infantry the active duty garrison training is a notable hardship. Their PT is more challenging than a typical regular army unit. A lot of FTRs & constant drilling, practicing, & training. A lot of ruck-marches and it seemed pretty universal there was nothing in the entire basic training that hurt your body after 10 miles of that. Infantry does it further with more gear. I'd actually support more woman in these MOS, the differences in gender regarding sleeping & showering can be worked out if they can maintain & certainly women are capable or certainly believe boxers & runners certainly can, it would also cut back on all the misogyny which would inevitable lead to with the group dynamics & an all-males club with a frat house style group personality that also think they are the shit -- not all but many who were 11B basically felt that since they were infantry, they were better than the rest of the people in the military.

[eridani]

93. Nobody should n/t

[stone space]

100. Do those here who support manditory military "service" for women also support...

...mandatory pregnancy and childbirth for women?

If not, why not?

Shouldn't the government be telling our daughters how to live their lives in every way possible?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

107. What a bizarre question

What does one have to do with the other?

[stone space]

108. Both ways of men telling our daughters how to live their lives. (nt)

[SickOfTheOnePct]

110. Opening the draft up to women

is not telling them how to live their lives, anymore than it's telling the men that would be drafted how to live their lives.

Daughters are no more precious to their families than sons.

[stone space]

112. You make it sound like an opportunity, not violent coersion.

Opening the draft up to women is not telling them how to live their lives, anymore than it's telling the men that would be drafted how to live their lives.

Forcing women to kill and die against their will is not telling them how to live their lives?

Seriously?

What if they don't want to kill and die?

Isn't it their choice?

Who are you to decide for them?

[Humanist_Activist]

121. That's an argument against the draft in general, not an issue that would only affect women. n/t

[SickOfTheOnePct]

124. It's coercion for men as well

If men have to be drafted, i.e., forced to go to war, why shouldn't women as well?

As I've said previously, I'm against the draft. But if we ever have to use it again, women should be drafted just like men.

[stone space]

202. Different thread, different poll.

Try here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026335902

[Humanist_Activist]

114. You seem to be the master of the non sequitur, seriously, what the fuck are you talking about? n/t

[stone space]

117. Why should we telling women how live their lives?

Aren't women smart enough to make these choices for themselves?

[Humanist_Activist]

118. Again with the non sequitur, what the hell are you prattling on about? n/t

[stone space]

120. Whether or not we should kidnap women and force them...

...to kill and die against their will.

It's the question asked in the OP.

I favor letting women make their own choices and running their own lives.

But then, I have two daughters, and they don't really need anybody telling them what to do.

[Humanist_Activist]

122. Do you feel the same way about men? n/t

[stone space]

123. Of course I do. But that wasn't the question.

The question was about the government telling women how to live their lives.

And even going so far as kidnapping women and forcing them to kill and die for it.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

125. What you choose to ignore is that the question was asked

because men are already subject to, using your hyperbole, being kidnapped and forced to kill and die.

Being against the draft for everyone is a valid position, and one that I hold as well. But you have yet to give a reason why, should the draft be reinstituted, it would be OK for men to be drafted but not women.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

129. The poll does *not* ask "Do you support mandatory military service for women?". That's important.

It asks "If there (sic) draft is reinstated, should women be drafted? " (emphasis mine)

I oppose mandatory military service for anyone.

But I think that mandatory military service for everyone would be less bad than mandatory military service for men only (although still pretty bad).

I suspect many (possibly most, possibly nearly all?) of the people answer yes are in the same category.

[stone space]

200. "If women are raped, should men also be raped?"

I would tend to answer "no" to that question, just as tend to answer "no" to this question:

"If there (sic) draft is reinstated, should women be drafted? "

One can add all sorts of "if"s to the question, and I'll still be opposed to drafting women, just as I am opposed to raping men.

I don't really see how adding a few "if"s is going to change my response to either question.

[ileus]

101. Why would a draft be reinstated?

[Donald Ian Rankin]

113. Yes to the question in the text, no to the question in the title.

No-one should ever be conscripted. But if conscription were to be introduced, it should be gender-neutral.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

127. Agree 100% on both counts n/t

[HereSince1628]

130. YES, and ONLY women should be drafted. It's time to balance an historic wrong

[seabeyond]

132. so, to compensate for the historical wrong of rape allowed, .... anytime a girl/women says rape,

the accused go to jail with NO trial?

i am sure your post is in absurdity, as well as mine.

[laundry_queen]

167. Sure. Only if

Women get to be the only ones in charge of corporations as CEOs and on corporate boards. You know, to balance a historic wrong.

An only women senators, congressmen and presidents from now on. Until numbers are equal in history, to also balance that historic wrong.

And maybe we should burn a few men at the stake if they are suspected to be witches. To balance that particular nasty historic wrong.

And from now on, only women should get the vote, not men. Because it's time to balance a historic wrong.

Need I go on? Or has my post reached the point of ridiculousness your post started out with? (for any potential alerters - not advocating these things, just pointing out the ridiculousness in "HereSince1628"'s post.)

[HereSince1628]

170. LOL. This is a real serious thread doncha know?

We're in Nahnahland from the start...

[treestar]

134. If men are, yes.

Good way to stop all unnecessary wars.

[ismnotwasm]

144. Yes if men are women should be and there is a draft

Now ask me if I believe in having a draft the first place

[TBF]

146. As soon as the ERA is ratified I will consider this question

and not a second before.

[ismnotwasm]

150. Actually that's a good point

I'm anti-war, but without equal protection under the law, women shouldn't be drafted

[TBF]

166. Same here - anti war and anti-draft

but I would consider some type of required service for a year or two after high school if folks wanted that. Again after everyone acknowledges that we are all people (not just white land-owning males).

[HereSince1628]

153. No doubt an ERA should be ratified, but

I think this argument has to explain why women should be different than black men, Hispanic men, and Native Americans largely without equal civil rights and sadly, even Japanese men in internment camps who were conscripted in WWII and later

Blacks Hispanics and Native Americans by and large didn't organize resistance to the draft leveraged on other goals.
Resistance to conscription by Japanese men in internment camps offering cooperation for freedom of their families led to felony convictions and imprisonment.

I'm sure that some argument along the lines of misdeeds of the past need not be models for the future would work.

[TBF]

165. I don't agree with conscription so someone else

Last edited Mon Mar 9, 2015, 08:03 AM - Edit history (1)

will have to make that argument for you. Going way back to the founding (if your user name is indicative our families came here around the same time!) only white, male landowners were guaranteed full rights. So if they want to fight it's on them.

[Wella]

168. What's with all the "trial balloons" about the draft?

Are the Democrats taking Charlie Rangel's 2003 draft bill out of the mothballs?

[mwrguy]

169. Not while the US military is basically a giant rape camp

[AwakeAtLast]

175. That is my reason for saying "No!"

[JackRiddler]

171. Who cares?

If the draft is reinstated, should there be a revolution?

[stone space]

201. Yes.

If the draft is reinstated, should there be a revolution?

[Jamastiene]

176. I don't even think men should have ever been drafted.

I come from a military family and one family member believes everyone, males and females, should have to serve a full 4 years before going to college. We disagree on that vehemently. She was a WAC. If rape happened in the military back then, I doubt it was as widespread as it is now. There is no fucking way I could say I think women should be drafted. We wouldn't be allowed to fight, just do bullshit tasks, and get raped by other soldiers and commanding officers. And none of them would ever get convicted even if they wasted the time to have one of those sham military trials. No, thanks, but no thanks. I don't believe in the draft to begin with, but I REALLY would not ever say women should be subjected to that kind of bullshit. Been raped, done that, don't want to go through it again no matter how much the local government run county mental health "official counselor for gay people" of Richmond County, North Carolina, thinks I need to "get right with God." I wish the internet had been around back then. I got raped and that was the extent of my therapy. I wish they guy had killed me instead. At least there is some common human respect in being murdered. Being raped is being degraded then being degraded again when you try to get the authorities to help then feeling nothing but pain from it for the rest of your life. There is no way I would vote to see any woman go through that.

So, hell no, I won't even consider the male/female "equality" aspect of your question until they stop raping women and getting away with it in the military. Even though I grew up in a military family, I fear soldiers nowadays. Hell no, women should not be drafted, but then again, I don't think men ever should have been either. But anyone who spouts off at the mouth about how we "need" to go to war should have to put up or shut up. THOSE are the ones who should be drafted and ONLY those people should be drafted, regardless of gender or anything else. Otherwise, keep it volunteer for those who want to do it.

[Kath1]

179. God damn, Jamastiene!

You are perfectly right on this. Very excellent post.

Thank you and I agree. AS WOMEN - HELL NO, WE WON'T GO!!!

[seabeyond]

180. rape aspect is an excellent point i totally overlooked and their unwillingness to address. just a

mentality that is what happens in war.... meh.

so you are right. that is a HUGE reason why it is a big NO!!

[F4lconF16]

204. Excellent points. Thanks. nt

[napi21]

177. I answerred OTHER because of a conversation I heard from a military officer.

It was a show on tv (msnbc I THINK) but I don't remember which show. He was asked if there should be a draft. He said NO. Years ago when we had the draft, we pulled in a bunch of guys, trained them to shoot and a few other things, and sent them off to the infantry. Today, the training is much more extensive. They have top learn a lot of technology to operate the new equipment in all areas of our military, and 6 weeks won't make it.

I recommend something else to get all young people to contribute. Something like mandatory community service, or foreign service of some kind, and yes ALL young people should have to serve in one of those areas, both male & female.

I really like his idea. I don't know if community service is the right area, but something like that, that would force kids of SLL social levels to contribute.

[Joe Magarac]

178. No to a draft for men or women.

What is it with some Democrats and a love for imposing involuntary servitude?

I'm too old to be drafted this time, but I would definitely aid others to resist the draft.

No matter who was president. No matter what the cause.

[kcr]

186. Not only no, but hell no

I'm not surprised at the lopsided results because of the tendency to want to be fair. It does seem fair on the face of it. Well, women want equality, right? So, doesn't that then mean they should be drafted, too, in the event of one?

No, and here's why. For one thing, it assumes that equality has been reached and men and women are the same. There are all kinds of reasonable arguments to be made how this isn't so. The fact that women overwhelmingly still tend to be the primary caregivers in their families for childcare. They tend to be the caregivers when a family member falls ill as well. Aside from the issues with dependency, this tends to take a toll financially. I'm not saying men never act in this capacity, but as a group women are still overwhelmingly affected more. These are burdens that significantly impact women far more than men and a draft would further burden women and their dependents. Women are also not as physically strong. This is simply a fact. And then there are the issues of rape in the military. No way it's right to add to those numbers by force.

I'm against the draft in either case, but it is simply not factual to claim it would be equitable and fair to enact a draft on both men and women. A draft would not impact both men and women the same.

[CreekDog]

192. This poll kind of begs the question(s)

[stone space]

203. See campanion poll here:

Should men be drafted into the military?

If the draft is reinstated, should men be drafted?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026335902

[Lancero]

205. Easiest way to see just how 'equal' a person believes women should be to men...

...Is to ask if women should be susceptible to the draft as well.

Main reason they give that they shouldn't? It's to dangerous, women can't handle it.

Sometimes followed by 'shouldn't waste safest birthing years'.

What's interesting is that the danger argument can be applied to quite a few activities, and other jobs, while the second can be applied to any woman working towards a lifelong career.