• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Draft women, too (here we go)

Henrin said:
I know many people that joined up for those reasons.
Click to expand...

And how many have you known who served?

In my 18 years, I can safely say it is in the thousands. In every field from Infantry and PATRIOT missiles to medical and IT. And trust me, for most of my career it was not the "Education Benefits", because when I first joined those were an absolute joke (VEAP). Just look up Chapter 32, then explain why anybody in their right mind would join the military just to get that crappy education benefit.

Yea, I put in $1, they add $2. Max input was $2,700, which gives you a whopping $8,100 to use for education when you got out (and very few programs were acceptable for VEAP). If somebody wanted to join the military for that education benefit, their ASVAB score was probably to low for them to enlist in the first place.

And here is the double irony of your statement. The number of people who try to join the military actually increases when the economy tanks. Which is ironic, because whenever this happens it is also at the same time they downsize the military and reduce the number of people who can join (and seperate many who are already in). If somebody really meets your criteria, they will find it much harder to join the military. SO why would they waste time and money trying to recruit in "poor areas"?

Simple answer, they do not. Almost universally, the recruiting centers are set up in suburban shopping malls, where they can get the offices to operate out of at a price the military is willing to pay. Back when I first enlisted, the centers were still mostly in Government Buildings. And for the most part, if you wanted to join the Guard or Reserve you had to go to the unit itself you wanted to enlist in.

Sorry, but you are simply spewing more coprolite, that you think is true. The problem is, I have seen almost the exact opposite of what you are saying.
 
Henrin said:
I have no idea why I must continually state that I'm not against people associating and helping each other through their own free will. Collectivists are so screwed up that they somehow think that if you oppose forced association that somehow you oppose people associating at all.
Click to expand...

I'm fine with forced taxation of those who have no morality. If we based our political system on the whims of those elements we'd live in a pretty terrible place.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Actually makes sense. If we're going to officially open up combat roles to women, then women should also be subject to the draft. However, I'm not sure that either are the right choice regarding military readiness and/or combat efficiency.

U.S. military generals want women to register for draft - CNNPolitics.com
Click to expand...

There's something not quite right about a body of people being able to vote me into compulsory military service, without the risk of them having to serve as well.
 
Harry Guerrilla said:
There's something not quite right about a body of people being able to vote me into compulsory military service, without the risk of them having to serve as well.
Click to expand...

Rather a silly claim.

Registration is required of those between 18 and 26. The minimum age for the Senate is 30, for the House it is 25.

The median age for those in the Senate is 63 for the senate, 57 for those in the House. Our youngest Senator is 38, our youngest Representative is 31.

But hey, nobody is making you join the military, so do whatever in the hell you want. To be honest, I never expect much from Libertarians in the first place.
 
Oozlefinch said:
Rather a silly claim.

Registration is required of those between 18 and 26. The minimum age for the Senate is 30, for the House it is 25.

The median age for those in the Senate is 63 for the senate, 57 for those in the House. Our youngest Senator is 38, our youngest Representative is 31.
Click to expand...

Wasn't talking about politicians, was talking about citizens.

Oozlefinch said:
But hey, nobody is making you join the military, so do whatever in the hell you want. To be honest, I never expect much from Libertarians in the first place.
Click to expand...

Ouch, I'm hurt. :lol:
 
Oozlefinch said:
Rather a silly claim.

Registration is required of those between 18 and 26. The minimum age for the Senate is 30, for the House it is 25.

The median age for those in the Senate is 63 for the senate, 57 for those in the House. Our youngest Senator is 38, our youngest Representative is 31.

But hey, nobody is making you join the military, so do whatever in the hell you want. To be honest, I never expect much from Libertarians in the first place.
Click to expand...

Whereas, from conservatives we expect obedience.
 
Oozlefinch said:
No, you are confusing us with Liberals again. They are the ones that will scream and shout and sue if they do not get their way in everything.
Click to expand...

No confusion at all. 'Obedience' does not mean, "...scream and shout and sue if they do not get their way in everything". Obedience means to meekly comply with the demands of the daddy state that they adore.
 
Oozlefinch said:
No, you are confusing us with Liberals again. They are the ones that will scream and shout and sue if they do not get their way in everything.
Click to expand...

No, he's nailed conservatives pretty well. The US is a liberal country and represents their views, but who fights and dies for the country the most? Conservatives. Why? Because even if the country doesn't represent them and goes further and further from what they see in a country they stand beside their country out of a sense of loyalty and duty. Conservatives will rarely protest, will rarely ever make themselves heard when it really counts, but liberals will protest and never shut their ****ing mouths about what they want until they get their way. Admit it, you're defending a country that is only yours by citizenship. You're defending a country that for all intents and purposes doesn't care about your values.
 
Any draft that exists should definitely be gender neutral, including men, women, and everyone in-between. Everyone who has the right to vote for warmongers should only be able to do so understanding that they are putting their own neck on the line.
 
Henrin said:
The US is a liberal country and represents their views, but who fights and dies for the country the most?
Click to expand...

Actually, the reality is the opposite.

mabtswnh2kqp0bmq4g9tqa.png


And for the military, it is pretty much the same as the general population. You will find about the same number who supported President Obama as those who oppose him. You will find in the military far-left almost SOcialist Liberals serving in the same squad with far right Conservatives and even Libertarians of both right and left wing leanings.

However, most of them are very patriotic, and want to make the country better. Even if politically they think of very different ways to achieve that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom