NDAA would require women to register for the draft

[Uxupox]

Only if the standards are lowered I bet. As an example, the men may need to do 20 pull ups, the women would only need to do 12. Furthermore, having women in battle will expose them much more to rape. If it isn't from their male colleagues, it'll be from the enemy. That is how war usually goes, it is a man's world that is just no place for a woman.

I'm convinced now that the Red Army only let women into battle in the Great Patriotic War because the USSR was in an existential crisis during the titanic struggle with Nazi Germany. In other circumstances such as if the Soviets invaded Europe first, the women would've been held back for reserve or in no front line infantry positions at all. The invasion of Finland was done by only men, was it not?

luckily soldiers seldom are called on to do pull ups in war.

and we don't have to take any woman who isn't fit enough. some women are and there is no real reason not to have them in those jobs. and we have 200,000+ women serving today who are only in danger from their fellow soldiers.

and many many military jobs don't ever involve combat so it doesn't much matter how physically capable people in those jobs are.

I need a citation for this.

[Ifreann]

Or, you know, nobody registers and nobody gets drafted. That'd be good too.

It's illegal to not register for the draft

You'd swear I was suggesting that the law be changed or something.

[JChillin]

It's illegal to not register for the draft

You'd swear I was suggesting that the law be changed or something.

You seem like a pleasant person.

[Ifreann]

You'd swear I was suggesting that the law be changed or something.

You seem like a pleasant person.

I am a delight.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

You seem like a pleasant person.

I am a delight.

Now put this pink dress for your country.

[Zeinbrad]

China and Russia to name a few. Our Army is smaller than South Korea's.

And how would an invading army get past the most powerful navy in the world?

Fearmongering.

[Imperializt Russia]

luckily soldiers seldom are called on to do pull ups in war.

and we don't have to take any woman who isn't fit enough. some women are and there is no real reason not to have them in those jobs. and we have 200,000+ women serving today who are only in danger from their fellow soldiers.

and many many military jobs don't ever involve combat so it doesn't much matter how physically capable people in those jobs are.

I need a citation for this.

http://web.archive.org/web/201204211206 ... today.html
In 2009, the regular Army was made up by 13.4% women, the Army Reserve by 23.7% women and the Army National Guard by 14% women.
Going by the 2016 end-year strength figures (475,000; 198,000; 342,000 respectively), this would equate to about 168,000 women in all forms of the Army, not including the Marines, Navy and Air Force. The latter two, I would assume, having relatively high numbers of serving women.

[Uxupox]

I need a citation for this.

http://web.archive.org/web/201204211206 ... today.html
In 2009, the regular Army was made up by 13.4% women, the Army Reserve by 23.7% women and the Army National Guard by 14% women.
Going by the 2016 end-year strength figures (475,000; 198,000; 342,000 respectively), this would equate to about 168,000 women in all forms of the Army, not including the Marines, Navy and Air Force. The latter two, I would assume, having relatively high numbers of serving women.

I know about the number of female soldiers in the military, what I for citation is the 200k female soldiers getting threatened by their male peers.

[Novus America]

If you're not fit for battle, chances are you won't be sent to the front, even if you get drafted. But you might get assigned to a support role or in a factory somewhere producing munitions or peeling potatoes, whatever is wanted by the people in charge of logistics.

That'd be a waste of my life, though. So I'd probably still dodge.

This is still based on the the assumption conscripts are only used in menial untrained positions.

First of all munitions factories are operated by civillian contractors. Logistics products are provided by military contractors. Some countries have millitary staffed factories and farms, but not the US.

The modern military is not organized like that. If you have a skill you will be likly assigned a relevant position. And you can request a job too. Obviously not guaranteed to get your first choice. But serving two years in a job is not a big deal. You get paid, training and college benefits too.

[Imperializt Russia]

http://web.archive.org/web/201204211206 ... today.html
In 2009, the regular Army was made up by 13.4% women, the Army Reserve by 23.7% women and the Army National Guard by 14% women.
Going by the 2016 end-year strength figures (475,000; 198,000; 342,000 respectively), this would equate to about 168,000 women in all forms of the Army, not including the Marines, Navy and Air Force. The latter two, I would assume, having relatively high numbers of serving women.

I know about the number of female soldiers in the military, what I for citation is the 200k female soldiers getting threatened by their male peers.

I don't believe that's what was said.

I believe the point being made was that most of the women currently serving were not in frontline combat roles and therefore would be "more" at threat from their peers than from enemy action.
Which is a confusingly written and bizarre point to make.

[Dakran]

Interdasting. Can't wait to see the hell this raises on social media and in public. Gonna be goooood,

[Socialist Tera]

Good that they have it equal where both have to be drafted but I would only serve in a socialist country, I would avoid draft in a capitalist country.

[Roma Byzantina]

Good. If men must register then it only makes sense that women would need to as well.

[The Princes of the Universe]

The draft needs to go, but so long as it exists, gender should not be cause for exemption.

[Saiwania]

First of all munitions factories are operated by civilian contractors. Logistics products are provided by military contractors. Some countries have military staffed factories and farms, but not the US.

So what is to stop said private contractors from simply being paid off to slow, stop, or sabotage production, or worse- demanding exorbitant prices for their wares? All military matters ought to be nationalized and not left up to mere mercenaries.

[Galloism]

First of all munitions factories are operated by civilian contractors. Logistics products are provided by military contractors. Some countries have military staffed factories and farms, but not the US.

So what is to stop said private contractors from simply being paid off to slow, stop, or sabotage production, or worse- demanding exorbitant prices for their wares? All military matters ought to be nationalized and not left up to mere mercenaries.

Typically, there are crimes related to working with the enemy... now what were they...

[Ifreann]

I am a delight.

Now put this pink dress for your country.

o7

---

So what is to stop said private contractors from simply being paid off to slow, stop, or sabotage production, or worse- demanding exorbitant prices for their wares? All military matters ought to be nationalized and not left up to mere mercenaries.

Typically, there are crimes related to working with the enemy... now what were they...

Naughtiness in the first degree.

[Novus America]

First of all munitions factories are operated by civilian contractors. Logistics products are provided by military contractors. Some countries have military staffed factories and farms, but not the US.

So what is to stop said private contractors from simply being paid off to slow, stop, or sabotage production, or worse- demanding exorbitant prices for their wares? All military matters ought to be nationalized and not left up to mere mercenaries.

Military members can be paid off too. And yeah, contractors can overcharge. We do need reform in our contesting system.

But they are not "mere mercenaries". They are American workers, often veterans making stuff. Not hired guns.

Realistically the reason why we have contractors do these things is the government sucks at it. Also Seperating military and civillian matters is not easy. A P-8 Poseidon is a just a Boeing 737. A lot of military stuff is commercial off the shelf.

[Imperializt Russia]

Realistically the reason why we have contractors do these things is the government sucks at it.

No, it's just how the US has always done it.

[Novus America]

Realistically the reason why we have contractors do these things is the government sucks at it.

No, it's just how the US has always done it.

The US government sucks at it. Yes it is self reinforcing. The US did used to have some military owned and operated armories and ship yards though. But these has been either replaced with private ones, or the ones remaining military owned are largely operated by contrators.

[Shaggy Dog Story]

Now put this pink dress for your country.

o7

---

Typically, there are crimes related to working with the enemy... now what were they...

Naughtiness in the first degree.

I had not realized o7 was an emoticon for a salute. In the US Army an o-7 is an officer grade 7. A Brigadier General. The thought of a BGen in a pink frilly affair has provided today's amusement.

[Neutraligon]

Only if the standards are lowered I bet. As an example, the men may need to do 20 pull ups, the women would only need to do 12. Furthermore, having women in battle will expose them much more to rape. If it isn't from their male colleagues, it'll be from the enemy. That is how war usually goes, it is a man's world that is just no place for a woman.

I'm convinced now that the Red Army only let women into battle in the Great Patriotic War because the USSR was in an existential crisis during the titanic struggle with Nazi Germany. In other circumstances such as if the Soviets invaded Europe first, the women would've been held back for reserve or in no front line infantry positions at all. The invasion of Finland was done by only men, was it not?

I do agree that standards should not be lowered at all but in war it doesn't matter your sex as long as you can do your job correctly and with exemplary motivation.

Why are we talking about standards when it comes to the draft?

[Imperium Sidhicum]

Good. I think that everyone capable of holding a gun should have the honour of being called to serve their nation in times of need. Even if women are kept on the home front in times of war, they still should know how to defend their homes in the absence of men.

[Zoice]

Don't remember the exact statistics for basic but women passed just as fine as men.

Only if the standards are lowered I bet. As an example, the men may need to do 20 pull ups, the women would only need to do 12. Furthermore, having women in battle will expose them much more to rape. If it isn't from their male colleagues, it'll be from the enemy. That is how war usually goes, it is a man's world that is just no place for a woman.

I'm convinced now that the Red Army only let women into battle in the Great Patriotic War because the USSR was in an existential crisis during the titanic struggle with Nazi Germany. In other circumstances such as if the Soviets invaded Europe first, the women would've been held back for reserve or in no front line infantry positions at all. The invasion of Finland was done by only men, was it not?

Let the women decide if they want to go into war, they don't need you to decide for them. If they can do the 20 pull ups needed, all the power to them. There aren't many opportunities for genuine accusations of patriarchy, but you're the real deal.

[Boihaemum]

Nitpicky point: If passed women will be required to register for the Selective Service, not the draft. We haven't had a draft since the 70s to register for. Apologies if this has been brought up in the past pages.