TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

Top U.S. generals: Women should have to register for draft

xynomaster

February 2, 2016
324 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://reuters.com/article/idUSKCN0VB1UR
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title Top U.S. generals: Women should have to register for draft
Author

xynomaster

Upvotes 324
Comments 101
Date February 2, 2016 6:08 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/43vflj/top_us_generals_women_should_have_to_register_for/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/top-us-generals-women-should-have-to-register-for.957121
https://theredarchive.com/post/957121
Top posts by xynomaster

Woman jailed for sexually abusing boy after judge says "gender is irrelevant" and he cannot lower the sentence just because the victim is a boy

11005 upvotes
September 12, 2016
/r/MensRights

"My son's life is not worth food stamps" - father furious after the woman who killed his son avoids jail despite a man receiving 5 years in prison for stealing food stamps that same day

5949 upvotes
January 8, 2016
/r/MensRights

13 year old boy files human rights complaint against B.C. government for providing HPV vaccine to girls but not boys

5522 upvotes
September 13, 2016
/r/MensRights

Mom admits to killing 3 young sons so that her daughter could have more attention - despite the previous deaths, a judge had returned the third son to her custody just 6 days before he was killed

4984 upvotes
August 19, 2015
/r/MensRights

Please Stop Saying That Teacher "Had Sex With" Her Student - It's not sex, or an affair, or a scandal. It's rape. ​

4526 upvotes
June 4, 2016
/r/MensRights

Female teacher pleads guilty to 28 counts of sexual abuse against a middle school boy, but won't go to jail

4288 upvotes
June 30, 2016
/r/MensRights

Female teacher accused of sexual harassment by 10 male colleagues and 3 students is allowed back in school after arguing that the reports were the result of workplace envy over "a strong female in a department otherwise dominated by males"

4123 upvotes
May 23, 2016
/r/MensRights

Children do not have affairs with older women, they are abused by them

3074 upvotes
October 6, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]damitdeadagain 26 points27 points28 points 10 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

Sister is in the military. They won't even give her a real gun. Apparently she is soo inept she carries a dummy one when they are training. Then goes back to the desk after.

Not saying all women would be like this but jesus can you imagine the flood of women who are just typical girls like my sister if they instate the draft.

[–]soalone34 24 points25 points26 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

As long as the women have the same standards as men only competent people will be let in. If someone is that incompetent then the standards shouldn't accept them, man or women.

[–]jammastajayt 20 points21 points22 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Ever been in a room with too many 18 year olds who all played too much Call of Duty? Well, for the most part, that's boot camp.

[–]WaitingToBeBanned 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, but you can yell at them and kick them out for being retarded pussies.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

[deleted]

What is this?

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]McFeely_Smackup 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

when I was in basic training if you couldn't pass Basic Rifle Marksmanship, you got re-classed to truck driver.

[–]ARedthorn 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This. Under the selective service, you're required by law to sign a contract. If you do, you're required to serve if called. It doesn't have to be combat (if you're disabled, incapable, or unwilling), but you will serve.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Nah, I'm not gonna be forced to do something I don't want to do just because some big war happens while I'm young and forced to sign something. Not happening.

[–]ARedthorn 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, if you're in the US (immigrants and refugees included), your options are:

1- refuse to sign up for the selective service ----you are committing a felony, and if charged face up to $250,000 fine, 5 years jail time, and loss of voting rights in most states ----even if you aren't charged, are no longer eligible for any federally funded job, program or service. Among other things, this includes admission to any public school that receives federal funding, which is pretty much all of them.

2- sign, but in the event you're ever called, refuse to serve ----you are committing a felony. See the above. ----expect consequences to be worse here, if only because they have a reason to want to make an example of you.

3- sign, but declare yourself a conscientious objector ----you still have to serve if called, just not in combat ----you're a slave with a few special protections

4- sign, and serve if called without question or objection. ----you are a slave

[+][deleted] 10 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]McFeely_Smackup 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

yeah, no shit. Most of the people I've met who are missing limbs due to IEDs were either driving or riding in a truck.

[–]Sinsilenc 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You do realize just about all ground troops are riding in the truck...

[–]McFeely_Smackup 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, my point is that being a truck driver is not the relatively safe job it used to be in the "good old days"

[–]Hiscore 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

11B is more dangerous, but better trained

[–]192873982 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

In our army, they give you a rifle after half a week and you'll take that rifle home with you. Why wouldn't they allow your sister to have a gun? Carrying a gun requires a responsible person. They have to teach their soldiers to be responsible people, if they aren't already. I don't see a reason why your sister shouldn't have a gun.

[–]damitdeadagain 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I guess there are lots of jobs that don't ever see a combat situation. I'm not sure exactly what she does but it's not the pew pew type of thing

[–]192873982 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I agree, but why then give the men who do the same a gun? Also basic gun/rifle training can't hurt. Even positions who don't usually fight could get into a fighting situation with some bad luck.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They won't even give her a real gun. Apparently she is soo inept she carries a dummy one

Reminds me of the Will Ferrell movie "The Other Guys".

[–]unklestinky 14 points15 points16 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Good, maybe some women will finally learn that they have had the right to college financial aid based on gender alone, whereas men have had to earn that right by registering.

[–]PotatoDonki 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And voting!

[–][deleted] 41 points42 points43 points 10 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

How about abolishing the draft and just incentivising people to volunteer with good pay and perks?

[–]soalone34 39 points40 points41 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Nah. When the draft is actually needed they'll just make it again and we won't have any time to make it fair.

[–]dangrullon87 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or theyll give giant sign up bonuses, but fuck the guys already in... Every fucking time. New guy "oh just came in fresh, 70,000 sign up bonus" yea.. ive been in 7 years with a 2% raise..

[–]Obtainer_of_Goods 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

After the fiasco that was the Vietnam War, I doubt there will ever be a draft again except in a time of extreme national emergency,(ex. total war with china) but I sincerely doubt such a situation will ever arise again, the world is just to interconnected with trade, and people often forget that China is just as dependent on us as consumers of their products as we are as purchasers, without each other our respective economies would collapse.

[–]Revoran 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

If there is a total war against China, it will be over in 30 minutes.

[–]Mikeavelli 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Kinda doubtful. They've got us outnumbered by a good amount, but they don't have a blue-sea navy capable of projecting force over to the United States, or an Air Force capable of challenging US Air Superiority. They've got ICBM's with nukes I suppose, but MAD still applies, and the Chinese heads of state aren't any more fond of Nuclear Winter than we are.

[–]biteme43 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

no other country apart from the US really has a blue sea navy capable of projecting its force, they can take them, but really make an all scale war? no.

[–]dungone -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

We are the ones who would go nuclear first.

[–]Mikeavelli 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

We could, but they've got nukes, and can just retaliate. MAD applies either way.

[–]dungone 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

Let's put it another way - we'd run out of options sooner.

[–]Unconfidence 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is very true. In a total war situation the east could simply eat Europe and consolidate Eurasia, then move into Africa and Australia. Eventually in terms of economic power, the American continents would fall behind. We can hunker behind the walls, but that only lasts so long.

[–]Mikeavelli 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Militarily occupied nations don't give a lot in terms of economic power (See: Colonialism. Or, Afghanistan/Iraq for modern day examples) - and while China might be able to roll over the mosty-demilitarized Western Europe, they're boxed in by Russia, India, and Pakistan, all of which have strong militaries and nuclear weapons to fall back on if they lose a conventional war.

I don't really see a total war happening between the US and China under almost any circumstances. The US wouldn't be able to invade China because of their vastly superior size, but China wouldn't be able to invade the US either, on account of the lack of a Navy. There would be a blockade for a few years, both economies would go down the shitter, and eventually new leadership in one or both countries would come to power on an anti-war platform dedicated to going back to business-as-usual.

[–]SaiHottari 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Liberty Prime, online. Primary directive: the destruction of all Red Communist Chinese invaders. Democracy is nonnegotiable. Chance of mission failure: 0%!

[–]soalone34 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah but you're talking about in recent times, you can't predict far into the future.

[–]ThisisMalta 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now that women have to do something unfair I'm sure there will be more more of a lush for this. It was okay for men for hundreds of years though.

[–]-er 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The military has good pay and perks. My friend's in the National Guard. He owns two homes, with one of them essentially being paid for with a housing allowance. He also went to college for free, and has little to worry about in terms of ever being unemployed.

[–]Demonspawn 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Because conscription is the responsibility for the right of suffrage.

Unless you are willing to be the force to enforce government, you have no business deciding its direction.

SCotUS 1918 decision:

"Compelled military service is neither repugnant to a free government nor in conflict with the constitutional guaranties of individual liberty. Indeed, it may not be doubted that the very conception of a just government and its duty to the citizen includes the duty of the citizen to render military service in case of need, and the right of the government to compel it."

[–]Revoran 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Ah, another one of the Supreme Court's incorrect decisions. Sad to see.

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Where do rights come from?

Once you understand that, you understand why the decision was correct.

[–]Revoran -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'll tell you where they don't come from: launching aggressive wars against small countries full of brown people on the other side of the world.

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

As I thought: you have no clue. And because of that, you have no basis to argue against the Supreme Court decision.

[–]Revoran -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

When was the last time conscription was used in the US? Was it used for a war to protect US territory from attack, or was it used to invade a foreign country on the other side of the world?

[–]Demonspawn 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Answer the question or shut up. I will not entertain your derailments.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

you mean exactly like it is now?

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

I mean dismantling selective service and outlawing any future compulsory conscription or draft.

[–]McFeely_Smackup 11 points12 points13 points 10 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

They could do that but it would literally have no meaning at all.

Reinstating the draft today would take an act of Congress, and an equivalent act of Congress is all the would take to reverse any abolition of the draft.

Anything short of a constitutional amendment would simply be symbolic

[–][deleted] -2 points-1 points0 points 10 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

I don't know what country you're from but in the USA teenage boys must sign up for selective service.

Anything short of a constitutional amendment would simply be symbolic

You answered your own question.

[+]McFeely_Smackup -8 points-7 points-6 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

You said draft not selective service they're two different things.

There is no draft currently.

[–]ARedthorn 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In the US, they're effectively the same thing.

One is active, the other inactive.

Some people seem to think the selective service isn't the same as the draft, or even related to it. That it's just a list you have to put your name on, and when a draft is called, that's different.

Nope. The selective service is just the name we gave to the draft when it's not being actively called.

The selective service, if you paid attention, includes a clause that you agree to serve if called. ...Meaning you signed a contract. ...Meaning you are required by law to sign a contract. ...To do, in war or emergency, whatever someone else tells you. (Among other things, worth noting- if your name is pulled and you're a pacifist, you still have to serve, willing or not, just not in combat.)

It also defines the list the draft is pulled from, how the draft is called (in detail), and what limitations it has (in detail). That sir, is the draft.

Saying it's not the same is absurd.

While we're at it, may as well say that the law doesn't make murder illegal- the cop who arrests you for it does. Or that tax laws have nothing to do with the IRS knocking on your door.

Still, you're right. It would take a constitutional amendment to prevent a draft. So what? That's what we should push for then.

[–][deleted] -3 points-2 points-1 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

https://www.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/43vflj/top_us_generals_women_should_have_to_register_for/czlccbx

Here you could benefit from this

[+]McFeely_Smackup -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I know you think you're clever, but if you actually read what you're responding to I think you'll see you're being childish.

[–][deleted] -4 points-3 points-2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Wen you're failing: Ad Hominem! Rub it on anything!

[–]McFeely_Smackup 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Ad hominem doesn't mean what you think it means.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There is good pay and perks, but not only that, our military costs a fuck load, and our budget doesn't come from an unending supply of money.

When the shit hits the fan, and it means life or death, thank god for the draft

[–]H0ckeyK1ller 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That is what equality is, if they don't like it too bad. Tell all the men that were drafted in WW1 to Nam. But hey if they want equality then I'm all for it if they also may be drafted. :/ Or we could just go back to how it used to be....

[–]omegaphallic 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The draft is slavery and slavery is wrong. My country doesn't have the draft (Canadian), and were fine. I don't support expanding a barbaric practice to women, I support ending it.

It not like America will ever need a draft for survival, battles between major countries are done via proxies or the boardrooms and the spy game. The major powers have everything to lose via direct war and nothing to gain, they'd destroy whatever they wish to aquire.

And wars against minor powers will increasingly done by drone warfare, its just a matter of time till even the infantry is replaced by drones. The big beefy men and some women will be replaced by geeky dudes in a basement (of a military base) blowing up people via drones, playing it like its a video game (hopefully NOT like grand theft auto :D).

[–]-er 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I've heard women use the excuse, "well there will never be another draft, so it shouldn't matter if we aren't required to sign up." If that is the case, and there won't be another draft, then it shouldn't matter to you if you sign up.

I don't mind the draft. If we are ever in another war where it is necessary, then people should be compelled to serve, but it should be from a pool of both men and women.

[–]The_Def_Of_Is_Is 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is really bad for men in the event of a draft. Because now every man drafted is shipped to the front lines, no matter where they would be of most use (and better efficiency in a military is directly lives saved).

[–]professor_chemical 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Drafting is barbaric

[–]RaptorFalcon 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Checkmate feminists

[–]Ultimate_Failure 12 points13 points14 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Wrong. The draft for women will never be real, as long as they have the option of getting pregnant to avoid going to war.

This is a victory for feminists. They get the fig leaf of draft eligibility, without the obligation of actually having to die for their country.

[–]SilencingNarrative 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (5 children) | Copy Link

I would not have guessed that gender (women good men bad) feminists would want women to be subject to the draft. I know their official position is that the draft should be required of both sexes if its required of either, but i always thought that was insincere.

We seem to be drifting toward requiring women to register and i dont see that momentum being derailed by anything. You will hear a few half hearted naysayers pipe up, and their objections are routinely dismissed.

So its puzzling that we are not seeing any moves to backpedal.

I'm missing something, and i suspect its big.

I predict that women will be required to register in the same way womdn are required to pay child support. They will still be protected from harm much more than men, and they will not be nailed for failing to register.

Still, no one can know that thats how it will play out. I would have expected a huge backpedal by now.

[–]Demonspawn 5 points6 points7 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I'm missing something, and i suspect its big.

Some percentage of women simply can't be drafted because they won't meet standards. (True of men too, but definitely a higher percentage of women.)

90%+ of women won't meet combat standards.

Any woman who does meet standards (combat or otherwise) and doesn't want to get drafted can just get pregnant when she's called up (abortion after missing being drafted optional).

Basically, women are immune to being drafted into combat. Requiring them is just a dog and pony show.

[–]SilencingNarrative 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Just because they won't meet standards to be infantry soldiers doesn't mean they won't meet standards to be mechanics, or field medics, or truck drivers, or any number of other jobs that are almost as deadly as being a soldier.

[–]Demonspawn 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And if they don't want those jobs, same solution: get pregnant.

[–]SilencingNarrative 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'm going to predict that's not how it plays out.

[–]Demonspawn 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You'd lose that bet, because that's ALREADY how it plays out.

Women in units about to get deployed have a rate of pregnancy significantly above the military baseline.

This shit is already happening, by women who volunteered for the military. To imagine that it won't happen when women are drafted is ludicrous.

[–]xynomaster[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Terry O’Neill, president of the National Organization for Women, said that, although the organization does not believe in a draft, it supports equal treatment for women, meaning they should required to register. “We don’t think women should be exempt from the draft any more than they should be exempt from combat roles,” she said.

From 2 days ago.

Although there will certainly be feminists (and others) who oppose this for bullshit reasons.

[–]MangledJingleJangle 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I understand the logic in this argument, but I feel like this is the point where idealism meets reality. Feminism and Pacifism intersect here to create a false dichotomy of just terrible choices. There are very good reasons why we have a draft and why that draft is made up of men. This is exactly why idealism is bullshit when it is not applied with a healthy dose of realism.

[–]unklestinky 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

There are very good reasons why women should also be included in the draft as well. Building the military on a war isn't all about ground forces. In case of a need to reinstate a draft there are plenty of non front line rolls that need filled as well.

[–]MangledJingleJangle 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

There are plenty of non-combat rolls in the military, that's true, but we don't institute a draft because we are short on volunteers for those positions. We have a draft when we are short on men to fight and risk their lives in combat.

Women, with limited exception, are not suited for combat. There is no necessity or strategic benefit to conscripting women for the United States.

[–]unklestinky 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So because not all women are suitable for combat you feel they should get a free pass and be exempt from it. Doesn't make sense to me, but to each their own.

[–]Corn-Tortilla 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

And for every one of those non front line rolls that gets filled by a woman, there is another man that will get sent to the front because all the non front line rolls are filled with women.

[–]unklestinky 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They are going to send the same amount of people to the front lines regardless.

[–]xynomaster[S] 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This argument doesn't really make sense to me. If there are 100 front line positions and 100 support positions needed, in your example there will be 100 men on the front lines regardless. The only difference is whether we also need to draft 100 men to do non-combat roles or whether we can have women do that and let those other men get on with their lives.

[–]Corn-Tortilla 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, if we can just replace 100 men with women so the women can start doing their share, ok. Great, 100 men can go home. Why do I not believe that's thd way it will work out?

[–]pintocat 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If they're terrible soldiers, make them marines and they can go clear the minefields first

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Does anyone think that a "DRAFT" will be a random selection of people if one is implemented. If it were then the odds say that the ratio would be near 50/50 of men and women. Does anyone in their right mind really believe that the US armed services is going to accept a near 50/50 ratio of men and women. Folks this whole thing is a scam. They will make women sign up for the draft but if it ever happens I think that the ratio will be like a 1000 to 1, iow, for every 1000 men that are drafted 1 woman will be and that 1 woman will be a clerk.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Many Republicans fear the change would lead to quotas mandating specific numbers of women, which they argue could weaken some units, such as Marines in positions that might require hand-to-hand combat.

I was under the impression that "knife-fighting" range combat is pretty rare in modern conflicts. Most combat footage videos are at such a distance that you can barely see the enemy combatants (if at all).

also I thought the draft was abolished. do they mean selective service (the pseudo-draft) ?

[–]192873982 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Hand-to-hand combat can happen and does happen.

Soldiers will often have to check houses for enemy fighters. If there is one and you can shoot him, that's good, but it will also happen that someone will attack you with a knife, because he lacks access to other weapons at that specific instant.

[–]Hiscore 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Bro, you're never clearing a room by yourself. Your fireteam can and will shoot the fucker

[–]192873982 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Depending on how surprised you are and how the fight goes, it's not always easily possible to shoot the guy while ensuring they don't hit you. You need to at least be able to get enough distance for others to shoot.

[–]Hiscore 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Idunno, I've never actually deployed. We'd been trained to do takedowns in Urban Ops, but somehow I doubt I'll ever use that.

[–]xynomaster[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yes, selective service is in effect "registering for the draft", even if no draft exists right now.

[–]by_myself 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Someone should introduce those Republicans to Lorena Bobbitt, she's proof that some women are dying for the chance to engage in knife combat.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don't know if they have the balls for that

[–]Hiscore 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hand to hand combat almost never happens unless you're an MP

[–]the_sky_god15 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Women infantry is a horrible idea. Just pure genetics put them at a disadvantage

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]the_sky_god15 -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

That's a horrible idea.

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]the_sky_god15 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

But if we are at war then the guns and the bullets would be a loss.

[–]192873982 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Actually women don't shoot that bad. That's probably the thing they lack the least for a infantry position.

[–]the_sky_god15 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I know, I've seen women who could out shoot me with their eyes closed but again that is the exception. In a time of war when we need to muster up as many troops as possible men are much easier to whip into shape than women.

[–]192873982 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree, but not because of the marksmanship.

Women lack body strength and also they are emotionally not as stable as men, which leads to problems, but they can shoot.

[–]the_sky_god15 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly my point

[+][deleted] 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]192873982 3 points4 points5 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're in this sub...

[–]bufedad 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, if that's the only criticism you can put forth on this sub, then it appears we are on the right track.

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter