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

Republicans raise alarm about women in combat Their subtle warning: It could force all young women to register for the draft.

blueoak9

December 4, 2015
61 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/12/pentagon-women-in-combat-republican-reaction-216412
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 Republicans raise alarm about women in combat Their subtle warning: It could force all young women to register for the draft.
Author

blueoak9

Upvotes 61
Comments 51
Date December 4, 2015 4:23 PM UTC
(10 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/3vfikw/republicans_raise_alarm_about_women_in_combat/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/republicans-raise-alarm-about-women-in-combat.965797
https://theredarchive.com/post/965797
Top posts by blueoak9

Yes! "Lawsuit challenges constitutionality of male-only draft registration"

1165 upvotes
July 15, 2015
/r/MensRights

I Saw a Man Get Arrested For a Sex Crime Because He Made a Scheduling Error

762 upvotes
July 17, 2014
/r/MensRights

Two Teens Have Sex. Neither Could Legally Consent, But Only the Boy Gets a Felony Charge.

747 upvotes
March 10, 2015
/r/MensRights

When feminists say "Misandry doesn't exist"

571 upvotes
October 1, 2013
/r/MensRights

Woman poses as teenager to rape boy - and of course doesn't get charged with rape. Can you guess why?

552 upvotes
October 21, 2013
/r/MensRights

College student: Women should be required to register for the draft, and that includes me

451 upvotes
February 23, 2016
/r/MensRights

Just saying - I have NEVER been threatened with violence/berated verbally by an MRA. I have been threatened with violence/berated verbally by more feminists than I can count on both hands.

448 upvotes
September 30, 2013
/r/MensRights

Facebook has a policy of not allowing hate speech and hateful content? Not so much....

415 upvotes
October 2, 2013
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]DaneWhitman 22 points23 points24 points 10 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.), who supports the decision, said Thursday she does think it will “eventually” mean that women will be part of the draft. But that’s not a bad thing, she said. “There’s all kinds of ways women can serve, and there’s all kinds of ways men can serve,” she explained. “And if, in fact, we were at a point where we were having a draft again, I would think both would and should serve.”

Credit where credit is due.

[–]bufedad 9 points10 points11 points 10 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Credit, but concern. The ways that men serve and the ways that women serve don't appear to be the same.

[–]SmokingGiraffeti 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Obviously. There are different roles for different people

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

And personally, I would prefer the average man over the average woman in frontline combat because of innate physical differences.

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

Whoever is strong and capable should be on the front line, regardless of what's in their pants.

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

And statistically, that will probably be mostly men.

[–]SaiHottari -1 points0 points1 point 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

As would I. I'd also advocate that society needs to grow up before I want women watching my back even if they did physically have what it takes.

[+]CornyHoosier -6 points-5 points-4 points 10 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

When a country goes through a war it generally needs the women to be safe to continue procreating to rebuild the population.

Besides, if you were in a fox hole with weaponry flying around you everywhere ... would you want "Becky the Valley Girl" in there with you?

[–]bufedad 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When a country goes through a war it generally needs the women to be safe to continue procreating to rebuild the population.

That's not my problem.

Besides, if you were in a fox hole with weaponry flying around you everywhere ... would you want "Becky the Valley Girl" in there with you?

I've been in foxholes (not really foxholes, but close enough for this discussion) with men I didn't want to be there with.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

When a country goes through a war it generally needs the women to be safe to continue procreating to rebuild the population.

Really? And what do you think the women will do? Start sharing men? Don't be stupid. Few women will do that, so for every man killed you have a woman who stops breeding or never gets round to doing so. The whole idea is just another excuse for the West's misandry.

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

Somewhere i read that only 20% of men in history reproduced according to genetic data. I would assume that the mating pool for women wouldn't be hurt as much as you might think. Plus, it isn't like infidelity or polygamy is anything new.

[–]ThePigmanAgain 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

I am not hypothesizing. This is what happens in areas where many men get wiped out -- if 30% of the men die, about 30% of women stop breeding and the population drops even further.

[–]The_0bserver 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Can you provide some source for this?

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

Not really. It's hard enough to learn X without also having to learn where it was that i learned X. I think Orwell had something to do with it.

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

I'd like to read where you found this because this would largely defeat the benefits of sexual dimorphism and our evolved male disposability.

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

It's hard enough to learn X without also having to learn where it was that i learned X. I think Orwell had something to do with it.

Also, there is no "evolved" male disposability, it's all cultural and has nothing to do with evolution. In most of the world, men are the majority, you don't get that by being the disposable sex. It's only in the West that we are a minority, everywhere else, things are as nature meant them to be.

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

Why do you think the west, where we are as safe and healthy as possible, there is suddenly a dip in the male/female ratio? Also, why would you consider this not what nature meant to have?

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

I don't get you on the ratio bit. Men are outnumbered by women, in case you don't know. As for nature, there are about 105 male babies born for every 100 females. Nature meant men to be the majority.

[–]blueoak9[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

When a country goes through a war it generally needs the women to be safe to continue procreating to rebuild the population.

Seriously outdated information, like about since WWII. The military makes up less than one percent of the population (That's a huge issue in and of itself.) The age of mass armies has passed for now and is not coming back any time soon. There is no way that drafting the small number of women who might be needed would impact the number of fertile civilian women significantly.

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

Perhaps becky the valley girl needs to harden the fuck up and face shit like an adult.

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

“There’s all kinds of ways women can serve, and there’s all kinds of ways men can serve,”

In other words, the men get to die, the women get to fill out forms. Don't forget, this is the cunt who told men to shut up about pretty much everything.

[–]garglemesh42 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Sen. Claire McCaskill

She's also one of the people responsible for the existence of kangaroo courts (and one of the strongest supporters of them) in US colleges.

Don't trust her. She has an agenda, and that agenda definitely isn't about equality.

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

I'm well aware of who she is, I strongly disagree with her on college kangaroo courts, and I don't trust any politician.

Still, credit where credit is due.

[–]Rockbottom503 13 points14 points15 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Sorry but why shouldn't they??? If the government deems them capable of serving in combat roles then they should be made accountable to the same standards for citizenship as their male counterparts.

[–]cwdoogie 6 points7 points8 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That's the thing. The marine corps did a pretty extensive study not too long ago about how effective women were in certain field tests, compared to men.

There was stuff you might have guessed beforehand; they weren't able to carry as much weight, they couldn't travel as fast, stuff like that. But there was also stuff like women getting hurt (sprained ankles and the like, nothing too serious) more often. But what really surprised me was that, of all things, women were less accurate with firearms. Based on the results of their study, they recommended secretary Carter not to lift gender exclusivity. He ignored them (side note: he was never in the armed forces. IIRC he's a lawyer).

So, while I wouldn't 100% disagree with your sentiment in theory, it doesn't look like it will be as great a boon as you might think.

That being said, there have been a good number of women who got combat-action medals for their military service in the middle East in the past few years. Just as well, some have made the ultimate sacrifice there. I have no intention of disparaging their efforts.

[–]Murky42 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

http://www.usashooting.org/news/2012/2/28/195-usa-shooting-viewpoint--men-vs-women-in-competitive-shooting

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424052970203960804577239540945498130

Shooting is one of the few collegiate sports where men and women regularly compete against one another—and women are often winning.

In 2010, Scherer's TCU squad became the first all-women's team to win the NCAA rifle championship. And the Horned Frogs did it by beating perennial powerhouse Alaska-Fairbanks, winner of nine of the 13 previous championships. In 2011, TCU went 22-0 in the regular season and were heavy favorites at the NCAA national rifle championship in March before finishing third. This season, the team is

If talking about recruits I think this is a case where its quite plausible that differences in interests on average between genders (AKA males like guns more then girls on average) is the cause of the difference in shooting skill of trainees.

Top athletes are still likely to be male though as males in general are on average more likely to be competitive and thus sport enthusiasts.

EDIT:

http://www.thebangswitch.com/the-gender-gap-in-competitive-shooting/

This article says that it might be more physiologically ingrained after all.

Although the issues it states could be countered by designing a gun with women in mind.

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

You raise very good points.

[–]Murky42 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks I do try.

[–]_77mynor 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

there have been a good number of women who got combat-action medals for their military service in the middle East in the past few years.

Unfortunately most if not all of those "heroic female fighter" stories are propaganda.

Still, I say let them serve. Front line combat. But segregated. Let them pull their own wait instead of hiding behind the men*

*This is never going to happen, unfortunately, for reasons we know all too well. I'm pretty sure Canada introduced these policies several years ago and there hasn't been a single female fatality in Afghanistan.

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

[permanently deleted]

[–]MidgardDragon 8 points9 points10 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No one should have to register, you are correct, but if men have to women should have to, too.

[–]MidgardDragon 7 points8 points9 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Good You either get rid of the draft all together or you subject everyone to it.

[–]SlashSero 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That won't mean that everyone would be subjected to it in the same manner. If female draft ever comes to be I am willing to wager that women who aren't registered as reserves or active units will be automatically placed in relatively safe logistics roles. That is simply the only way the army will ever be able to sell female draft to the nation. I doubt they will ever be able to draft women in the vanguard unless they want to make headlines every day about how many women died in active combat. It would severely hurt morale and support for the war effort at the home front as unlike men they are not seen as disposable numbers that can be fed to the meat grinder in our western society.

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

That won't mean that everyone would be subjected to it in the same manner.

It already doesn't. If a man drafted during the Vietnam war was morbidly obese, or had a chronic illness, or was missing a foot... he's not getting treated the same as those who are physically able.

There are different standards for different roles in the military, and most women don't qualify for the more physical ones. That's just how things are and there's nothing we can do about it.

[–]icefire54 2 points3 points4 points 10 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If the draft does happen, it will be the same as Israel. Men will still get the most dangerous positions. It will be a way for progressive elites to pat themselves on the back without really changing much. And honestly, I don't see any way to fix this. Men will always be more capable of the dangerous positions than women.

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

If the draft does happen, it will be the same as Israel.

Pretty much. I'm all for it.

Men will still get the most dangerous positions.

Is there anything wrong with this? The most physically and mentally capable people (regardless of gender) will get those positions, and that means it'll be 99.9% men. This isn't unfair though, it's just the reality of the situation.

[–]icefire54 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I never said that the dangerous positions should be 50/50 men and women. I acknowledged that this kind of arrangement is inevitable.

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

The fantasy of drafting women

Defense Secretary Ashton Carter announced today that all combat roles will be opened to women, with no exceptions. This has lead to a reply from many conservatives that women should have been careful what they wished for, as now there is no longer any reason to exclude them from the draft.

I pointed out the delusion of the idea in the comments at Instapundit. The idea that women will ever be drafted into combat against their will is pure fantasy. All women who want to avoid being drafted need to do is fail the physical test. When they do, everyone will point out that women and men are different after all. Men in theory could also fail the physical tests, but in practice this will come with a stigma for men that women will never face.

Two other commenters at Instapundit described how this worked for men in the past...

I have a friend whose granddaughter was in basic training at Ft. Sill. Came the end of basic, she failed the physical test. And was promptly given an honorable discharge.

Back in my basic training days (1969–I want to be an airborn ranger and live a life of danger in Viet Nam and all that) if you flunked the physical, they put you in a special training company until you could pass the physical. For guys who were seriously out of shape that might take some time–and in some cases the only way out was to get a truly disabling injury.

We may see selective service changed to include women as well as men. We may even see a situation where women are drafted alongside of men. What we won’t see, ever, is a situation where women have high or even significant pressure applied to motivate them to pass physical requirements if they don’t personally want to be there.

What this is about, and what this always has been about, is envy of men. It is about eradicating the idea of masculine virtues, and more importantly, erasing all sentiment of gratitude for what the men in the military do. To a feminist feeling gratitude to men is unbearable. This is why every unit, especially elite forces and combat infantry, must include women. When Seal Team Six took out Bin Ladin feminists were forced to bear the unbearable; public officials expressed gratitude for the “men who risked their lives to accomplish the mission”, and feminists couldn’t chime in with “and women too!”

Never again.

Since the goal is to erase the concept of masculine virtues, the new bargain the introduction of women into combat represents isn’t to have women join equally or even seriously in the fighting and dying. The new bargain is that men will continue to be the ones who fight and die, but they must not feel a sense of masculine pride in either doing this or having this obligation. Registering women for selective service alongside men serves this goal, as does drafting women and letting those who don’t want to be there fail out. The imagined downside for feminists is only a fantasy.

[–]blueoak9[S] 10 points11 points12 points 10 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

It is about eradicating the idea of masculine virtues,

Full citizenship, with the acceptance of all the responsibilities of citizenship, is not a masculine virtue, it is an adult virtue. Women are just going to have to pull their weight from now on, it's that simple. And popping little planet killers out does not qualify. That's something you do for yourself, and it's wonderful, but it's not something you do for your nation.

[–]chavelah 1 point2 points3 points 10 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

I think responsible reproduction (i.e., birthing them and raising them) is a contribution that both sexes can make to long-term strength and prosperity of their nation, but anybody who is serving in the military should be on compulsory birth control for the entire period of time that they are deployable. You can't birth a baby in combat, and you can't care for a baby in combat, so if you are at a place in your military career where you are eligible to be sent into combat, contraception should be mandatory. We could work out a reasonable compromise for career military of both sexes who want to have families - put in five years, then have a guaranteed 2-year stint of family-friendly duty, then reapply as needed. But the 18-year-olds serving five years and then getting out? Mandatory birth control is the best thing we could do for them. No skipping deployments for women, no neglected kids at home because their young father conceived a child he knew he might not be around to care for.

[–]blueoak9[S] 4 points5 points6 points 10 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I think responsible reproduction (i.e., birthing them and raising them) is a contribution that both sexes can make to long-term strength and prosperity of their nation,

That gets way too close to national breeding programs for my comfort. For generations France gave bonuses for the birth of sons. It was a Napoleonic policy - 'nuff said on that. A national program of male disposability. Then there was the Lebensborn program....

I prefer the Chinese attitude where having children is something you do for your family and something you do to society. (This attitude is one reason the One Child Policy was tolerated - people already saw childbirth as kin of selfish.)

But I agree with the thrust of your comment. People want to have kids, as a very basic human need, and they shouldn't have to sacrifice that along with everything else they already sacrifice.

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

I think she may have meant it in a "let's celebrate Mother's Day by giving her flowers" sort of way. Obviously in an economy that requires well-educated, skilled workers, parents play a crucial part in bringing up the next generation. But I agree with you 100% that there is a huge difference between that and military service; they are in no way substitutes for one another.

What's really ironic is that a lot of these attitudes towards motherhood as a national service were invented by women who were wishing to avoid the military draft back in the 1940's. This was just a couple of decades after they were handing out White Feathers to distract everyone from the female draft while they were vying for their right to vote. The very image of the 1950's American housewife that 2nd Wave feminists have railed against, as well as much of the rigid gender roles for men, are themselves products of various women's groups trying to keep women out of combat.

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

I meant it more in the sense of "properly educated and socialized children are a long-term asset to society, not a drain." I agree that valuing responsible reproduction can be a slippery slope to ass-backwards nationalism, and I don't want government payouts (although we get them, in the form of tax deductions), but I also don't want to go all the way over to the Chinese notion that reproduction is inherently selfish. We're watching other countries struggle with a middle class that refuses to train up the next generation. Fuck that noise. I want the educated people to keep breeding. I also want them to be eligible for the draft, regardless of sex and class.

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

reproduction is inherently selfish.

Depends on which aspect of it you're talking about. I don't think the Chinese consider raising and educating a child to be selfish.

[–]blueoak9[S] 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I meant it more in the sense of "properly educated and socialized children are a long-term asset to society, not a drain."

On a case by case basis. It's no problem if there's plenty of water, food and room to live. In other cases it can get tense.

"We're watching other countries struggle with a middle class that refuses to train up the next generation. Fuck that noise. I want the educated people to keep breeding. I also want them to be eligible for the draft, regardless of sex and class. "

Amen. That's how Chinese parents serve the family.

[–]Corn-Tortilla 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

"compulsory birth control"

Gee, why stop there? If you're going to go fascist, why not go full fascist. Just break out the gas chambers and ovens and be done with it.

"no neglected kids at home because their young father conceived a child he knew he might not be around to care for."

1) So if a father gets sent off to war, their children will be neglected? Did you seriously just say that? Here's an idea. How about mothers not neglect their children if the father get sent off to war? What, is it too much to ask for the mother to feed and tuck them into bed at night while the father is dodging bullets and trying not to get blown to fuck?

2) So if a man gets sent off to war and dies, he not the "real victim". It's like Hillary said, the "real victims" of war are women and children.

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

By the time we're instituting a draft, we've ALREADY gone full fascist.

In terms of our volunteer military, the current system of pretending that it's just like any other job clearly isn't working. When people on their five-year stints make a baby, the mothers can get out of deployment entirely and the fathers can get shipped away for a period of time that qualifies as legal abandonment in every other circumstance. It's not that military wives neglect their children when dad is gone, it's that dad is not replaceable by mom or anybody else. If he spends the first year of his child's life on an airbase in the desert, he's not parenting.

There are all kinds of personal decisions that you give up the right to make when you join the military. Conceiving children while eligible for deployment should be one of them. Most people think about this in terms of removing a loophole for women (and that would be great), but it's also important to push back against the total disregard for a young child's need to be cared for by their father.

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

My parents are the Vietnam generation. I personally know three men who deliberately flunked their draft physical. And that was two generations ago, when "masculine pride" i.e. male disposability had a much stronger hold on our culture. If we ever have a draft again, men will be flunking in droves, either deliberately or simply as a result of the obesity epidemic. If women are on the draft rolls, they will also flunk in droves. I don't want anybody to be conscripted, but if it has to happen at some point in the future, we'll be a lot better off if we have access to every young person in American who isn't a land whale or a committed pacifist.

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

http://www.stripes.com/news/us/white-house-considers-opening-the-draft-to-women-1.381862

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ncfm-will-argue-challenge-to-male-only-draft-registration-at-ninth-circuit-court-of-appeals-300188106.html

[–]TheDude41 0 points1 point2 points 10 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Chivalry is shit.

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

The weakest men don't belong in combat, neither do women.

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