| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
 Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 4:58 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
This is where the logic of radical egalitarianism takes you: enacting policies that defy logic and which undermine military effectiveness.
And if women are to be drafted into combat units, it's surely time we ended the gender apartheid in professional sports. Gender is merely a 'social construct' after all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Mon May 16, 2016 5:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Modern war is a good bit more political than physical, so the idea that they will necessarily be less effective is only true if the military opperates ineffectively. Women are already in the israeli forces and in the pershmerga so it is hardly an unworkable concept. Modern weapons have made the sort of mass mobilization conflicts of the past less likely as well, so I wouldnt worry too much about American women. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 3:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon wrote: |
| Modern war is a good bit more political than physical, so the idea that they will necessarily be less effective is only true if the military opperates ineffectively. Women are already in the israeli forces and in the pershmerga so it is hardly an unworkable concept. Modern weapons have made the sort of mass mobilization conflicts of the past less likely as well, so I wouldnt worry too much about American women. |
Is Israel a walking PC circus? Does the United States share the same geographical nature and conditions as narrative?
I do not think so.
American women, if they truly want their false narrative of "war on women" to be cleansed and a full share of what they are supposedly lacking, that being equal opportunity, than they should full well accept responsibility and accept the draft.
But...I think they are so far gone, that it still would make things worse. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Plain Meaning
Joined: 18 Oct 2014
|
| Posted: Fri May 20, 2016 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It appears the submission of women to the enter the draft was offered as a poison pill to the bill, and the author of the amendment voted against it. So it is strange to attack the sincerity or consistency of those who also opposed the amendment, moreso when we understand that the military prefers volunteer enrollment to conscription as a national policy.
Distraction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
trueblue
Joined: 15 Jun 2014
Location: In between the lines
|
| Posted: Sat May 21, 2016 5:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Plain Meaning wrote: |
It appears the submission of women to the enter the draft was offered as a poison pill to the bill, and the author of the amendment voted against it. So it is strange to attack the sincerity or consistency of those who also opposed the amendment, moreso when we understand that the military prefers volunteer enrollment to conscription as a national policy.
Distraction. |
So what would be the consequences should that happen? Do you think women would embrace it as a REAL chance for equal opportunity? Why do you think HRC has not said much (or anything) about it?
Why do you think it is strange to attack the sincerity of those who opposed the amendment, despite being a volunteer military (for now)? Perhaps the narrative of "equality" is simply a ruse?
The vote for registration requirement was close...32-20. But, the DADA was approved for debate by a vote of 234-181. Why do you think it had that margin, PMS?
If Ash Carter opened all combat jobs to women, why should women NOT be forced to register with the Selective Service, just like men?
Perhaps Rep. Niki Tsongas, D-Mass, is simply a distraction, when she said.....the vote, .“precludes Congress from having an open and transparent debate about this very important issue that impacts women’s equality. If we want a full hearing, is there no better place than on the floor of this House,”
So, why the need to debate? Is not already a given, regarding the "equality" of women (in America)?
Besides....
| Quote: |
DADA may still be on the legislative table. The Senate Armed Services Committee still has its own version of the Draft America’s Daughters Act. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell supports the measure, and it may see new life if it can survive a joint House and Senate conference committee and subsequent House and Senate votes
|
I say, obligate the the double standard ladies of America to register for the Selective Service, or...take away the Selective Service as a whole. OR...require all men and women 18 and up for obligatory military service, like Isreal. That last option is not the best...or even good, as there would be too many unanswered questions about cost, social consequences and effectiveness.
http://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/the-draft-americas-daughters-act-in-limbo-64150/
http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/05/this_nation_does_not_need_the_draft.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
