I know, everyone is going to hate me for saying this. I don't think women are a good thing for our armed services during draft time, which will probably never again occur in our lifetime.
I guess that I better explain myself. Our armed forces are a highly male dominated type of thing. We all know how differently men and women think. As a woman, I do not posess these traits that our armed forces require to be a contributing member.
I reason this as human evolution. How many eons did women care for children and do things that would not put them in harms way. Men were the hunters. Women were the gatherers, which was compatible with low risk to life of themselves and offspring. You can't change evolution with a sudden change in politics or social climate.
I do believe there are women that are very capable in combat, but most would hinder things if put there by draft by differing physical strenght and thought pattern. Women who wish to do this should be by choice and under the exact same expectations that is of the average man. The bar should never be lowered. Our armed forces are there for a good reason, to protect our American citizens. I see no room for social experimentation on this at all.
Myself, I absolutely would serve if needed. I am an RN. I could serve and be a very useful person in a MASH unit aiding with medical knowledge. Personally speaking, I absolutely would serve in a medical unit to aid the wounded, even if it is scary to me. Men are scared at the prospect of war also. From my understanding, all licensed medical people have, for a long time, been eligible for draft. That includes me. If I had nothing else to offer our country than my nursing ability, I need to stay put. I would be horrified at what men do that is almost instinctual to them, but not most women.
Go ahead, throw rocks at me! I'm a lousy feminist.
Wildflower63- IMO, you are painting with too broad a brush. On some level, I can understand what you are saying. The problem is that you cannot lump 50% of humanity into one massive lump.
Yes, there are some women who are not cut out for combat............as there are some men of whom you could say the same thing.
By the way, I do not believe in the draft, as I believe it to be involuntary servitude. In the US's volunteer army, women have proven themselves to be more than capable of doing what had formerly been considered, "a man's job"!
Diversity.
The nature of war is radically changing. Information technology, intelligence, automation, guerilla tactics, deceit, public relations, biological weapons, control systems, intelligent weapons, etc, etc, ...
If we require certain abilities, skills, or talents during wartime
then those criteria should be the only criteria applied.
Stay flexible. There are many situations where we would especially need . . . *any* type of person.
Smiley, very good point. I guess that was on I didn't do such a hot job at making. Absolutely, women can have skills need that would contribute. I don't really predict a draft ever again in our future with the technology of today reducing the need of human labor.
I don't agree with the idea of draft either. If someone is not there voluntarily, they obviously don't believe in the cause or do not feel they are physically or psychologically capable of contributing the the war effort. Our armed forces appear to be adequately staffed with enlisted and reserve people that did voluntarily enlist knowing the risk and purpose of what they were signing their name to.
To my knowledge, they are also refusing a lot of people and sending them home after training where something went wrong. My neighbor didn't lose enough weight and got sent right back home after three months of enlistment in the Army.
Today, war seems more like playing a video game. Then they send in the ground troops for clean up. The reduction in casualties is pretty significant with the Gulf War and Iraq compared to the one before that, VietNam.
The US Armed Forces are very powerful. The major reason I am against draft is possible misuse of this type of power by politicians that may not be for the good of the people around the world. Power can be a dangerous thing in the wrong hands.
Draft yes or no
For those of you out there who think there should never be a draft under any circumstances:
The draft was instituted to increase the number of able-bodied people to available to defend our country. The draft was instituted because not enough people were volunteering for the military. Perhaps our commanding officers in the days of the draft didn't make the best possible use of the men and women they sent to war, but it was the best we knew how to do at the time. If the draft hadn't been instituted in WWII, we'd all be speaking another language right now. Or worse, WE wouldn't be here at all to complain about the draft. The draft should not be instituted frivilously. But if our country needs us, we need to step up to the plate. To make an analogy as to those who disagree with Bush and his policies and complain about it, I may not like the coach, but I am loyal to the team.
As for women being forced to submit to the draft. I have to say that I am male and am intrinsically sexist. I don't like to admit it but I am. I want to be able to say that I think women should NOT have to submit to a draft because although there are many women out there who would serve and serve very well in the military, that to force random women out there who are mothers and wives, would not necessarily return the result our commanding officers are looking for. But then, how many men who were drafted in WWII, were not what they were looking for? But they were hardened and trained. And in the end they all fought.
The only issue with women in the draft is that, statistically, there is a much larger percentage of women in the US that are stay at home mothers or at least are the primary care-takers of children than there are men of the same job. Some compensation and a plan of action would have to be worked out if women were called to the draft.
Take your best shot.
Sugar wrote:I believe, at the moment, that no women engage in actual combat. The exception is Air Force fighter pilots. I believe that there are one or two women who actually fly bomber planes into war zones, but I could be mistaken.
The restrictions on women is in the specialty they can have in and in some of the units they can be part of. At this time there are no restrictions I know of on female combat pilots. I know a women who is an Apache Attack helicopter pilot and I know of a female Kiowa pilot killed flying a light attack mission in Irq. The Air Force and Navy pilots are the same way. The first female F-14 pilot in the Navy was killed about six years ago in a training accident.
Women may also be truck drivers, Military Policemen and all sorts of specialties that come into enemy contact all the time in an asymetric battlefield like Iraq. Look through the casualty lists, there are women among them.
As to selective service...women should have to register as long as men do. My vote is out as to whether we should have a draft or not.
I'm not in favor of any kind of draft.
Another reason they had the draft
Another reason they had the draft in WWI and WWII was to ensure the proper utilization of personnel. Early in the war people who had vital skills (like languages and industial skills) were joining the military in areas where they were not suited. The needs of the military and the industries needed to feed the war effort were not being served with people being used like that.
I doubt that will happen to us again but it is another reason they had the draft back in the day.
The draft is slavery. I'm against slavery. Gender has nothing to do with it.
Re: Draft yes or no
Oben wrote:The draft was instituted to increase the number of able-bodied people to available to defend our country. The draft was instituted because not enough people were volunteering for the military. Perhaps our commanding officers in the days of the draft didn't make the best possible use of the men and women they sent to war, but it was the best we knew how to do at the time. If the draft hadn't been instituted in WWII, we'd all be speaking another language right now. Or worse, WE wouldn't be here at all to complain about the draft.
Slavery was instituted to increase the numer of able-bodied people available to feed and cloth our country. Slavery was instituted because not enough people were volunteering for cotton picking and corn growing. Perhaps our slaveholders didn't make the best possible use of the men and women they enslaved, but it was the best we knew how to at the time. If slavery hadn't been instituted in the 18th century, our ancestors would have starved and we wouldn't be here at all to complain about slavery.
This transcription makes at least as plausible a case for slavery as the case you made for the draft. But how does that refute your notion that there should be no slavery under any circumstances? And how does your defense of the draft refute our notion that there should be no draft?
