DANGEROUS bill requiring all citizens 18-42yrs old to perform 'National Service'

[RANA]

Ok...gonna try this again.

Personally after seeing the decline of attitudes of young recruits over the last 10 years I'm not sure I would want to serve with people that didn't want to be in the military. I've seen some messed up shit accomplished by people that just wanted out of the service any way they can. I think compulsary service in our country would be a bad thing. Not in the military anyway. I don't want anyone in an armed service that doesn't want to be. If they kept it to civil service where they would not be manning weapon systems, flying planes or taking up arms....fine.

On a slightly different topic....in the year 2008, where women are serving along side men in virtually every career field (aside from SF and Subs) why are women NOT included in the required Selective Service draft? What do you guys think about that?

I don't believe in conscription in the US.
Sure why they are not required, I guess it's old school thinking

[Commando_Barbi]

I'm sure if they tried to change it, you'd see a lot of people that fight for "equal rights" for women, not wanting that to be equal.

[RANA]

I'm sure if they tried to change it, you'd see a lot of people that fight for "equal rights" for women, not wanting that to be equal.

You nailed that on the head!!!!
You still in SD? I go there every month

[football2007]

^^^ beautiful.

So true. Interesting how that works?

[football2007]

dammit rana...now my laziness with not quoting ppl is exposed

[RANA]

dammit rana...now my laziness with not quoting ppl is exposed

I am there at times

[convalescence69]

There is a double standard.
The selective service thing not including women is a throwback to chivalry. "Women and Children first" to the lifeboats and such.
I am all for equal rights, though there will never be equality in all things. Women are paid nearly the same as men and the glass ceiling is disappearing in many fields, however, it is still expected for a man to open the door for a lady (which I have no problem doing) and pay for dinner. I don't suspect social expectations of gender roles will change either; men will be the ones expected to fix the plumbing, the car, etc, where a woman filling those roles instead while the man is washing clothes will most likely always seem odd to most people.

[Commando_Barbi]

I'm aware of why it is the way it is....just wonder why they don't change it. Have they even thought of changing it?

I have always been independent. I don't expect a man to do anything for me, but I certainly thank him when he does. I can open my own door, and even open doors for guys. I also pay for dinner sometimes, esp if its with someone I go out with on a regular basis. I can also mown the grass, split and stack wood, run electric where I want it, re-wire light fixtures, and so on and so forth. Oh ya, and I can shoot a deer, field dress it and have it in the freezer before you know what happened .

Unfortunately, there are many women who like to take advantage of their gender...but they are the same ones that bitch when they don't get treated equally.

VERY frustrating for me! When I was in the Navy, I would bust out any female that tried to use her gender to get over on work. PISSES ME OFF!

There is a double standard.
The selective service thing not including women is a throwback to chivalry. "Women and Children first" to the lifeboats and such.
I am all for equal rights, though there will never be equality in all things. Women are paid nearly the same as men and the glass ceiling is disappearing in many fields, however, it is still expected for a man to open the door for a lady (which I have no problem doing) and pay for dinner. I don't suspect social expectations of gender roles will change either; men will be the ones expected to fix the plumbing, the car, etc, where a woman filling those roles instead while the man is washing clothes will most likely always seem odd to most people.

[convalescence69]

I'm aware of why it is the way it is....just wonder why they don't change it. Have they even thought of changing it?

I have always been independent. I don't expect a man to do anything for me, but I certainly thank him when he does. I can open my own door, and even open doors for guys. I also pay for dinner sometimes, esp if its with someone I go out with on a regular basis. I can also mown the grass, split and stack wood, run electric where I want it, re-wire light fixtures, and so on and so forth. Oh ya, and I can shoot a deer, field dress it and have it in the freezer before you know what happened .

Unfortunately, there are many women who like to take advantage of their gender...but they are the same ones that bitch when they don't get treated equally.

VERY frustrating for me! When I was in the Navy, I would bust out any female that tried to use her gender to get over on work. PISSES ME OFF!

Wow, you split and stack wood, mow the lawn, AND sometimes pay for dinner? You are a goddess!
I always thought it would be neat to have a girl that would like working on my car with me.

[Commando_Barbi]

I've done that too. I was married to a motorhead for 14 yrs and grew up in a house with a father who raced cars and motorcycles. I learned to drive on a race track. My father made sure I could change oil, fan belts, etc.

Don't get me confused, however, I'm still all Lady....even when I have a weapon pointed at you telling you to get down .. or ELSE

Wow, you split and stack wood, mow the lawn, AND sometimes pay for dinner? You are a goddess!
I always thought it would be neat to have a girl that would like working on my car with me.

[GREENMACHINE]

I really liked what I was reading till I read the Navy bit. All for equality and all that, just don't like my ladies tougher than me.

I'm aware of why it is the way it is....just wonder why they don't change it. Have they even thought of changing it?

I have always been independent. I don't expect a man to do anything for me, but I certainly thank him when he does. I can open my own door, and even open doors for guys. I also pay for dinner sometimes, esp if its with someone I go out with on a regular basis. I can also mown the grass, split and stack wood, run electric where I want it, re-wire light fixtures, and so on and so forth. Oh ya, and I can shoot a deer, field dress it and have it in the freezer before you know what happened .

Unfortunately, there are many women who like to take advantage of their gender...but they are the same ones that bitch when they don't get treated equally.

VERY frustrating for me! When I was in the Navy, I would bust out any female that tried to use her gender to get over on work. PISSES ME OFF!

[Commando_Barbi]

LOL Green.....I'm still girly . I am just not some weak female that needs to be taken care of. With that said, I do like to be taken care of and never turn down having a door opened for me . I'm that lady that can take care of business when it needs to be, but very very good at makin ya feel like a man too

Ohhhh and not BAGGIN on the USN! Demmit!

I really liked what I was reading till I read the Navy bit. All for equality and all that, just don't like my ladies tougher than me.

[GREENMACHINE]

LOL Green.....I'm still girly . I am just not some weak female that needs to be taken care of. With that said, I do like to be taken care of and never turn down having a door opened for me . I'm that lady that can take care of business when it needs to be, but very very good at makin ya feel like a man too

Ohhhh and not BAGGIN on the USN! Demmit!

No doubt. I'm too goofey for military service, and I have bad tourettes. Not a good combo.

[Commando_Barbi]

Yep, this is my new home. Plan to be here for a while. Love the weather and lifestyle.

[RANA]

Yep, this is my new home. Plan to be here for a while. Love the weather and lifestyle.

Yep, I enjoy visiting there

[peteroy01]

women arent on the frontline like you say. Yes they are in Iraq and are in some danger but not the frontlines!

[Commando_Barbi]

women arent on the frontline like you say. Yes they are in Iraq and are in some danger but not the frontlines!

You think women are kept on post and not out there facing the same dangers as men? Facing IEDs, ambushes, flying over Iraq taking ground fire and other combat actions. I've BEEN in those planes.

[peteroy01]

they damn sure arent kicking in doors!!!!!!!

[peteroy01]

or running patrols. for the most part they are drivers. Transporting supplies from pt A to pt B. and of course they are in a hostile environment during these times cause they are in Iraq and shit happens. but you are trying to compare men and woman as doing the same job but they dont come close to the dangers and men do!

[Commando_Barbi]

Been there?

[peteroy01]

so what did you do there?

[Commando_Barbi]

Back on topic.....

[Commando_Barbi]

I did TWO six month tours over there. I was formerly in the Intelligence field, thats about all I can tell you.

[peteroy01]

ok, since you wont reveal your job, i was a Scout Sniper in the USMC with 2 tours. so your definition of "frontline" is probably quit different than mine.

[Commando_Barbi]

Would you not agree that the the "frontline" is pretty fluid and the danger comes from everywhere and NO one is safe there. It's a shitty situation. My point is that women are not simply working in the background, in airconditioned tents....they are out there running in those convoys, flying over land, etc. Of course it's not the same as kicking in doors (note I did say that women were not participating in SF jobs). Building searches SUCK in a non-war zone....HATE EM...don't even want to imagine doing them in a shithole like that.

I'm sure you can understand that there are certain types of jobs that you can't just go dropping details on an unsecure net.

ok, since you wont reveal your job, i was a Scout Sniper in the USMC with 2 tours. so your definition of "frontline" is probably quit different than mine.

[peteroy01]

you dont have to be SF to kick in doors unless any infantryman is considered SF. what im trying to say is that men are on the frontlines and women accidentally end up on the frontlines.

[Commando_Barbi]

Sorry for leaving out Infantry (I'm a sailor....not much infantry in my world). I agree with you, that women are accidently ending up there, but they are there. Combat medics, flying, driving, etc.

But back to my point which is....in this day when women are serving in the military side by side with men, they should not be excluded from selective service.

[Commando_Barbi]

As much as I want to continue this discussion, my old retired self needs to roll into my rack and call it a night. Thank you for your service Peter.

[peteroy01]

and thanx 4 urs.

[Commando_Barbi]

and thanx 4 urs.

Thanks...and if we were over there at the same time, what I did, probably helped you do what you did.

[Commando_Barbi]

Now....back on topic! I hope that the bill never comes to pass because we don't need that mess in our military.

Good nite!

[GREENMACHINE]

Now....back on topic! I hope that the bill never comes to pass because we don't need that mess in our military.

Good nite!

Thank god I am in Ireland. No chance of anything like that coming in here.

[Tock]

From what I understand, Congressman Rangel is pushing for this because
almost all of the guys in the military come from low-income backgrounds, which means that while the guys running big businesses and political policy makers decide when Americans go to war, it's the poor folks who have to wage the war & get killed on the front lines.

His idea is that if all the children of rich people have to fight wars and get shot at and killed the same way that poor people do, then politicians would be more likely to think twice before waging war on anyone.

The logic makes sense to me.

[Logan13]

From what I understand, Congressman Rangel is pushing for this because
almost all of the guys in the military come from low-income backgrounds, which means that while the guys running big businesses and political policy makers decide when Americans go to war, it's the poor folks who have to wage the war & get killed on the front lines.

His idea is that if all the children of rich people have to fight wars and get shot at and killed the same way that poor people do, then politicians would be more likely to think twice before waging war on anyone.

The logic makes sense to me.

No one makes Americans enter into the military. It is up to each individual to follow their own path. What if there was no military for them to join, what would they do with their lives then? I see the military as an opportunity for many. My grandpa, dad, brother, brother-in-law, uncle, father-in-law, and (3) cousins joined the military. None of them were poor and none of them joined to become an officer.............

[Tock]

No one makes Americans enter into the military. It is up to each individual to follow their own path. What if there was no military for them to join, what would they do with their lives then? I see the military as an opportunity for many. My grandpa, dad, brother, brother-in-law, uncle, father-in-law, and (3) cousins joined the military. None of them were poor and none of them joined to become an officer.............

Nevertheless, it looks like most people in the military come from poor parts of the US:

http://www.military.com/NewsContent/...,79770,00.html

Military Recruits Come From Poor Areas
United Press International | November 03, 2005
WASHINGTON - Most military recruits in the United States come from areas in which household income is lower than the national median, a non-profit group says.


Nearly two-thirds, 64 percent, of recruits to the military were from counties that have average incomes lower than the national median National Priorities Project said. The group looked at Department of Defense data for 2004.

According to NPP, 15 of the top 20 counties that had the highest numbers of recruits had higher poverty rates than the national average, and 18 of the top 20 had higher poverty rates than the state average.

The U.S. military has long been considered a step away from economic hardship, a trend that is apparently continuing.

Military recruiting officials contend money is not the only reason people join the military, since it also attracts those looking for an opportunity for public service, travel, and structure and discipline.

[RANA]

From what I understand, Congressman Rangel is pushing for this because
almost all of the guys in the military come from low-income backgrounds, which means that while the guys running big businesses and political policy makers decide when Americans go to war, it's the poor folks who have to wage the war & get killed on the front lines.

His idea is that if all the children of rich people have to fight wars and get shot at and killed the same way that poor people do, then politicians would be more likely to think twice before waging war on anyone.

The logic makes sense to me.

That is Rangels excuses, but it's a false excuse. I was not poor when I entered the military. I did not have a sense of direction but who does at the age of 18.
Please read the following: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Nat...y/cda06-09.cfm

[Logan13]

That is Rangels excuses, but it's a false excuse. I was not poor when I entered the military. I did not have a sense of direction but who does at the age of 18.
Please read the following: http://www.heritage.org/Research/Nat...y/cda06-09.cfm

excerpt:
"Our review of Pen­tagon enlistee data shows that the only group that is lowering its participation in the military is the poor. The percentage of recruits from the poorest American neighborhoods (with one-fifth of the U.S. population) declined from 18 percent in 1999 to 14.6 percent in 2003, 14.1 percent in 2004, and 13.7 percent in 2005."

nice find rana!
Another example of the histerical Left making statements that have no basis in fact. Ignorant people piss me off..........

[RANA]

excerpt:
"Our review of Pen­tagon enlistee data shows that the only group that is lowering its participation in the military is the poor. The percentage of recruits from the poorest American neighborhoods (with one-fifth of the U.S. population) declined from 18 percent in 1999 to 14.6 percent in 2003, 14.1 percent in 2004, and 13.7 percent in 2005."

nice find rana!
Another example of the histerical Left making statements that have no basis in fact. Ignorant people piss me off..........

Thanks, an other reason Rangel does this (During elections) is that it makes it look like Republicans are behind this.

[tjpatrick1987]

We have a lot bigger issue's in this country right now. something like this would never get the attention it needs to even have a chance.

[Tock]

From the GAO website:

http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d05952.pdf
(look at page 130)

About all they can do is estimate the socioeconomic status of war casualties, by matching up the home zipcode of the dead veteran to economic data of each zip code.

From their 2005 report, % of deaths (as of May 2005) go like this:

Rich - 13%
Middle class - 58%
Poor - 29%

The DOD statisticians caution, however:

Because of the previously discussed limitations with using zip codes and
community-based characteristics to estimate individuals’ actual
socioeconomic status, these findings (and later similar findings on

wounded servicemembers) need to be viewed with caution.

We all know about the reliability of statistics . . .

------------------------

There is something to be said for Republican "Chickenhawks" who enthusiastically support the war, but are loathe to personally participate in it.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=gFGit_tZDqs
http://youtube.com/watch?v=BnvVEDWgb98&feature=related
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RjQuJDjZar8&feature=related <-- prefer fighting the "culture wars" instead
http://youtube.com/watch?v=OTZ4gaUo_xw&feature=related <-- Bill Maher's take

Me, I've already done my time in the USAF. If they really want me, sure, I'll go. But they probably won't, because I'm gay. And I don't mind either "asking or telling."