Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeedKarma

Instead of picking a country where women are barred why don't you go back to the link I gave you on page 1?

---

I looked at it. And they didn't show a single woman that was a grunt. They have supporting roles and no one is doubting their contributions for the country. But the grunts are the labor force of war. That is what the argument is about.

From your post (quote)

In Afghanistan, for example, 83 women served in the infantry, 58 were in field artillery, 34 were combat engineers, 20 were pilots and nine were in armour. The proportion of women in combat positions doubled from 4.6% in the 1990s to 8.3% during the Afghan mission.

Quote:

---

Why would we need a draft in the first place? Clarify please?

---

I don't think we do today.. It wasn't my idea to reinstitute Selective Service.. It was Carter and the Dems. But I do foresee a future day when there would be a need for a draft .

But it would not have happened if females were subject to it . They made it a point to exclude women in the law... going so far as to let the Equal Rights Amendment expire rather than have women enter into the Selective Service system .

Now ,as I pointed out on the 1st page ;the Selective Service law stood up to constitutional challenge only because women do not serve in front line combat.
It's all well and good to have equal rights and opportunity when the service is volunteer and women have a choice about serving in infantry combat roles . It's quite another when there is a draft ;and neither men or women are permitted that choice.

Hello Don't:

Quote:

---

There are a few nutcases of course, but the vast majority of conservatives do not believe what you are suggesting and do not promote this idea. I certainly don't.

---

Nothing like a little sensationalism, there is no such thing as "Republicans for rape." But like I said yesterday, what would I know about women's issues?

It might not be an official club but there is enough on your side talkig crazy stuff. Obviously THEY know nothing about women's issues.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

it might not be an official club but there is enough on your side talkig crazy stuff. Obviously THEY know nothing about womens issues.

---

And liberals never talk crazy stuff, snicker snicker...

Ex put his out there, your turn. Then I can snicker with you.

Lets see what the women think after the first videos of dead female soldiers are shown being raped by the Muslim horde. Its not IF but WHEN its going to happen.

Doesn't this rape distraction belong on the 'war on women ' op ?

Not really... considering what passes as female in some of those countries... its going to happen... its a common occurrence in prisons in that part of the world... the Battlefield will be even worse.

Then there is what they could expect if they were ever captured alive...

They sodomized the Embassador to Libya... either before or after he was killed... and that was a guy... they treat their own women worse than livestock... think our women would be treated better than that by them?

Being in a combat role puts them at very high risk of that...

Hello tom:

Quote:

---

doesn't this rape distraction belong on the 'war on women ' op ?

---

It's all the same argument, isn't it? I put it here because I said right wingers have blamed women for being raped for a long time. Don't said that wasn't so. So, I posted my thing.. No, it's not exactly in response to the argument. But, I FOUND it, and I LIKE it, so I posted it.

Excon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

Ex put his out there, your turn. Then I can snicker with you.

---

"I know it wasn't rape-rape. It was something else but I don't believe it was rape-rape. He went to jail and [sic] when they let him out he was like "You know what this guy's going to give me a hundred years in jail I'm not staying, so that's why he left." -Whoopi Goldberg on Roman Polanski sodomizing and raping 13-year-old girl.

"I propose a limitation be put on how many squares of toilet paper can be used in any one sitting. Now, I don't want to rob any law-abiding American of his or her God-given rights, but I think we are an industrious enough people that we can make it work with only one square per restroom visit, except, of course, on those pesky occasions where 2 to 3 could be required." -Sheryl Crow

"My fear is that the whole island will become so overly populated that it will tip over and capsize." -Congressman Hank Johnson

"If you take out the killings, Washington actually has a very very low crime rate." - Marion Barry

"Eight more days and I can start telling the truth again" -Chris Dodd

"The conventional viewpoint says we need a jobs program and we need to cut welfare. Just the opposite! We need more welfare and fewer jobs." -Jerry Brown

"The harsh fact of the matter is when you're passing legislation that will cover 300 million American people in different ways, it takes a long time to do the necessary administrative steps that have to be taken to put the legislation together to control the people." -John Dingell

"If I lived in Massachusetts, I'd try to vote ten times... Yeah that's right, I'd cheat to keep these bastards out. I would. Because that's exactly what they are." -Ed Shultz

"Guess what this liberal would be all about? This liberal will be about socializing... uh, um... Would be about, basically, taking over, and the government running all of your companies." -Maxine Waters

And this is not a little bit of sensationalism? Interesting that most on this list are not politicians.

Kathleen Parker's take on the subject:
Parker: Military is putting women at unique risk - The Washington Post

She's right on... making most of the points I've tried to make on this discussion.

With all that battle gear on, how will the enemy even know she is female? And she will certainly be well trained before she is let loose in the batttlefield.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Wondergirl

With all that battle gear on, how will the enemy even know she is female? And she will certainly be well trained before she is let loose in the batttlefield.

---

Under close combat conditions and from capture Im sure they will figure it out.

Hello again, wingers:

Your attitude toward this MIRRORS your backwards viewpoint about women in general. It's the kind of attitude that foments a war on women...

Bottom line; your views are paternalistic, and offensive. They're sexist, old fashioned, and WRONG... The stupid reasons I hear from you is that you can't sh1t with the girls looking... She can't carry a guy. But a Pee Wee Herman type could, and a Serrina Williams type couldn't. The guys might have to RAPE a girl if she was there. She might have her period, and we can't have that.. She might get pregnant - can't have that. She might get captured and raped by them. Can't have that either. What if there's a draft? Can't draft women.

It's time you joined us the 21st Century.

excon

My understanding as explained by females who have already served is that they want the same credit and promotional opportunities as the men they served with. Sounds legit. They also point out that the chances of them being raped and assaulted by their fellow comrades is greater than being captured by the enemy, and fact back this up. They also agree that they have to meet the same high standards for combat as the men do, so seems the benefits and past circumstances have more merits than the what ifs of the opposing arguments.

I guess that's why Panetta and the Joint Chiefs have decided to give them the equality, and equal protection under the law they are suing for with a rational plan of implementation over 3years to accomplish that goal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by talaniman

My understanding as explained by females who have already served is that they want the same credit and promotional opportunities as the men they served with. Sounds legit. They also point out that the chances of them being raped and assaulted by their fellow comrades is greater than being captured by the enemy, and fact back this up. They also agree that they have to meet the same high standards for combat as the men do, so seems the benefits and past circumstances have more merits than the what ifs of the opposing arguments.

I guess that's why Panetta and the Joint Chiefs have decided to give them the equality, and equal protection under the law they are suing for with a rational plan of implementation over 3years to accomplish that goal.

---

Careful about bringing up rape. You'll be accused of waging war on women.

Quote:

---

They also agree that they have to meet the same high standards for combat as the men do,

---

And yet there are already 2 standards in the military for men and women .