Selective Service debate

[TheHolo.Net]

This only applies in the United States as far as I know.

I know its been true for a while now that women are allowed to be in combat situations in the armed services, be they Army, Air Force or whatever. That brings up a question in my mind being a man who at the age of 18 was required by federal law to register for selective service (ie " the draft").

Is the selective service program going to be changed now as well, or has it been discussed in any of the debates in the past? Isn’t it only fair that selective service not be discriminatory based on gender since voluntary military service is non discriminatory now? Or is selective service as I knew it 16 years ago no more?

This issue had to be raised when the debates to allow women in combat were going on. I wonder what kind of justification was given that they are exempt from selective service? How can I explain to my son right before he turns 18 that he has to go register or face jail, while his sister isn't required to?

[Darth Viscera]

Women signing up with the selective service? Excellent idea! Misery loves company :)

[Charley]

>_< not-so excellent. Vis brings up an unintentional point. Last time we did the draft, draftees passed around vietnamese hookers and hash pipes, to relieve the tension. We could quite possibly experience an epidemic of fraternization, that could lower combat effectiveness just as dangerously as any vietnam instance.

[TheHolo.Net]

I'm not saying we should institute the the draft. I'm saying the laws as they apply to selective service should be changed to be either, "fair" or non-existant, thats my take.

[TheHolo.Net]

I posted this topic at another forum I frequent and got this response which is similar to LL's:
The draft is for military emergencies. Given that a male soldier is more effective overall(as men make better infantrymen, given their strenght advantage), and training a soldier costs the same regardless of gender, pretty much, it would be foolish to draft women, as it would result in a weaker army than a male-only draft, and in a time of military emergency, that's a big deal. Female soldiers are still useful, and that's why we have them in the Army, as when there's no draft, we simply hire everyone who can qualify, the more, the merrier.

edit: There's also the fact most men are ambliviant at best about sending women who want to fight out to possibly die, but forcing them to offends the chvanisim of almost every (male) congressmen. (for the record, it would bother me a lot too. I have no problem with allowing a woman to fight if she wants to, but but I wouldn't be willing to force one to).Here is my response:

But, can't it be said that "forcing" someone into the military is no better than what the Feyadeen were doing early on in this war? The only real difference is the US could be doing it by "law" while the Feyadeen were doing it by immoral persuasion.

[Marcus Telcontar]

Why shoud anyone be forced to go to war, for any reason? It should be always up to the person in question. Australia has shown this for the 100 years of it's existance - a volunteer army is the best in effectiveness.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
Why shoud anyone be forced to go to war, for any reason? It should be always up to the person in question. Australia has shown this for the 100 years of it's existance - a volunteer army is the best in effectiveness. My thoughts on this subject are starting to lean very far in the direction of complete abolishment of the selctive service program in the US. Its an immoral practice, prettied up by the "Law". That doesn't make it right, it just makes it illegal to ignore. >_<

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
Why shoud anyone be forced to go to war, for any reason? It should be always up to the person in question. Australia has shown this for the 100 years of it's existance - a volunteer army is the best in effectiveness.

But your country, unlike America, hasn't been invaded by France, Great Britain, Germany, Canada, Great Britain again, Canada again, Mexico, America, and Mexico again, and all in a space of just 160 years. You haven't had need of a draft. Also, I'm guessing that that you would have instituted the draft if the Japanese had succeeded in mounting an invasion.

If some hully-gully George Democrat lets the godless Chinese into the cookiee jar and they're running amuck in San Francisco (at least, I hope they would confine their hostilities to San Francisco), then you'd better believe we'd institute the draft, with an angry foreign army on our soil again.

@LL
You misunderstood my first post somewhat. When I talked about "company", I didn't mean it sexually, like "Oh great, a free girl for each guy. Score!" I meant it as in, if us guys are going to be ordered into battle, then they had better darn well order the girls in too. Sure, Rosie the Riveter looks fine and dandy in that Boeing factory making B-17s, but she's not being shot at by the lousy Huns!

[Marcus Telcontar]

You haven't had need of a draft. Also, I'm guessing that that you would have instituted the draft if the Japanese had succeeded in mounting an invasion.

You dont understand australians. If anyone got onto our soil in a hostile manner, then every single one of us would race to smite them. The concept of the volunteer and doing your job is deeply ingrained in the aussie Pysch. The draft wasn't instated when the Japs looked liek getting close to Darwin.

On an invasion - the only useful place to invade is the East Coast, half of which is protected by The Great Barrier reef., the rest is cliffs anda few patches of sand. Unlike Iraq, this place has no easy jump off point, you have to do a seaborne landing in the north. Then, your faced with thousands of kilometers of nothing. No water. No food. And a well drilled army just waiting to pick you off. No one in their right mind would go any further than the out skirts of Darwin.

Dont give me the "We're being invaded" rot. The fact is, a soldier compelled to fight is about as useless as the front line around Baghdad.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Marcus Elessar
The fact is, a soldier compelled to fight is about as useless as the front line around Baghdad... And the United States Government should know this as fact in some cases because of what happened in Vietnam, though the story was entirely different in WW2, both of which included an active draft.

It shows that a draft in a war the people approve of for the most part works, while a draft in a war that goes against popular opinion doesn't.

It starts to become a bit of a paradox.

[Darth Viscera]

Some of our greatest victories have been won by draftees, Marcus. I wouldn't go so far as to say that they're useless to an Iraqi degree.

[Marcus Telcontar]

It shows that a draft in a war the people approve of for the most part works, while a draft in a war that goes against popular opinion doesn't.

Yes, that's true. Because you have a populace pretty much ready to go to war and readyt o do their duty if called up. I'd not really call that compelled as per say.

[TheHolo.Net]

So the argument that a compelled military isn't always a worthless one falls by the wayside. That leaves the non-discriminatory policy of having women in combat, which has been approved and put into practice, while we still have the discriminatory law that forces 18 year old men to register for the draft while women of the same age don't have to.

Any other argument I have heard so far is sexist and thus still discriminatory. Ethics wise I am having some problems with a draft backed by sexist selective service policy, but the necessity an unforeseen dire need might bring could trump said ethics issue. While it may also be true that such possible dire need could cause the general populace to volunteer in droves.

Like I said, it starts to become a bit of a paradox.

[Darth Viscera]

@Marcus
Well that's what I'm talking about. A war where an enemy is on our soil should require the draft as an emergency measure. If the American people see that we've been attacked on our own soil, they'll understand the gravity of the situation, just as you gallant Aussies do, and they won't really feel compelled to serve as much as obliged to defend their homes.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Darth Viscera
Well that's what I'm talking about. A war where an enemy is on our soil should require the draft as an emergency measure. If the American people see that we've been attacked on our own soil, they'll understand the gravity of the situation, just as you gallant Aussies do, and they won't really feel compelled to serve as much as obliged to defend their homes. I agree with your thought on a war where there is an outright invasion of American soil, but I really don't think that a Federally mandated draft should have to support said patriotic opposing force.

Americans are very patriotic and if there was an absolute need for more troops I think they would get them in spades, completely willingly in the case of an invasion of our nation.

[Morgan Evanar]

George Democrat Yes, because we're going to let another country invade :rolleyes yes, wonderful contribution, you snot. I suppose you think an anti ballistic missle system will actually work, too.

I think everyone should be registered for selective service. But if I felt my country actually needed me, I'd sign up for whatever branch of the services I would best serve.

[AmazonBabe]

If I may...

At 18 my fiancee had to sign up or be faced with jail. I didn't. BUT, I can tell you right now, after turning 18, almost every week I had a different call from the army, navy, airforce (nearly thought about signing up for that one), marines, you name it. Yeah, they don't force women to sign up at 18, but they sure as hell try to encourage ya by shoving it in your face a bunch.

As it stands, if they did instate the draft rules for women, that's it for me, cause I'd move to Australia... move over, Marcus! :p

(On a side note, I've also told my fiancee if the US EVER instated the draft while he was still eligable to serve, I'd hire someone to break his legs.)

Gee... can you tell I don't like the draft?

[Sorreessa Tarrineezi]

hmmm, come to think of it, I got those calls for about a year or so after but I hung up on the buggers....

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by AmazonBabe
As it stands, if they did instate the draft rules for women, that's it for me, cause I'd moving to Australia... move over, Marcus! :pOkay, you are free to have that opinion of the draft, but let me ask this; What is your stance on allowing women in the armed services in combat roles? Should they have been allowed or should it have stayed a male only thing?

My opinion of the draft really isn't that much different than yours.....but here is the thing, its a federal law in a country I love, maybe its an unethical law, but none-the-less it is still a law that exists. If I decide that it is immoral, wrong, unneeded, and unwelcome, then I will fight to get said law changed, but for now I am trying to solidify my opinion of that law by "feeling out" what other people think, so if you could answer my question I would appreciate it.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by Sorreessa Tarrineezi
hmmm, come to think of it, I got those calls for about a year or so after but I hung up on the buggers.... PS: Men get those calls too (I know I sure as hell did), and I would guess that they get even more of them since the military is still primarily male dominated.

[Sorreessa Tarrineezi]

I know, I was saying that AB reminded me of it so they do try us just not as hard...

[CMJ]

I'm trying to remember...when I had to register what was the age? I seem to remember it being 18-25....is that corect?

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by CMJ
I'm trying to remember...when I had to register what was the age. I seem to remember it being 18-25....is that corect? I don't remember the specifics exactly but I remember it being required that you register within a specific number of days after your 18th birthday, and I think that number was less than 91 days.

[AmazonBabe]

CMJ - 18


What is your stance on allowing women in the armed services in combat roles? Should they have been allowed or should it have stayed a male only thing?

I don't mind women being allowed into the armed forces. If that's what some women want to do, then more power to them.

I think it's a good thing it was allowed. It allows women to stand on an equal base as men. There are quite a few women out there that physically can challenge even a guy (they aren't many, but they are there). Somehow, I think women would feel very left out and shunned if they weren't allowed to choose to be a part of the armed forces or not.

But, it all boils down to the fact they (women) have a choice, while men don't. In that sense, I don't think it's very fair and certainly doesn't put them on an equal standing (in this case I think the men might feel somewhat slighted).

[CMJ]

No that's not what I meant. I worded it terribly.

How long are you draftable? I seem to remember that range being 18-25. The armed services try to recruit you before you turn 21 though...after that I never got calls anymore. By then they figure you're hard wired and not easy to manipulate I guess.

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by AmazonBabe
But, it all boils down to the fact they (women) have a choice, while men don't. In that sense, I don't think it's very fair and certainly doesn't put them on an equal standing (in this case I think the men might feel somewhat slighted). My being beyond the age to be considered for the draft makes my compulsion to be aggravated by this unfair law less than it would be if I was just approaching my 18th birthday, but I do indeed find it very odd that someone fought to make it legal for women to get fair treatment in the military yet did nothing about the sexist policy that is the Selective Service program......that leads me to think it was a feminist driven issue, but I could be wrong.

Thanks for your more complete opinion.
Originally posted by CMJ
How long are you draftable? I believe its 18 to 27. I myself am out of that range and thus not draftable.

[CMJ]

I really don't mind having to register with selective service. If we got into a conflict that needed more than our volunteer fighting force I wouldn't mind going if called.

I'd make a lousy soldier though, they'd probably reject me. ;)

[TheHolo.Net]

Originally posted by CMJ
I really don't mind having to register with selective service. If we got into a conflict that needed more than our volunteer fighting force I wouldn't mind going if called.

I'd make a lousy soldier though, they'd probably reject me. ;) I myself would volunteer as well, without the need for selective service, if I thought the cause was just and my pressence could be helpful.

[AmazonBabe]

Thanks for your more complete opinion.

Welcome. :)

[Jedi Master Carr]

I think the selective service should be gotten rid of we will never use a draft again and if we got into a conflict with a country where we needed a Draft (ie China or Russia) we are done for and it would probably be armagandeon.

[CMJ]

Don't be such an alarmist Carr, not everything would be Armeggeddon. ;)

[TheHolo.Net]

Russia is so splintered since the collapse of communism there, I don't think they would be much of a problem, and really I don't think the Chinese would be that big a deal either unless the nukes started to fly.

[Charley]

Which is doubtful. More likely is the Red Storm Rising effect. Everybody knows the consequences of a nuclear exchange between states. No nation wants to risk that.

So with the idea of nukes discredited, I honestly think that a hypothetical war with China could be won. Definitely not easy, mind you, but I'd say more probable than improbable.

[Lilaena De'Ville]

You know, no armed forces ever called *me* up.

...I think they knew I'd be pretty much useless. Although I've been told that joining the armed forces would be a very good move for me...they pay for schooling, etc, and since I'm a woman I'd get right in. My brother-in-law told me that. He also said I should be in the police force.

:rolleyes

I don't see anything wrong with women volunteering for active duty or what-have-you, but being forced? No frikking way. And when exactly was the last time the draft was actually used? Vietnam? They should just get rid of it.

Of course, then we have to face the fact that the greatest evil in the world is the apathy of good men. In that case, the draft could well be needed, as volunteers wouldn't be pouring out of the cracks.

[TheHolo.Net]

I have just learned that I was wrong in thinking that women were allowed to be in any part of military combat situations/parts of the armed forces.
Aren’t there laws against women in combat?

The answer is no—statutory exemptions from combat aviation were repealed in 1991, and a law that exempted from involuntary duty on combat ships, including submarines, was quietly repealed in 1993. Units such as the infantry, armor, field artillery, special operations, submarines, and special operations helicopters remain all-male, but women are now serving in combat support and combat service support positions that used to be coded “all-male.” Source: http://www.cmrlink.org/WomenInCombat.asp?docID=187

So I withdraw my debate as it isn't relavant to what I thought the situation with the laws were.

[Jedi Master Carr]

Well the reason it is an armagadeon is the only war between us and China or Russia would be one where a madman is in control most likely of China or Russia, if that happens than that person is probably the anti-christ maybe and he might want to destroy the world. Also I think only a mad man would want to start another world war and so in that case it would lead to a nuclear exchange. I can't see another reason why we would want to take on China or Russia for that matter neither nation is a threat to us or them so that was my point.

[Charley]

Russia and China are definitely both threats to us. Thinking otherwise denies seeing what they are, which is a rival sphere of influence. What I think you mean is that the urgency of the threat is not particuarly compelling.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Morgan Evanar
Yes, because we're going to let another country invade :rolleyes yes, wonderful contribution, you snot. I suppose you think an anti ballistic missle system will actually work, too.

I think everyone should be registered for selective service. But if I felt my country actually needed me, I'd sign up for whatever branch of the services I would best serve.

I don't trust the modern-day democrats with our national security after what Jimmy Carter pulled.

@All

In the event of a national emergency, aka a foreign army on our soil, the draft is a necessity. The USA would not have won the civil war without the draft, plain and simple. Even in a crisis where support for our military is abundant, a draft is very much needed because most people will not volunteer for the armed services, even in a crisis.

[imported_Eve]

I had a class in college whereas we spent half the semester looking at China vs. USA. My professor seemed to prove his point pretty well that China isn't a threat because (1) their military is old and ournumbered severly, in terms of fire capability and technology, (2) the geography of the region (and world politics) says that most surrounding states would side with the US for either religious or economic/trade reasons - we're more like them then the Chinese are.

However, China vowed to be supreme on their 50th anniversary of the PRC. It was kind of a vow to take us out. And they will try.

Back to the topic... I can't believe that this day in age, we still don't have the same rights as men. I'd volunteer before they had to draft me.

[Darth Viscera]

Originally posted by Eve
However, China vowed to be supreme on their 50th anniversary of the PRC. It was kind of a vow to take us out. And they will try.

Well, the USSR also swore that by 1980 communism would have been perfected. I guess it turns out they didn't mean it.

Damn you George Marshall!

[Jedieb]

We had a similiar thread awhile back. I for one think that selective service should be changed to include women. Hell, I think the draft should be brought back. A volunteer force makes war much too convienient for large portions of the population. The burden and responsibility for serving and DYING should be shared equally. That means a draft that includes men and women and one that doesn't have college exemptions.

We already have women in combat. So I don't buy any excuse that training female soldiers would make for a less effective fighting force. Whenever we'd rag on female soldiers my Drill Sergeant would tell us; "The M-16 is the great equalizer. I've had female soldiers that could out shoot most of your sorry *&^&*^ss." We've already had at least 2 female POW's in this current war and a female A-10 pilot almost had her plane shot out from under her the other day. The women are ALREADY fighting and risking their lives. This wouldn't be anything new.

A draft was very effective for WWII, but not so for Vietnam. Why? Because one was a just war that was widely supported. The other was a mistake who's unpopularity increased as the war dragged on. Vietnam wasn't lost because unwilliing soldiers weren't fighting effectively. Those men and women fought their asses off. But the burden was overwhelming carried by the poor and minorities. There weren't any President's sons or daughters serving in that war. It was far less common to see anyone of priviledge get their butts shot off in Vietnam. Certainly in comparison to WWII where everyone from Bush to Kennedy's served.

A volunteer army makes the dirty work someone else's job. I think everyone should have an equal chance of suiting up and coming home as a paraplegic. If the risk was shared more equitably we'd probably have fewer wars.

[Charley]

If we're not in a time of duress, why would we want to conscript troops?

We're volunteers for a reason. I know the risks involved. I still volunteer. There is no gun pointed to my head.

[Jedi Master Carr]

I don't see anybody invading US soil anytime soon, so I see no need for a draft. As far as China I don't think they want to fight us, why would they their is nothing to gain, if they keep going and improving their economy etc they will be dominant one day maybe in 100-200 years but it will happen. Their is no need to try to go in militarly they don't want any war. As far as Russia they are no threat right now with Putin in power. Sure if somebody can to power whose beliefs went to the extreme right (there was this xenophobe can't recall his name) then I would be more worried but right now Russia is no danger to us, if that changed I would get worried.

[Darth007]

I skimmed through the second half of this thread, so sorry if I repeat something already mentioned.

The way I see it, the draft's purpose is to enlist as many strong, healthy 18 year old males as possible to be used on the front lines. Maybe the reason that women aren't required to, is that if there is a child in the family, then you have both parents gone. Im not sexist, and I hope this doesnt sound that way - but I'd rather have a man fighting and a woman taking care of the kids.

However , I think that there should be a change made to the whole thing. I believe that if married or engaged or whatever, the couple should have a choice as to who will sign up.

[JediBoricua]

I agree with JediEb here.

Let's have a permanent draft that includes women. Considering that in the war being fought today there is not a single son of the 500+ congressmen, and that blacks and latins are overepresented, having an equal army would be the only fair thing to do.

If the Army and the Government are representing the big interests when invading a certain country or starting conflict in any part of the world having an equal draft will make them think the decision and not rush things. You can argue this point in the current war, it will take a few years to see the real reasons of the Iraqi war, but on other parts of the world the military has served as an armed branch of big business using minorities and other marginal sectors as the driving force.

About women soldiers, really how are men better. Cannot woman walk, march, shoot, drive tanks/planes as well as any man? A woman that trained and was in good physical form would make an excellent navy seal, ranger, delta, etc. An american regular solider is the best of the world, be it female or male.

[Charley]

:rolleyes You do realize our armed forces are made up of lifers, term enlistees, and volunteer reservists, right? As in...THEY CHOOSE TO SIGN UP!

As for your assumptions about the female soldier...if you can find enough Chynas in this world that would sign up to pull paratrooper duty (humping a 120 pound pack over 50 miles in 4 days, etc) and justify the bureaucratic cost of admitting these statistical outliers into specialist units (not saying they can't hack regular infantry, but some things require exceptional ability) then go right ahead. Otherwise, there are some limitations that do make sense, and should be kept in place.

[JediBoricua]

I really don't see how a normal sized woman, of course she can't be a petite 5'1" that weighs 109 pounds, that is in shape and has trained cannot carry 120 pounds of cargo and pack over 50 miles. Of course women should go through the same trials and tribulations that men go to qualify for elite units. Granted, there will still be more men than women, but some women are up to the challenge and could pass the training.


You do realize our armed forces are made up of lifers, term enlistees, and volunteer reservists, right? As in...THEY CHOOSE TO SIGN UP!

I know many latins who have signed up. Are they doing it for freedom and justice? Not really. They are doing it for the college money and for a safe job. Many blacks and latins (I wouldn't dare say the majority, buy a hefty chunk of them) sign up because it's their only way to progress. They don't have the money for college, nor they went to good high schools, etc. And let's not talk about race only. I don't have the stats, but I"m pretty sure that the majority of volunteers come from lower class families.

Besides it's really hipocritical that those who to send young men and women to die sit comfortably at home while the poor do the dirty work.

[Charley]

So the military takes care of its own. Why is that wrong? You act like the military is the ONLY ROUTE for these people, and it quite frankly is not.