General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region Forumssouthernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)politicans sons going to the front line would that make them stop and think? I bet it would. Old men are always happier to send someoneelse children.
Bluenorthwest
(45,319 posts)Next daft takes women as well, that's just how it has to go. Modern times.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)they are about 5 states short. But even that much a majority of married women do not want to go to war with children at home. I just don't see that happening. Besides that I have been around to see what kind of a fallout that can cause. No I don't see that happening.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)Even a TeaPubliKlan will slow his roll if "Daddy's little girl" is probable cannonfodder. The rank and file anyway.
The society is fairly comfortable with boys in bodybags but a bit more squeamish with girls.
Hell, your reaction was indicitive of what I'm talking about. Women in bodybags and motherless children is a tough sale for many.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)honest I believe once a woman has a child she needs to get out of the military. If she is married they husband or wife needs to make the choice. I am of the old school. I come from a family of lifers. Their attitude was if the military wanted you to have a wife they would have issued you one. I know I going to get alot of hate about it. But it is my personal belief. I say when my husband was stationed at Ft Campbell how unprepared many soldiers were about their families. What always bothered me is the recruiters would say the person they were trying to get in. You can give your parents temporary custody of your child or children (this is a single soldier I am talking about) and once you get your permanent assignment then you can get them back. I have seen it with my own eyes. This is a terrible policy. Soldiers need to worry about the mission. Now I know of some women who are great soldiers and even they don't like these kind of women who take advantage of their gender. I worked with a couple of girls that would use her period as an excuse. The other girl used her looks to get off and bragged about until she asked off once to often and she didn't get her way and accused the Captain of harassment. Not all women are like that but there are some. None the less I have no problem with women servicing. Yes I do have a problem with women in combat. Sorry that is how I feel. You have every right to disagree with me and I respect that. In the military MISSION always comes first. I would feel the same if there were a single man with a child.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)I honestly don't understand what women (and some men, especially those who themselves are single dads) are thinking of when they think the military is just like any other job and is compatible with home life.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)MedicalAdmin
(4,143 posts)All men serve 2 years and all women serve 1 year minimum. And those are all potential combat missions.
Does anyone here think the IDF are a week force?
It dan and should be done. The decision makers need skin in the game and I'm not talking about investments in Halliburton.
SheilaT
(23,156 posts)never forget that the Ultra Orthodox have a complete pass on serving.
And what does the Israeli Army have to do with the U.S. Army? If we actually had a universal draft I shudder to think how many wars would then be justified, how many more military bases would be built, how many more countries occupied.
The sad truth is that it is precisely our overgrown military and unrealistic military presence around the world that will lead to this country's eventual downfall. In all of the debate about how we can't afford Medicare or Social Security or even to repair roads and bridges in this country, the enormous size and reach of our military is almost never mentioned. There will come the day when we'll simply be a high-tech version of the collapsing Roman Empire.
TheKentuckian
(25,026 posts)in rights, obligations, duty, and responsibilities.
The two are a perfect match, folks like you will have a greatly reduced tolerance to missions that result in women in body bags and motherless children and equality under the law is greatly enhanced.
Less missions and everyone has skin in the games that do happen.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)life. I know there are so good women soldier but many women don't want to be in combat. They are being pushed by women who do want to be there. Now I think if a single woman or a man have children they should be mde to get out. If they are married then one or the other should be out. You say they are equal. Ok then why do they have different requirements for PT? There is a reason. There are some jobs women do better then men and vise a versa. I am not hating on women. Like I said it comes from years of observations. Personally I don't want my granddaughter going off to war or being in the military. Especially since the military in general can't seem to stop women from getting raped.
xchrom
(108,903 posts)Robb
(39,665 posts)No one here supported the invasion of Iraq.
Less than half supported going into Afghanistan.
And no one here supports a war with Iran.
whatchamacallit
(15,558 posts)until the president does (that is).
Robb
(39,665 posts)I'm one of DU's "hawks" in that I supported action in AfPak. We were in the minority then, and if anything we have become LESS convinced it was a good idea since Obama took office, not more.
War with Iran is folly, and fortunately everyone in any sort of power position agrees.
Union Scribe
(7,099 posts)We'd hear about how he was forced to, how it's a humanitarian move (why do you hate those women being stoned????), how it'll mostly be drones so our troops are safer, etc etc. Basically, the exact same arguments used to justify his expansion of Afghanistan, his dawdling in Iraq, drone bombings, Libya. We've already SEEN that many will flip on war and go full rah-rah if they support the person waging it.
southernyankeebelle
(11,304 posts)then let them do it. I support only Afghanistan until we got OBL. Once they got him Mission Accomplished time to come home.
MineralMan
(146,288 posts)However, I have to disagree with the pragmatic woodchuck. Nothing good has ever come from our meddling in the Middle East. I think we should stop doing it completely. In fact, I'd be in favor of drastic cuts in our overseas military operations worldwide.
MilesColtrane
(18,678 posts)So, we've got that going for us.
But seriously, we do need to GTFO of Afghanistan and Pakistan.
surrealAmerican
(11,360 posts)k & r
Ichingcarpenter
(36,988 posts)be it war, health care, infrastructure etc
They just need to be lead like sheep to where
their corporate/military / media shepard wants to take them.
I think that's his point... and like always
He gets it.
and the full version:
Also seen on today's daily kos:
Yep
WillyT
(72,631 posts)leeroysphitz
(10,462 posts)a2liberal
(1,524 posts)HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts)Never figured that one out.
K & R.
eridani
(51,907 posts)Laelth
(32,017 posts)-Laelth
GeorgeGist
(25,320 posts)sense folks at DU have gotten Tom's attention.