Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Whether they should register or not this is the one of the biggest red herrings in this debate.
The last person drafted was in 1973, that's 40 years ago and if there is one thing that all five branches of the U.S. military adamantly agree about is never ever having to draft another person into their ranks.
They didn't want a draft when they invaded Iraq.
They didn't want a draft when they ordered Stop/Loss.
They didn't want a draft for the surges.
They didn't want a draft to keep troops from serving 5, 6 or whatever number of rotations.
So why is the question about the Selective Service suddenly relevant unless these threads are inundated by 18years olds whose registration is a recent memory.
Why? Because the SS is archaic and discriminatory, and it doesn't just affect young men at all. Any male (born after 1959) applying for a college loan, or a Pell grant must show proof of registering for the draft. Any male applying for any type of civil servant job, government job, such as working for the post office must show proof of registering. I served in the U.S. Navy, and still had to show proof of registering years later.
Whether they should register or not this is the one of the biggest red herrings in this debate.
The last person drafted was in 1973, that's 40 years ago and if there is one thing that all five branches of the U.S. military adamantly agree about is never ever having to draft another person into their ranks.
Why do you think it remains necessary for young men to register?
Actually, only 14% of the military is female overall, and probably not even 1% would want to be in combat. So they could have had women register for the draft a long time ago. Men aren't suppose to fight for their own equality, their suppose to just put up, and shut up. Complaining is for wooses. We also have female fire fighters who are unable to to break down doors in burning buildings, but if anyone mentions that, their anti-woman. It's just the way it is.
Sure, now they get to keep their mouths shut when their very lives are put in danger, as well as their mental training being altered due to the nature of their troop adding females. They will face some of the most extreme and dangerous situations possible with what may be a lesser-quality force, as well as what can only be the obvious outcome of captured female troops being held for ransom (and possibly impregnated) and having to go back after them. And the females will have to face the same moral quandaries for possible collateral damage that kills women and children, and scorn from the general public when they come back.
Feminists are like little kids. You tell them not to do something and explain the reasons why, and they do it anyway. Like when people used to catch their kid smoking and put the whole pack of cigarettes in their kid's mouth just to teach them a lesson. Let the feminists eat cake. All the daughters of America should have to register for the selective service with no special treatment or lesser requirements. Sign 'em up. Let's get rollin'.
Whether they should register or not this is the one of the biggest red herrings in this debate.
The last person drafted was in 1973, that's 40 years ago and if there is one thing that all five branches of the U.S. military adamantly agree about is never ever having to draft another person into their ranks.
They didn't want a draft when they invaded Iraq.
They didn't want a draft when they ordered Stop/Loss.
They didn't want a draft for the surges.
They didn't want a draft to keep troops from serving 5, 6 or whatever number of rotations.
So why is the question about the Selective Service suddenly relevant unless these threads are inundated by 18years olds whose registration is a recent memory.
I suspect the subject comes up because only males in the United States are required to register for SSS within thirty days of reaching their eighteenth birthday. Failure to do so means an inability to receive any governmental financial assistance (including student loans), the risk of a $10,000 fine, and the risk of five years in federal prison. In most states, driver's and various professional licenses are also denied to those men who have failed to register.
My preference is to eliminate selective service. However, until then, it's not unreasonable to maintain the same registration requirement of young women.
The real question is do we still need the Selective Service System?
After 40 years since the last draft, military leadership is deeply against involuntary conscription. The last decade has shown that an all-volunteer force is capable of fighting two wars simultaneously while keeping our other global military commitments. The time, effort, and money spent ($22 million) maintaining the SSS is a waste. Given the need to cut government spending, this is something that adds no value and should be abolished.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Including those undecided.
