Selective service - draft

[TechWife]

Oh for bleeping sakes.

 

LOTS of people sign up just because....

Free college

Patriotism

Family tradition/expectation

Desire to serve

Seeking adventure/challenge

Civic duty ideals

 

Whether they come out thinking that it was worth it or that's what they got out of it might be debatable but yes, a lot of good soldiers enlist "just because".

 

You have listed legitimate reasons, not a flip "just because" reason. I have no problem with the reasons you have listed as long as people are going into it with their eyes open and are not over-romanticising their commitment. 

[ThisIsTheDay]

The draft will never be reinstated in this country.  Ever. 

 

Too many people would turn out in the streets against it, and it would be entirely impossible to enforce.

 

It will never happen.

 

 

[Tsuga]

So now they are considering making selective service a requirement for women too.

 

I'm rather ardently against that.

 

Does anyone else have opinions or whatever about it?

 

I'm not against women CHOOSING to serve presuming they can meet the same requirements of the men.

 

I think women and men should have the same requirements, including selective service, and that men and women equally should be exempt in cases of pregnancy, breastfeeding, height, etc.

 

I think fewer women will meet basic requirements and more will be reproducing when drafted, but oh well.

 

I think they should all sign up.

 

I also think that everyone should have two years of compulsory civil or military service and that in exchange we should give them all a free college or technical education based on merit, but that's just me.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

The draft will never be reinstated in this country.  Ever. 

 

Too many people would turn out in the streets against it, and it would be entirely impossible to enforce.

 

It will never happen.

 

I think one is unlikely as a war on a scale that would require one would likely end with a flash and a bang. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Don't confuse Selective Service with a Draft. Selective Service is merely a registry of people's names who could be called if a draft occurs. And there has been an all-volunteer (IOW, not drafted) force for over 50 years, even through several combat operations. In the unlikely chance that a draft occurs, names on the selective service will be called for medical and mental exams. Only the physically and mentally fit will be drafted.

 

 

 

Saying that those not physically and mentally fit won't be drafted offers me no sort of comfort.  Because that does not include people who flat out don't want to be forced into it.

 

 

[Reefgazer]

I'm for equality - that includes the good as well as the bad, so IMO, women should have to serve and register if men have to do so.

[redsquirrel]

I can't imagine why women should be excepted. Fair is fair. Why should men have to shoulder this burden alone? Women aren't special and men are not expendable. 

 

And I know plenty of American women who have served with distinction.  I know quite a few women from other countries, such as Israel who have served.

 

I don't see the problem.

 

That said, I have two sons and I have family in the military and I am 100% unconcerned about a draft. This congress can't even be arsed to authorize war against ISIS.  I can't imagine they can get their act together long enough to get a draft reinstated. Just no.

[Tsuga]

I think one is unlikely as a war on a scale that would require one would likely end with a flash and a bang. 

 

Cannot like as it's too horrible to imagine, but unfortunately this is true.

[Tsuga]

Saying that those not physically and mentally fit won't be drafted offers me no sort of comfort.  Because that does not include people who flat out don't want to be forced into it.

 

Well, there is the religious exemption for men and women alike.

 

Of course nobody wants to go to war, and many don't even want to serve their country in a civil capacity. Tough titties, kiddies. I say this because I took flipping cold showers for two years and did my time in a third-world country. I do think there should be a civil service alternative, of course.

 

But whatever is required of men should be required of women. The point is it's already required.

 

If the asked whether it should be repealed... that's a different story.

[Tanaqui]

This congress can't even be arsed to authorize war against ISIS.

 

Congress hasn't authorized a war since 1945. There's a huge loophole I'd like to see closed, but honestly, I think all our congresscritters prefer it that way.

 

[Carrie12345]

My only argument against it is that I'd have to worry about 4 kids instead of 2.  (1 of my boys wouldn't qualify.)  Not exactly grounds for law making.

[Amy in NH]

I don't think we should force anyone to go - gender shouldn't matter.

[Joyofsixreboot]

I wasn't excited that my boys had/will have to sign up. Looking at my much more "emotional" daughters I am less thrilled. My temperament is much more suited than theirs. This is coming from the mom of a kid who chose to join the guard. I'm for choice.

[DawnM]

http://youngadults.about.com/od/legalissues/a/Selective.htm\

 

 

Huh, I have son turning 18 in a couple of months.  I hadn't even thought about registering for SS until this thread.

[Joules]

I support for a couple of reasons.  First, equality, as in I think men and women should always be treated equivalently.  Second, I am NOT in support of a draft at all and hoping that congress will think a little harder before calling for a draft if daughters are involved  (since most of them are still sexist in addition to being idiots.)  If we can't drum up enough volunteers, then I would seriously doubt the war is worth fighting.

[Katy]

I'm glad women are allowed into whatever role they want.

 

It's sexist of me, but I think in general terms, men are more suited for combat than women.

 

In general all-volunteer forces are better for numerous reasons.

 

I'm not opposed to national service being a requirement for everyone in exchange for a 2-year or 4-year college scholarship though, but only if there are both military and peaceful roles to choose.  Americorps or some such similar.

[Guest]

 

Of course nobody wants to go to war, and many don't even want to serve their country in a civil capacity. Tough titties, kiddies. I say this because I took flipping cold showers for two years and did my time in a third-world country. I do think there should be a civil service alternative, of course.

 

 

 

 

This is not a great reason to make a whole country the size of the USA make a commitment.

 

In fact, it's not even a reason at all. A complete nonstarter.

[QueenCat]

They have hardship deferments. I don't know how hard it is to qualify for this, but I'd imagine being a single parent or remaining undrafted parent would qualify.

 

Single mothers are in the military now. They have to have a "plan" for when they are deployed. Not sure why that would give them a deferment.

[JumpyTheFrog]

Nobody should be enslaved to go kill other people. Think of how many wars have been fought where most of the soldiers on both sides have been forced to fight. So much death and destruction.

[QueenCat]

http://youngadults.about.com/od/legalissues/a/Selective.htm\

 

 

Huh, I have son turning 18 in a couple of months.  I hadn't even thought about registering for SS until this thread.

 

You don't want to forget.............. makes getting scholarships and such pretty impossible if he goes to college.

[Audrey]

Selective service, the draft... whatever you want to call it... is morally repugnant.  Gender is irrelevant.

[RootAnn]

I'm different than some (most?) of the people on this thread, I guess. I don't believe men & women are at all the same or that they should be treated the same. I think men and women, in general (statistically), are made really different from one another in our abilities & talents. There are some men (more nowadays) that aren't at all suited for military operations, including maintenance, pilots, and combat). There are some women who are suited for military operations, including engineering, mechanics, and pilots. However, in general, the military and especially combat operations, are more suited to men. 

 

I fully admit I'm sexist - but not to the extent that I'm one of those people who won't let their daughters go to college. Men & women are fundamentally different. We shouldn't be treated the same.

 

Reading Heinlein's Starship Troopers about how military service is required if you want to be a voting citizen is very thought-provoking in my opinion. I look forward to the discussions my dc & I will have when they read it in their upper high school years. Have we been more likely to go into combat situations now because so many of our government officials & elected officials haven't done military duty? Why haven't we had an official declaration of war from Congress in all these years? What would have to happen for the draft to be reinstated? What would happen if it was reinstated? Why do we have it still if it won't ever be reinstated?  Other questions suggest themselves when Selective Service is brought up.

[Danestress]

I hope we won't have a draft. But if we did, I see no reason not to draft women. Some may not be suitable for certain combat roles - nor might some men. It does not help the effort to put people in positions for which they are clearly not suited, and I think some assessment is necessary. But many positions would still be available. Why should women get a free pass?

[Murphy101]

To address the issue of single parents/dual military couple called up for a draft: There are already many (MANY!) single parents and dual military parents serving in our armed forces. The military handles it by having mandatory alternative care plans for the children, even in times of peace. My dh and I were both on active duty after we had our first children. We had to have a written plan on file (along with powers of attorney, etc, for the caregivers) in the event that both of us had to be called away simultaneously. All I's were dotted and all T's were crossed.

What if you can't do that?

 

I literally have no family that I could or would allow to raise my children.

 

I'd face jail time before letting my family take care of them.

 

My dh is an only child with a mother who has cancer.

 

Granted I'm rather confident this doesn't apply to me now, but it would have been my situation at 22 years old too.

 

What do people without family support do? I'm presuming that for now, they just don't join. But a draft would obviously cramp that option.

 

I don't buy the we will never have a draft again theory. I think it should be that way, but I wouldn't bank on it.

 

And if that's genuinely the case, then instead of requiring women be added to selective service, why not just do away with selective service entirely?

[Murphy101]

If you truly and honestly "have no one" with whom you could leave your children, then you would be required to choose (after interviewing, checking out, etc.) someone on the list of approved caregivers on the base/post. There is a rather robust list of people who are cleared (meaning, background checks, passed home inspections, etc.) to provide both short-term and long-term care at each military location. You would, of course, be financially obligated to them.

So basicly, they would force me to use a form of military foster care?

 

I hazard that would shred any remaining patriotism if they forced that.

[elegantlion]

I am against the signing up for selective service and I do not think it should be extended to women. I think it should be eliminated period. My son signed up, it's the law. He once considered signing up for the military, but has since changed his mind for valid reasons. Those valid reasons would not go away should he be forced to serve. 

 

My dad served in the military during the draft days. He saw no combat and worked in radio/technology, which lead to the career path he held for most of his life. It was good for him and I have pictures of his days in Japan hanging in my living room. It was a different time. 

 

Today, we have enough people, men and women, signing up and currently serving. If it came to war there are more that would volunteer. I also think that warfare would be different and not require as many personnel as previous wars.

 

I think it should be a choice, not mandated. If it were extended to women, it would only validate the antiquated idea of the draft. 

[Murphy101]

I'm suppose I'm sexist too. Equal does not always mean same. To suggest it does makes the concept of diversity a sham. When did feminism become about being like men? It seems like this kind of feminism makes being a woman a thing to be avoided, a less than. All of which is off topic so never mind my rambling. Off to run errands and extracurriculiars for the day.

[Murphy101]

Many people already DO use it. My own sister and her husband (dual military couple, both retired now) used it multiple times at two different bases. My other sister (military spouse) was one of those approved caregivers at yet another base.

They CHOSE to use it.

 

That's a whole other ball of wax from being FORCED to use it.

[ktgrok]

I'm okay with male and female citizens being drafted in case of need, BUT I think there have got to be accomodations so that both parents of a child are not drafted, and that single parents are not drafted. A child should be left with one parent home, period. If we gave exemptions in the past for being in college, surely being a parent is more of a reason. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

I'm suppose I'm sexist too. Equal does not always mean same. To suggest it does makes the concept of diversity a sham. When did feminism become about being like men? It seems like this kind of feminism makes being a woman a thing to be avoided, a less than. All of which is off topic so never mind my rambling. Off to run errands and extracurriculiars for the day.

 

I have wondered the same thing.  It seems a lot of feminists are about "be who you are" so long as who you are isn't too stereotypically feminine.  Unless of course you are a transwoman.  Then you must act very frilly and prissy to be a real woman.

 

People make no sense. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

Well, there is the religious exemption for men and women alike.

 

I object for religious reasons.  My religion isn't on the list though. 

[Guest]

It is not sexist or inherently unfeminist to acknowledge general differences between the sexes. And feminism is not about "being like men."

[Danestress]

What if you can't do that?

 

I literally have no family that I could or would allow to raise my children.

 

?

Presumably your husband is in the same position and also has no one to leave the children with. So this isn't about women serving versus men serving. This is about parents serving. If you were called up, the kids have him. If he were called up, the kids have you. It's not until you were both called up that your children have no one. I think there would need to be a system in place to address this.

 

There are various solutions (none great as a parent because we all want the very best for our kids). There could be a system where when one parent is drafted, the other is automatically deferred for that period, for example. But I don't think we should never draft women because some women have children. Men also have children.

 

I do think I that being pregnant or recently delivered should be grounds for a deferral. In World War II there was a method of categorizing who could be deferred. Men with dependents engaged in certain occupations had a deferral status higher than those involved in general occupations. Men could be determined fit for 'all duty' vs fit for 'limited' duty.

 

No system is perfect, but I think we could come up with a system that better meets the needs of the military and also recognizes individual situations better than giving all women a pass on serving their country in a time of need.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Danestress

[SparklyUnicorn]

It is not sexist or inherently unfeminist to acknowledge general differences between the sexes. And feminism is not about "being like men."

 

That may be what feminism means to you, but there are definitely feminists with very different views than this.

[8circles]

Presumably your husband is in the same position and also has no one to leave the children with. So this isn't about women serving versus men serving. This is about parents serving. If you were called up, the kids have him. If he were called up, the kids have you. It's not until you were both called up that your children have no one. I think there would need to be a system in place to address this. Neither of my grandfathers was called up in World War II. They were both

 

There are various solutions (none great as a parent because we all want the very best for our kids). There could be a system where when one parent is drafted, the other is automatically deferred for that period, for example. But I don't think we should never draft women because some women have children. Men also have children.

 

I do think I that being pregnant or recently delivered should be grounds for a deferral. In World War II there was a method of categorizing who could be deferred. Men with dependents engaged in certain occupations had a deferral status higher than those involved in general occupations. Men could be determined fit for 'all duty' vs fit for 'limited' duty.

 

No system is perfect, but I think we could come up with a system that better meets the needs of the military and also recognizes individual situations better than giving all women a pass on serving their country in a time of need.

 

(I am against the draft but since we're discussing...)

 

I agree with you totally.  I also don't think it is a valid reason saying some women aren't cut out for combat.  Neither are some men, even if the percentage might be different.

[Murphy101]

Presumably your husband is in the same position and also has no one to leave the children with. So this isn't about women serving versus men serving. This is about parents serving. If you were called up, the kids have him. If he were called up, the kids have you.

 

Yes and no.

 

My dh would not be called up for medical reasons and he is our only income.

 

So if I got called up, he would have to quit or I don't know what to take care of our kids. One of the main reasons I stay home is because he can't afford to pay someone to do what I do.

 

Also, I was thinking more along the lines of what if I had been a mom whose kids didn't have a father in their lives and I was drafted. Which I hear tell is extremely common these days.

 

None if which I made clear, so apologies for that aspect.

Edited December 5, 2015 by Murphy101

[Murphy101]

I'd also like to point out that roughly 90% of military jobs are non-combat related.

What's that got to do with anything?

 

No one can be in the military and presume they won't see combat. The enemy doesn't really give a dang what rank and duty we have.

 

And while it might be some false comfort to not be listed for combat duty, it still means being forced into leaving their families behind.

[SparklyUnicorn]

Yes and no.

 

My dh would not be called up for medical reasons and he is our only income.

 

So if I got called up, he would have to quit or I don't know what to take care of our kids. One of the main reasons I stay home is because he can't afford to pay someone to do what I do.

 

Also, I was thinking more along the lines of what if I had been a mom whose kids didn't have a father in their lives and I was drafted. Which I hear tell is extremely common these days.

 

None if which I made clear, so apologies for that aspect.

 

This was another big reason I changed my mind about joining the military.  They own you.  If they tell you to do whatever whenever they want, you must do it.  They don't really care about what is going on in your personal life.  That's not their problem.  They also reserve the right to not let you out after your term is up. 

 

I had met a woman in my unit who told me about being given a hard time for getting pregnant. 

[RootAnn]

What do people without family support do? I'm presuming that for now, they just don't join. But a draft would obviously cramp that option.

 

The daughter & son-in-law of some of our friends were both in the Air Force & stationed in Hawaii. The husband was deployed. If the wife would have also been deployed, the kids would have gone to 'strangers' until our friend could get out there to retrieve the children (72 hrs max). That was the single most important reason why the daughter decided to not re-enlist. (They didn't have children until the end of her time in the AF.) She didn't want her children to be taken care of by anyone other than her mom or dad for any amount of time. Her oldest has celiac disease. So, this absolutely is something that people currently have to deal with.

[Murphy101]

I'm okay with male and female citizens being drafted in case of need, BUT I think there have got to be accomodations so that both parents of a child are not drafted, and that single parents are not drafted. A child should be left with one parent home, period. If we gave exemptions in the past for being in college, surely being a parent is more of a reason.

I don't think there should be an exemption for college. In the past, that was often a cop out for rich people to wait out the draft. Don't want your kid drafted? No problem. Write a check to the college to see if by the time s/he finished the draft/war is over.

[SparklyUnicorn]

I don't think there should be an exemption for college. In the past, that was often a cop out for rich people to wait out the draft. Don't want your kid drafted? No problem. Write a check to the college to see if by the time s/he finished the draft/war is over.

 

Uh yeah that hardly seems fair.  I object for philosophical reasons and quite frankly I'm a wuss, but that's not ok?  Yet if I'm in college, that is ok?  Why?!

[Guest]

I think we all agree there should be no draft, period.

[Guest]

That may be what feminism means to you, but there are definitely feminists with very different views than this.

 

So what? Such enormous differences of opinions prove that feminism is not monolithic and does not belong to any one (in this case, fringe) opinion.

 

So I repeat: being a feminist is not about turning women into men.

[Butter]

No one can be in the military and presume they won't see combat.

 

Actually, that's not quite true.  My sister was in one of the Air Force bands.  When she joined her contract stated she (and all other band members) specifically could not see combat and the closest they could come to combat was moving body bags.  About a year into her service, their contracts were amended.  They were no longer qualified to move body bags either.  They literally could play music and that was it.

 

If a draft happened, I would expect people drafted would be, for the most part, seeing combat since it would mean we were in a war and needed replacements/enough people to fight.

[Guest]

So what? Such enormous differences of opinions prove that feminism is not monolithic and does not belong to any one (in this case, fringe) opinion.

 

So I repeat: being a feminist is not about turning women into men.

NM - I came out sounding moodier than intended ;) Edited December 5, 2015 by Arctic Mama

[happypamama]

Yes...the whole sexual harassment and rape culture of the military adds a new dimension to it.

 

To prevent this, should units be segregated by sex? I know there was a Women's Army Corp, but I need to google more to find out what they actually did.

This isn't in response to your post directly, and I don't really have a thought about women and the draft, as I can see reasons for and against, but since assault is a risk for our service members, some friends of mine developed this. It can be worn at all times, including the shower, so for any of you who have loved ones serving in the military, this might be a nice gift: http://m.spyderco.com/catalog/details.php?product=921

[SparklyUnicorn]

So what? Such enormous differences of opinions prove that feminism is not monolithic and does not belong to any one (in this case, fringe) opinion.

 

So I repeat: being a feminist is not about turning women into men.

 

I never said that.

 

What I said was stereotypical feminine behaviors don't tend to be celebrated among many feminists.  Many would like to see the pressures to conform to that ideal be done away with.  Not so much that they want to turn them into men, but that certain characteristics more often attributed to men are seen as more ideal.

 

If feminists cared so much about traditional issues facing women, then why have many feminist groups historically rejected to push for things that would help women facing issues more women than men face?  Such as affordable or free childcare?   Or protections from being discriminated against for being pregnant?  Etc.  Traditionally they have said we can't ask for "extra" if we want to be treated as equals.  My argument is if women are to be treated as equal then they need to have a more level playing field.  That isn't going to be the case if women choose to have children and there continues to be no protections in place. 

[SparklyUnicorn]

This isn't in response to your post directly, and I don't really have a thought about women and the draft, as I can see reasons for and against, but since assault is a risk for our service members, some friends of mine developed this. It can be worn at all times, including the shower, so for any of you who have loved ones serving in the military, this might be a nice gift: http://m.spyderco.com/catalog/details.php?product=921

 

Then again potentially this might end up used against a woman when being attacked by a much larger man or group of men. 

[Murphy101]

This isn't in response to your post directly, and I don't really have a thought about women and the draft, as I can see reasons for and against, but since assault is a risk for our service members, some friends of mine developed this. It can be worn at all times, including the shower, so for any of you who have loved ones serving in the military, this might be a nice gift: http://m.spyderco.com/catalog/details.php?product=921

One, it's not military issue so I suspect they wouldn't be allowed to keep it. Could be wrong though.

 

Two, it's be fellow military, so I hazard it's a problem of one or more of:

 

More than one assailant.

Being over powered.

Being ambushed/surprised.

 

Three, military usually means they already have weapons bigger than that available to them.

[happypamama]

Then again potentially this might end up used against a woman when being attacked by a much larger man or group of men.

Unfortunately, this is true. But so could a lot of things, and many times, a woman or smaller man could be attacked by a larger man or a group without any weapons other than their own hands. My friends were just trying to find something that was very easily accessible and able to be worn to the showers to provide a little something more than nothing.