The White House Says Women Should Be Required to Register for the Military Draft

[guillaumeb]

From the article:

The White House and the Pentagon on Thursday respectively announced support for requiring women in the U.S. to register for the military draft when they turn 18, USA Today reports.
The announcement makes Barack Obama the first president since Jimmy Carter to endorse universal registration for the Selective Service. The White House previously was pretty neutral on the subject, but in a new statement to USA Today, Ned Price, a spokesman for the National Security Council, revealed the administration had changed its stance:

http://nymag.com/thecut/2016/12/white-house-supports-requiring-women-to-register-for-draft.html

An attempt to normalize a permanent state of war in the US?

Edited to add:But what if people questioned why the US is constantly at war, and why politicians children and rich peoples' children rarely serve in these so-called necessary wars.

Further edited to add: If national service is such a good thing, such a necessary thing, any politicians who advocate for service should encourage their own children to volunteer and set an example. And such politicians should have previously volunteered themselves.

What if the US instead concentrated on self-defense instead of power projection and world dominance? Would a draft really be needed at all?

[metroins]

1. I think it's about equality

Why shouldn't women be in the draft?

[charlyvi]

3. Agreed.

And I'm woman. I've always wondered about the double standard.

[Skittles]

4. oh I don't know

because we really do NOT have true equality? not a single female president and little representation in congress - how about we start there?

btw, I served

[metroins]

11. Isn't this a step towards it?

Personally, I'm not one way or another.

I see pros and cons each way, but I don't see a glaring reason women shouldn't be drafted.

[Skittles]

57. no

how about equal pay first? Or better representation in congress?

[metroins]

63. Congress

Is based on votes, I can't see anything the federal government can do about that.

Equal pay, long debate.

I don't see why there's any push back on this change.

[Skittles]

64. long debate

ALRIGHTY THEN

[Hortensis]

96. Oh, brother. We should have mandatory universal draft.

Regardless of sex or socioeconomic status. The age range should be expanded to include all able-bodied adults who have not already served.

1. It is about equality.
2. It is also about VERY MUCH about saying no to unnecessary war. Nothing like a decades-long threat of being dragged away from a good job and loving family to guard a pipeline in 115-degree heat in Central Asia to get people involved in the decision-making process.

Right now less than 0.5% of Americans are in service, and 0% of Americans worry that they might be forced to serve by the people they elect to "represent" them. Our wars are just not a problem for us, and that's why we have so many of them.

[whathehell]

105. Equal pay first, yes. n/t

[MADem]

203. The military already does that "equal pay" thing.

Equal rights? Equal responsibilities.

So long as men can say "You women are not equal, because WE get drafted to 'protect' you while you 'keep the home fires burning'" then women are placed at a disadvantage.

Once women are subject to the draft just as men are, there's no damn reason to deny passage of the ERA. The able citizens are tasked with protecting the less able, and gender isn't an issue.

[NWCorona]

148. While I get your point. Being a vet, I have to point out

That the US military is as gender equal as you can get. It still has the good old boy feel but pay within the rank is the same.

As far as a woman president. That is a terrible reflection on us but I served long before Obama came along. It was just one white guy after the next.

[cwydro]

174. Excellent point.

I have mixed feelings on this however.

I served also.

[guillaumeb]

7. A better question might be:

why does approximately 60% of the discretionary budget go to war spending?

Or another question might be:

What if we really challenged the priorities and pronouncements of the 1% who profit from the constant wars?

[metroins]

18. It's your thread

If you want to steer it that way, feel free. I thought the thread was about women and the draft.

[guillaumeb]

40. I prefer to let it develop.

But what if people questioned why the US is constantly at war, and why politicians children and rich peoples' children rarely serve in these so-called necessary wars.

[metroins]

41. I'm not sure what I think

And I don't really want to have the discussion.

[guillaumeb]

43. Thank you for your contribution. eom

[SQUEE]

15. We have grown numb to sending our sons to kill and die..

Maybe, in sexist America, this is a brilliant move to keep us from a draft at all.

[metroins]

23. I don't think that's it

If we need a draft, we will use it.

[Travis_0004]

31. And we should be drafting men and women.

[guillaumeb]

44. More likely a war to employ the large number of people

who are losing out in this country. A country that is constantly at war needs a constant supply of bodies.

[elehhhhna]

70. Then pass the fucking equal rights amendment or shut up

[smirkymonkey]

84. Thank YOU!

[metroins]

142. I can't pass anything

I do know this is a step in the right direction.

[MuseRider]

155. I am posting once since the primaries were over

to say this is exactly it. ERA and we will, it is only fair. I do not give one damn if the military is equal, somehow I have not seen real proof of that and it seems like a pretty awful place for some women who have entered service. Actually I would rather see equality by dropping this mandatory sign up for everyone.

We get equal pay. We get protections by our government to assure us we can do whatever we want without fear of retribution because we are somehow threatening the men folk or they are just being inappropriate because they have been allowed to be that way since.....for fucking ever. Those who would treat us badly would suffer the consequences not women getting fired because the poor men just could not handle it. I would be happy to never be patted on the head or have my butt patted ever again.

I am long past giving a damn if men are upset by this. I have trained too many men to do a job that I was proficient at only to find out they were getting paid twice what I was and they were just beginning a job that I had been doing for years.

ERA or no go.

[MADem]

202. No one has been drafted since the early seventies.

All it is, is a list of eligible people IN THE EVENT of dire national emergency requiring a military response. It's not a "mandatory sign up." It's a "put your name on this list as a citizen who is of appropriate age to defend our nation in the event of a dire catastrophe."

During peacetime, no one is forced to join, and people who don't like it should avoid going near a recruiting office.

If all citizens--including the female ones-- are equally likely to be caught up in a future draft, it puts a bit more skin in the game. No more "Who cares, it doesn't apply to MEEEEE" stuff.

Equal rights? Equal responsibilities.

FWIW, some of the best servicemembers I've ever known were female. I have worked for women and had many staffers work for me who were female. Your command tends to run more smoothly with women in key positions--they just have better attention to detail, IMO and they pay close attention to how their subordinates are performing as well. Way better negotiating skills, much calmer, less prone to pointless anger and reckless displays of machismo, strategically smarter, and better planners/administrators, too. Long range thinkers who care about the end result even if they aren't going to be there to see it. They're also absent less--even when you factor in pregnancy/maternity leave, military women miss less work than men. They're not getting in bar fights and breaking bones quite so often, you see.

You can't demand an ERA until the dumb ass STATES get their acts together. It's not like this hasn't been tried for decades, now. The draft is federal.


One of the excuses many states use to deny it is "Well, women aren't subject to the draft, ergo, they are NOT EQUAL." Last time the ERA failed, we heard that one a LOT.

Take that excuse out of their tool box.

Perhaps we can eventually persuade the Supremes to change "men" to "persons" in the "created equal" piece of our founding document.

[kcr]

73. I know a better way to make it equal. Get rid of it! n/t

[LWolf]

95. Because nobody should be "in the draft."

I'm all for equality; the way forward to equality on this issue is to remove the requirement that boys register.

Nobody should register, and no government should be able to draft people into its military.

[treestar]

101. Agreed, they have fought to be

in the military and to have equal opportunity there. This undermines that.

[stone space]

182. I don't know any women who fought to be forced by men to kill and die without their consent.

Many women who I know would prefer to have some control over their own bodies.

I want my daughters' right to say "no" to President Trump to be respected.

[treestar]

199. That's a different thing IMO as women want to be

in the military - there are women who want to and do get in and want to have the roles that are currently closed to them. Heck the military is the last refuge of the sexist as they can say that men are physically stronger generally and the only ones that can carry these heavy packs they apparently have to carry everywhere.

[Turbineguy]

2. Very funny

as a parting shot. Repubs like to send Democrats to fight their wars.

[guillaumeb]

8. The 1% ALWAYS send the 99% to fight wars for the 1%. eom

[Turbineguy]

14. I was thinking of

Operation Yellow Elephant.

[guillaumeb]

16. I am unfamiliar with that reference. eom

[Turbineguy]

20. It was a program to get Recruiters to go to

pro Iraq War rallies to sign up people for the military.

Eventually the Recruiters quit going.

[guillaumeb]

27. Far too many recruits?

Just joking.

[Iggo]

197. Okay, now I get it.

Yellow Elephant.

[TheWayitIs]

5. Why did he wait until after the election

This would have put Hillary over in a huge landslide

Great timing Obama

[philosslayer]

9. I agree

This is a very popular position. All those rural voters would've flocked to Hillary Clinton

[NobodyHere]

25. I doubt this issue is high on anyone's list.

[dhol82]

6. I totally support requiring women to register

If we are a war mongering country then everybody should be in the mix.

Makes the revolution more equal.

[guillaumeb]

10. But everybody would not be in the mix.

The rich and connected generally are not included in the sacrifices.

[dhol82]

26. I think there should be no exclusions

Everybody in the mix. No rich person exemption.

[guillaumeb]

30. Or children of politicians?

I predict there would be an explosion of illnesses requiring exemption.

[dhol82]

33. They should then be examined by physicians of the opposite party.

No exclusions!!!

That might possibly slow down the war mongering. Maybe.

[Warren DeMontague]

67. the draft and registering for the draft are two separate questions.

Everyone has to register. In the unlikely eventuality a draft is reinstated, then your point would apply.

[guillaumeb]

115. Which simply moves the "unequal treatment" bar down a bit. eom

[HassleCat]

12. Register for something.

I favor universal national service with exemptions only for those absolutely incapable of making a contribution. Of course, that would mean a bigger Peace Corps and Americorps and other programs hated by Republicans, so it's not likely to happen.

[guillaumeb]

19. I would favor universal service limited to domestic areas only.

And that service could be written to include teaching and working in economically depressed areas. But the 1% would still not really be affected.

[Flavius Aetius]

13. I had no problem with opening up combat roles for women

Except the infantry, spent 11 years in the infantry. But if the powers that be want to make that mistake then if my son has to go then my neighbors daughter should have to also.

[Travis_0004]

35. I'm fine with women in infantry, but they should have to meet the same standard

If the person next to you is shot, and we weights, 260 lbs (even if he is fit, he is wearing a lot of gear), then its your job to get him out of harms way.

I weight 230 lbs (I'm 6'5). Could somebody who is 130 pick me up and carry me to safety? I'm not military, and I realize that if I joined I would likely loose a few pounds, but I'm still might tip the scales at 300+ pounds with enough gear on.

[Flavius Aetius]

49. In principle i agree

In my other life i was 6 foot 235 and 275 in full gear. Any person that could pick me me up and take off running with me then they would always have a place at my side. I purged my teams of the weak, stupid i could train but could not overcome a person no matter how much heart they had that was just weak, that person would kill us all!!

[MADem]

85. You do realize that exoskeleton technology along with

robot tech will have the ability to completely mitigate strength differences? That's your "future soldier." What will matter is brains, not brawn.

[gollygee]

17. I think they should take care of the rape problem in the military first

And then I'd be fine with it.

[guillaumeb]

22. What if they took care of the "invading problem" with our politicians,

and the armed forces would be much smaller and less in need of bodies?

[gollygee]

29. That would be useful

But unlikely over the next four years.

[bdamomma]

144. exactly.

but you won't see the 1% sending their kids to war. Hell no.

[MADem]

198. I've been in favor of this for decades. Equal rights demand equal responsibilities.

The more women in senior leadership, the less that kind of crap happens.

You don't get senior leaders who are female without increasing the talent pool at the lower ranks. It needs to be perceived as a career for more than just the few who tough it out to get to middle and upper management ranks.

[milestogo]

21. Lets pass the Equal Rights Amendment first of all.

Then we can talk about equal obligations.

[guillaumeb]

24. I remember that one.

Still waiting for enough states to sign on.

[dhol82]

32. We were one state short

That was Phyllis Schlafly.
May she burn in hell.

[guillaumeb]

39. She might be.

She constantly preached that women should stay at home while she worked as a lawyer and lobbyist.

[guillaumeb]

36. Except when it affects politicians and rich people. eom

[stone space]

94. No, they don't. The penalties you have set up are for ordinary folks.

I think even they have to register

Rich folks who refuse to register will not be denied an education.

[stone space]

104. You don't have a right to force your guns on women.

And you don't have a right to deny women an education.

[suffragette]

145. Since they can and do pay out of pocket, they don't face the same requirement.

The rich always make sure there's a loophole for their children.

[suffragette]

163. It's not truly the same requirement if consequences differ.

[suffragette]

176. When loopholes are available to rich people, but not to poor, then the requirement is not equal.

It is designed to be that way. Men with few resources have to bear the higher burden of the responsibility or be penalized even more.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/storyline/wp/2014/10/16/america-may-never-have-a-draft-again-but-were-still-punishing-low-income-men-for-not-registering/?utm_term=.0dbb9041221b

[suffragette]

181. Tying penalties to financial resources necessary to those outside the rich creates an inequal

Process.

Penalties for a requirement meant to be equal should not be based on financial need or not.

[stone space]

83. Men forcing guns on women is not "equality".

Equality is a great thing

It's just men forcing guns on women.

[stone space]

90. This is an attempt to deny women an education. That is what this is all about. (nt)

[stone space]

93. Can you prpomise that women who refuse to register will be allowed access to education?

You are just wrong

The register just like men. They can get any education they want even if they fail to register. They just are not eligible for federal student loans. Fair enough if you do not follow federal law.

How does a women go about getting an education after men have denied her access to all educational grants and loans for not being man enough to shoot people?

Are you assuming that she is independently wealthy?

[stone space]

103. So you fully support denying women access to education if they refuse to pick up a gun, huh?

They decide to not follow federal law, they don't get federal benefits. I guess then they would have to get private loans and grants.they follow federal law, they get those benefits.

Why am I not surprise.



You've outed yourself.

[stone space]

143. You are advocating denying women an education.

Simply because they refuse to pick up a gun and kill for you.

That's NRA-level sickness.

The same sort of vindictive Lucky Gunner complex that causes Sandy Hook victims' families to be attacked and bankrupted in court.

[SQUEE]

156. C.O. status is still in effect.

You've gone and done your little trick again.

Such a martyr, building your own pyre and setting it alight.

But you keep making that stand

[stone space]

158. Simply not true.

C.O. status is still in effect.

There is no such thing for Draft Registration.

[SQUEE]

164. But there is for service.

So it seems you are adverse more to doing the service(and paying as well) than you are to the guns.

That latency you exhibit sure does serve you well.

[stone space]

168. You claimed that there was a CO status available for Draft Registration.

You were wrong.

[SQUEE]

171. No sir, I did not.

Do not lie and say that did.

reread what I said, and then apologize for lying about my words.

[stone space]

165. By attacking their right to an education.

You are attacking their basic and fundamental human rights.

[NickB79]

150. Should men be denied an education for not picking up a gun?

Because the current laws state that men who refuse the draft cannot get access to federal education funding.

Do you have an issue with this policy in general, or only when it's applied to women? Because having an issue with the law itself can be a respected argument. Holding the belief it's acceptable to deny men an education but not women for the same offense? Not so much.

[stone space]

151. There's a reason why I still don't have a BA to this day. (nt)

[smirkymonkey]

34. Fuck that. Pass the ERA and we'll register.

[guillaumeb]

37. Not much likelihood of that.

That might imply real equality.

[smirkymonkey]

38. Then fuck women going to war.

Sorry, can't have it both ways.

[gollygee]

42. No ERA, high chance of getting raped, but apparently that's no big deal

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/soraya-chemaly/military-sexual-assault-facts_b_4281704.html

I don't think anyone should be forced to go into this environment when there is such a high chance of victimization.

[guillaumeb]

46. And that applies to both sexes.

The brutalization, the exposure to an atmosphere where violence is glorified and normalized. And if there was no constant war there would be no need for an endless supply of recruits.

[gollygee]

48. Women have all of that AND a very high chance of being sexually assaulted

I agree that it is bad for everyone, but don't dismiss the additional dangers women face, from people they're fighting beside and should be able to trust.

Edited to add: This sounds a lot like "All lives matter."

[guillaumeb]

50. I have read numerous stories about rape in the military.

And if all lives did actually matter, there would be no need to say it. But all lives obviously do not matter to some people.

[gollygee]

51. The statement "All lives matter" in response to "Black lives matter"

Is a dismissal of black lives. And your posts have read very much like a dismissal of rape in the military.

[guillaumeb]

52. Please point them out.

I cannot find any such statements, but if you need clarification, I can do so.

[Skittles]

59. thank you

fuck these people who deny women basic equality, but then think it's "fair" they register for the draft

and I say that as someone who SERVED

[Nancyswidower]

53. Some of the best Officers I served under were women....

why would draft registration be dependent on the ERA...that's dead..has been since the 70's but why kill a pool of excellent recruits? Seems to be counter intuitive...and we'll never have a draft...

[stone space]

82. Actually, many still will not. They still haven't figured out how to get men to register.

Fuck that. Pass the ERA and we'll register.

No reason to believe that it will me any easier with women.

[bigtree]

45. equality is a good thing, a responsible and overdue goal

...but before we subject women to the draft, we should make certain that they will find an equal playing field on all levels when they serve.

[guillaumeb]

47. Which effectively closes off this avenue.

If women and non-whites truly had an equal playing field, this would be a different country.

[bigtree]

54. well, they'll probably move forward with this

...and it will only deepen the argument in favor of issues like equal pay, access, and other diminished or denied rights.

[guillaumeb]

55. I would hope that such a move would open a long overdue discussion

about why such a huge military is needed at all. Investment in infrastructure rebuilding and home weatherization and expanding mass transit would employ more people and teach more skills.

But such investment and training would not allow US politicians to use the threat of military force when dealing with the world.

[Doreen]

56. Well,

we want equal pay and equal opportunity we have to take the good with the bad. As long as we are allowed to do any of the things the men do then there is no reason we should be restricted from the draft.

[guillaumeb]

58. Agreed, if equal pay and opportunity and treatment were actually offered.

And if the US stopped constantly looking for places to invade there would be no pressing need for a draft either.

[Skittles]

60. how about equal pay and opportunity first?

so we can actually have INFLUENCE in the military decisions

[stone space]

61. This will deny many women an education, under the ongoing Pacifist Purges of the Solomon Amendment.

There's a reason why I still don't have an undergradate degree to this day.

There will be lots of women who will be purged from higher education if this passes.

[stone space]

92. A PhD. That's not an undergraduate degree.

I thought you have a degree?

I was admitted to graduate school without an undergraduate degree.

This is not a realistic option for those who will be purged from higher education under the Solomon Amendment.

[stone space]

136. You guessed wrong.

I guess that did not hurt you. I am sure woman can get an education just like you did. It seems you were not denied an education.

You are being disingenuous here.

Please tell me your secret plan for women who refuse to let you force your guns on them to get an education.

Prove to me that that this isn't some bullshit way to deny women an education.

You want to deny educational loans and grants to women, but you turn around and claim that this won't effect their educational opportunities.

Unless you have some secret plan up your sleeve for these women to get an education, the claim is a Trump level lie, and it's time to start calling a lie a lie.

[stone space]

161. Have I suggested denying anybody an education?

Wow, getting a little hostile

It is you being hostile with your anti-education stance.

Denying an education to your fellow citizens is a hostile act.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

62. FUCK NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not until all branches of the military treat sexual assualt like the crime it is.

[NRQ891]

121. I've always thought it would be better to get men out of war, than

to get women into it.

Oh, I know it's impossible to get them out completely, but we sure could be involved in fewer of them.

Trump might have been lying, but he played on this, here's Chris Mathews saying just that

[50 Shades Of Blue]

137. So have I.

My political awareness was formed in the 60's and I imprinted on Buffy Sainte-Marie's Universal Soldier. Well, Donovan's version.

[Warren DeMontague]

65. Either everyone registers, or no one does.

I'm not sure how that is avoidable, especially given the fact that we are working on getting society to be more accommodating of a non-binary gender reality.

[pnwmom]

71. Not until the ERA passes, giving women equal rights to men.

That failed because of the "concern" that it might subject women to the draft. No way would I support a draft without getting the ERA passed first. It would never get passed if the draft passed first.

[Warren DeMontague]

72. There is a difference between registration and a draft.

I registered. I've never been drafted.

But again, how do we maintain the status quo for people who dont identify on a binary gender chart?

[pnwmom]

74. The ERA will help everyone who doesn't currently benefit

from the current laws giving males special standing.

And once we have a registration, anyone on it is eligible to be drafted, if there were a draft. Women shouldn't be on this list till the ERA is passed. Otherwise we lose the only leverage we have.

[Warren DeMontague]

76. Personally, I don't think we should have a registration for the thing, at all.

For one, an actual draft is politically untenable and has been since 1972, so the purpose of the exercise is questionable, at best.

Two, the notion of a draft is wrong. It was wrong during Vietnam when the Boomers were opposed to it, it's still wrong even though many of them seem to secretly think it might not be such a bad idea for the "special snowflake" millennials who take 30 seconds too long to call their name with their latte at Starbucks.

Third, and in the same vein, personally I think the track record of the US in terms of moral authority and military adventurism since at least Korea is so shitty, they simply can't be trusted with the absolute authority to drag young Americans off to war against their will, ever again.

And I'm all for the ERA. Should have passed in the 70s.

But you didn't answer my question, which is, assuming the ERA doesn't come back to life and get passed; how exactly do we maintain the status quo- namely, "men" register, "women" don't, if we have moved beyond gender binary categories? Specifically.

[pnwmom]

77. I don't how they're doing it, but they've been handling

that issue for years.

[Warren DeMontague]

78. I suspect that's not entirely true.

Particularly WRT transgender individuals. Maybe they just go by gender as specified by Birth Certificate, but I doubt too many people here would call that a terribly enlightened approach.

Now, maybe that doesn't matter. But something prompted the White House to take this stand.

[davidn3600]

79. Im not sure this is really leverage unless there actually is threat of a draft

This country is never going to do a military draft for a Vietnam-like war ever again. The political cost would be astronomical.

The only time you are going to see a draft is for WWIII.

And there is very little political steam behind ERA these days. That's the problem. Even when Democrats gained power in 2009, they didn't push for an ERA, they instead passed Lilly Ledbetter. The ERA barely gets mentioned even in Democratic debates. Hillary only rarely brought it up despite being the first female nominee for president. Even if Hillary had won and Democrats retook Congress, I doubt ERA would make any progress at all.

[Warren DeMontague]

80. and WWIII wouldn't be fought with infantry, it would be fought with thermonuclear bombs.

So it's a moot point.

The idea of registering still strikes me as ridiculous, all these years after I had to do it. It should be done away with entirely.

[Ilsa]

172. I'm with you.

Until women have full equality under the law, this will continue to be one thing that should remain unequal.

I don't think there should be any registration for a draft.

[treestar]

201. It might be a good excuse

The voting age was lowered to 18 because people pointed out that if you are old enough to be drafted and go die for this country you are old enough to vote. So if you have it that women can be drafted it could create the same kind of pressure to pass the ERA.

[demmiblue]

66. Not until the ERA passes, and not until our female troops are protected. n/t

[guillaumeb]

116. Given the general level of misogyny, and given the stories about sexua violence in the military,

that is not something that will happen quickly.

[Laffy Kat]

68. If you require women to register for the draft...

Pass the effing Equal Rights Amendment. Then I'm all in.

[guillaumeb]

117. Still waiting on that one. Still waiting for the GOP dominated states

to enter the modern world.

[SomethingNew]

69. I've got a better idea:

how about NOBODY registers for the fucking draft. What a bullshit policy.

[guillaumeb]

118. Welcome to DU, and I agree. It is nonsense. eom

[SammyWinstonJack]

147. +1000000!

[Ilsa]

177. I'm on board. nt

[LeftyMom]

75. How about fixing the military's rape problem first?

[guillaumeb]

119. How about fixing the rape problem in the entire country?

An even bigger issue that is reflected in the military.

[stone space]

81. Don't register! Refuse and resist! You have a right to say "NO"!

Don't ever let anybody tell you that you don't have a right to say "no".

[guillaumeb]

120. A lot of us did just that during the Vietnam war.

And the government eventually declined to pursue the matter.

[HAB911]

97. Christians WILL NEVER ALLOW IT

Women are to be on a pedestal, yet subservient.........total cognitive dissonance

[whathehell]

106. Please qualify that as "Fundamentalist" or RW Christians,

That viewpoint may apply to the Fundies, who are, in fact, a MINORITY of Christians in this country. It certainly doesn't describe my upbringing or that of Mainstream Christians, who are, in fact, the majority.

[treestar]

99. Nothing wrong with that

the boys have to register. There's no draft, but they just have to register.

[guillaumeb]

123. And what if the US concentrated on rebuilding itself rather than military force

projection? Create jobs here.

[treestar]

200. I agree but that's another issue

I don't favor using war, but just that if women are treated equally, the military should be included in that. Use of the military unnecessarily is another question and I would oppose that regardless.

[alarimer]

107. No registration for anyone.

No draft ever.

[ancianita]

108. Until the ERA is passed, women do not have a legal basis for joining the military.

They shouldn't be fighting for a constitution under which they have no equal standing or protections.

The ERA died for numerous reasons. Get the Amendment passed and then we can talk about women being drafted or even registered.

And don't get me started about rape in the military.

[guillaumeb]

125. Recommended.

The military is a culture dominated by violence. Is it any wonder that some in that culture feel that sexual violence is acceptable?

[MineralMan]

109. Combine that with universal voter registration at 18,

and I'm all in. And make that registration permanent and completely exempt from state and local restrictions for presidential elections. You walk in, show your draft/registration card and vote at any voting place for the presidential race. If you want to vote in local elections, you'd need to show evidence that your residence is in that district, but that's it.

Everyone who is a U.S. citizen and 18 years of age or over should be able to vote for President anywhere. Period.

[LP2K12]

110. This!

This would solve so many issues.

I agree 100%.

[guillaumeb]

126. But that might encourage voting MM!!!

And we know that the GOP hates that idea.

[AngryAmish]

112. It is every parents dream of burying both their sons and daughters

thrown away in stupid wars. This is change we all can believe in.

[guillaumeb]

128. My personal winner so far.

And this idea is testament to the idea that "we hold these truths to be self-evident". The truth in this case being the US needs troops to enforce US hegemony.

[mainer]

122. It will actually have a good effect: make us resistant to wars

because we won't send both our sons and our daughters to fight unless we are absolutely certain that war is necessary.

[guillaumeb]

129. However, the US has literally always beens at war.

Overseas or here.

[NRQ891]

124. I've always thought it would be better to get men out of war, than

to get women into it.

Oh, I know it's impossible to get them out completely, but we sure could be involved in fewer of them.

Trump might have been lying, but he played on this, here's Chris Mathews saying just that

(sorry for the double post, replied to wrong post before)

[guillaumeb]

130. But war is the most used tactic in the US arsenal.

It is used far more than diplomacy.

[NRQ891]

127. 'you've come a long way, baby'

and this notice says you're taking a long trip, that just might be 'one way'

[guillaumeb]

131. Equal rights to be used in war, but treated as second class at home?

And that has applied to so many types of US citizens who have fought in US wars.

[NRQ891]

139. what I said was 'get people out of war, not into it' nt

[Orsino]

132. Everyone, or no one.

I lean toward no one, myself.

[guillaumeb]

133. Agreed. No one.

If national service is such a good thing, such a necessary thing, any politicians who advocate for service should encourage their own children to volunteer and set an example. And such politicians should have previously volunteered themselves.

[Orsino]

134. I would rather build a country...

...that people would fight for the chance to fight to defend. Not one that retains the specter of involuntary servitude.

[guillaumeb]

138. A nice observation about "involuntary servitude".

If the trillions spent on war had instead been spent on jobs and infrastructure here, the US could have easily afforded high speed rail, and solar for all, and a guaranteed national income, and a living wage. Instead, there is a system that massively profits the 1% who own the war industries.

[Historic NY]

140. The first 22 female officers sworn in after graduation from WP in June for active combat role...

have now completed advance training and have been assigned to active infantry & armor commands.


http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/04/15/army-women-new-rules-infantry-armor-officers/83036812/

[guillaumeb]

141. Which is a sign of progress that women are now, in 2016, finally considered "fit"

for these positions. Maybe someday the ERA will finally pass also.

[Nonhlanhla]

146. Sure why not. But first...

ERA
Abortion rights
Equal representation in Congress and a female president.

Then we can talk.

[guillaumeb]

149. All excellent points,

and they seem even further away after this last election. Almost seems like there are two countries co-existing uneasily at best in the same geographic entity. In Trumpland, it is 1951. Where I live it is 2016.

[Nonhlanhla]

189. I recommend Ibuprofen for the headache

you'll get from that head banging.

Oh, and waaaay to miss the point.

[Warpy]

152. Will they issue camo slings for nursing babies

or will we be expected to pump on patrol while the males all smoke cigarettes? Will they bother to lighten our packs when we're heavily pregnant?

Why do rich politicians always think the children of the poor should submit to a couple of years of slave labor for their country, while their own spawn escape through legal loopholes or education abroad?

Fuck this noise. Some of us of both sexes are warriors and that should be respected. For the rest, it needs to be voluntary except in times of national emergency--and that applies to the scions of bloated plutocrats, also.

[guillaumeb]

154. The baby in front will balance the pack in the back.

And yes, service is generally though of by the elites as something reserved for the working class. I read about draft riots in the US civil war so this is obviously not a new thing.

[Warpy]

178. It has never been fair, not since the Middle Ages

when kings and lords were expected to join in the slaughter. No amount of loophole closure will force a multinational robber baron to risk the hide of his own offspring. It's never fair because it can't be made fair.

In the Civil War, it did work to the advantage of a few. My own great grand uncle took $300 to take the place of a rich man's son in the Union army, and $300 was a great deal of money back on the gold standard. He socked it away and it provided the seed money to become quite wealthy once he'd survived the war. Most didn't survive.

Now, of course, they'd just pile Junior onto the family jet and send him someplace safe until he aged out.

[guillaumeb]

183. An interesting family story. Thanks.

The examples of Mitt Romney, and Dick Cheney, and George W. Bush, to cite just a few, or war hawks who could not enlist themselves. Nor did their children. I suppose the lack of a family connection makes it easier for politicians to send other peoples' children to fight and die.

[Squinch]

179. I agree with this. If we are going to be a warring nation, we should all share the burden.

[guillaumeb]

184. Or, we could decide that we wish to follow the example of Sweden and

Switzerland.

[Squinch]

185. Yes, but we would need a lot more support for a move to that position than we currently have.

If all of us stood to suffer for NOT adopting that position, maybe we would get to that position sooner.

[guillaumeb]

186. Yes, that is a possibility.

And war is one of the only actions that generally receives bipartisan support.

[Squinch]

187. Because so few really pay for it directly. We just send those kids out to do our dirty work

and we are all able to turn our heads away when we do it.

(We all pay, and pay dearly for it in lost services due to the expense of the Military industrial complex, but most people don't look at that.)

[guillaumeb]

188. And the wounded veterans pay for it with shattered lives,

PTSD, death in many cases. And the families pay also.

And that does not even include the shattered lives in the countries that are invaded, or the cost of rebuilding those countries.

[Squinch]

190. Yep. But so many of us don't ever have to see that. And we treat them like shit when

they come home too. The idea that we have homeless veterans is sickening, and completely unnecessary. The idea that many vets get substandard medical care likewise. Why do we have CHARITIES that help wounded veterans? Why would we ever require wounded vets to resort to charities?

If we all had a stake in this, maybe we would do the right thing by them.

[guillaumeb]

192. John Mccain recently introduced a bill to voucherize the VA.

Given that the VA is an example of government run socialized medicine, it must be destroyed by the GOP.

But hang that purple ribbon up and wear those flag pins GOP politicians.

[Squinch]

194. While you are, first of all, paying soldiers so little that they qualify for food stamps, and then

taking away their food stamps.

[guillaumeb]

195. A friend of mine was in the Marine Corps for a few years.

He has eight children, admittedly a lot, and qualified for food stamps and other assistance.

But the war industries are very profitable so I suppose that is a sort of balance.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

191. Good!

Thanks, Obama!

I'm confident that fewer people will want war if it means more women getting killed.

[guillaumeb]

193. I am not as confident as you.

But I hope you are correct.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

196. The psychopaths at the top won't care, but more regular citizens won't like it.

I asked my oldest brother about the draft and how our sisters (close to his age) acted while he was stressed about being sent to the idiotic Vietnam conflict.

He said they were mostly concerned about dances, dates and the like. That conflict might as well have been between aliens in a faraway galaxy as far as they were concerned. One sister suddenly worried about it when her boyfriend was sent over there.

More people to get screwed = more people to protest.