FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB General Discussion Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 03-26-2003, 04:52 PM   #31
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: USA expat, now living in France
Posts: 1,153
Default

Men and women who volunteer and are qualified for the job should be allowed to do any job out there, including combat. I can't imagine anyone wanting to do that sort of work, but it takes all kinds.
Jolimont is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 08:25 AM   #32
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: California
Posts: 56
Default

Rufus,

Southernhybrid beat me to the punch. That's what I was trying to say.

Just to clarify, I personally am agreeing with you.

ab
Mochaloca is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 08:39 AM   #33
Veteran
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: The Execution State, USA
Posts: 5,031
Default

Quote:
Should the US limit women's exposure to combat?
Laws, no. If women are so stupid that they actually WANT to be chewed to pieces by bombs, bullets, and gas, who are we to slow 'em down?

My already-shaky faith in the overall intelligence of the human race just took another little dive.
The Naked Mage is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 10:19 AM   #34
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Twin Cities, USA
Posts: 3,197
Default

What is the history of selective service? When did the US implement this program? I was not able to find out this information from the selective service website.
Bree is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:04 PM   #35
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Location
Posts: 398
Default

I believe that it was instituted during the Reagan administration. I remember because I was in high school at the time, so it directly affected me.
everlastingtongue is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 02:52 PM   #36
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Mars
Posts: 2,231
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by lpetrich
I think that if anyone is to be drafted, it's jingoistic nationalists.
Nope anyone of the top 10 holders of wealth should be drafted and a draft like that should be instituted for any military conflict the US goes into.

Martin Buber
John Hancock is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 03:21 PM   #37
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: North of Boston
Posts: 1,392
Default

I say "yes", if the combat that is being referred to is old fashioned ground pounding infantry. The male is more physically and mentally attuned to the grinding pace of ground combat.

I know some history, and realise that the Red Army used women in combat during WW2. Women womaned artillery, drove tanks and were snipers. The reason I am not going to use this example to contradict my previous opposition to women in combat in the US military is that we are not in a situation like the USSR was during the German invasion. We just don't need women at the front when there are so many able males who are more suited to the job.

Women can do all sorts of other tasks and even combat roles, such as fighter pilots or firing weapons from ships. There is no need for women at the front. I will never support this, unless an enemy army invades the US.
sullster is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 04:06 PM   #38
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: PA
Posts: 46
Default

Allow me to add three Russian women became aces flying combat aircraft in WW2.

Lilya Litvak 12 kills
Yekaterina Budanova 17 kills
Olga Yamschikova 11 kills

Litvak was awarded Hero of the Soviet Union, the highest Russian decoration.
MattR is offline  
Old 03-27-2003, 04:15 PM   #39
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 2,082
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by sullster
I say "yes", if the combat that is being referred to is old fashioned ground pounding infantry. The male is more physically and mentally attuned to the grinding pace of ground combat.
Small point:

There are plenty of women who are physically more capable of enduring combat than I am.

The test should be "can this person actually do the work?" not "does this person have the right genitals?"

Men in the military have physical fitness tests to ensure they're capable of doing the work. If a woman can pass the same tests, then she is equally fit to fight.

Even if an "average" woman is weaker than an "average" man, it's real and specific people who sign up for the military, not gender averages.

Welcome to the 21st century. It's probably different to what you're used to.
orac is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:05 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.