Should women register for the draft at 18?

Yes: They serve in the military already.

No: Men can fight better, plus there hasn't been a draft since 1972.

Give me your thoughts- I have an oppinon, but I'll wait until I get some responses.

Are you crazy??? Of course they shouldn´t, that would make them as stupid as you men! And if the men were just a tiny little bit smarter they would refuse to join the army too! From violence comes ONLY more violence! And that is the TRUTH! So stop the insanity, please!

(ah, ah) prejudice! (said while sneezing)

Just kidding.

If the draft is in effect for men so should it be for women. Most women in the US strive for the equality with men idea. If it is equality that is wanted then both sides of the equation apply. You can not have one without the other or it makes mockery of the concept.

Originally posted by wet1
If the draft is in effect for men so should it be for women. Most women in the US strive for the equality with men idea. If it is equality that is wanted then both sides of the equation apply. You can not have one without the other or it makes mockery of the concept.

My compliments to the author, Wet1, it is true that women seek equality therefore why not have them register as well.

Quote;Bebelina,

Are you crazy??? Of course they shouldn´t, that would make them as stupid as you men! And if the men were just a tiny little bit smarter they would refuse to join the army too! From violence comes ONLY more violence! And that is the TRUTH! So stop the insanity, please!

hmmm, well you say from violence comes "only" more violence! this is correct however without a defence, we would be destroyed, invaded, terrorised, nuked, killed. See with out the military were would we be?.

However it's necesary to understand the full scope of the problem, the US has't been completely honest either, the real war over Afganistan is not Bin Laden, but the resources of Afganistan mainly petroleum, and who is going to control it, will it be a friendly goverment, or a foe of the US's interests.

There's even thoughts that our own goverment perpetraded the events of 9/11 this remains to be known as yet, however there's more than meets the eye on this one!.

www.whatreallyhappened.com

Check it out!!.

You are sooo wrong!
Yes, women do want equality, and will get it too, but not at the price of descending to male stupidity by warfaring! Grow up boys, your toys are destroying the Earth and humanity!
Weapons and violence is NOT the peaceful solution, how can that not be obvious? Call it defense if you want to play chicken, but that´s not the right word, the right word is violence and fear. And once you have managed to get rid of your own fear, then the nations fear and then the humanitys fear will also dissapear. And then no weapons will be needed anymore. So you will just have to find new toys, that are not so destructive boys, because the game is over now. And it has been over for a long time, you have just not realized it yet. And this war is the final futile battle to make those of you that still wants to play the fear-game a last chance to get it. And if you don´t , you will die, by your own hand, mirrored in your enemy.

However did you even take a glance at the cite? I ponder to wonder that you've not!.

There's always been wars, it's part of why civilization has advanced, it is unfortunate that a country must have a defence, however if we wouldn't we would be invaded, your country btw, is an exception, "the worlds money is kept there"

So yes you've got nothing to fear, and it's not fear, that we've responded to the assults to our nation. either!!

If someone was to punch you! in the nose, would you try and talk to this individual that she has done wrong?, if you do, and she punches you again, and again, and again will you defend yourself? or just cry out that there's to much violence in the world and let her keep on punching you?

About the punching in the nose then..
I would of course try to stop him, not by punching back thought, and call for help. Policemen are not the only people in the world that are willing to help others. And so far, I haven´t actually ever seen them HELP anyone eihter, rather the opposite.
I single individual can of course have psychological and emotional problems that would lead to violent behaviour, but then that person needs help, not get beaten back. That would only increase this already disturbed persons view of violence as a way of communicating. Because that is what it´s all about, violence is ultimately, when you scrutinize it, a cry for help, a last chance of getting through to the outer world outside of themselves, when nothing else helps, when nobody listens.
Would beating or killing that person help?

Can a whole nation concist of emotionally and psychologically disturbed individuals? I don´t think so, but unfortunately those who run them are often like that. And then they send out distress signals to the population that in turn also get worried and afraid. And the sad part is that there is nothing to be afraid of but fear itself. If you send out fear, fear is what you will get.
So what the individual can do is to stop the wheel of karma, by not retaliating. By protesting against violence, by asking for help, and give help instead. To trust people to help. And if everybody did that, then it would work. I know it all seems impossible now, but we must start somewhere, with ourselves, with our family and friends, with our community and so on, and finally the WORLD will catch up.

And after all, isn´t that a more positive view of the future than what many others are representing? Isn´t peace better than war? It finally comes down to that simple question. :)

Originally posted by Bebelina
About the punching in the nose then..
I would of course try to stop him, not by punching back thought, and call for help. Policemen are not the only people in the world that are willing to help others. And so far, I haven´t actually ever seen them HELP anyone eihter, rather the opposite.
I single individual can of course have psychological and emotional problems that would lead to violent behaviour, but then that person needs help, not get beaten back. That would only increase this already disturbed persons view of violence as a way of communicating. Because that is what it´s all about, violence is ultimately, when you scrutinize it, a cry for help, a last chance of getting through to the outer world outside of themselves, when nothing else helps, when nobody listens.
Would beating or killing that person help?

Can a whole nation concist of emotionally and psychologically disturbed individuals? I don´t think so, but unfortunately those who run them are often like that. And then they send out distress signals to the population that in turn also get worried and afraid. And the sad part is that there is nothing to be afraid of but fear itself. If you send out fear, fear is what you will get.
So what the individual can do is to stop the wheel of karma, by not retaliating. By protesting against violence, by asking for help, and give help instead. To trust people to help. And if everybody did that, then it would work. I know it all seems impossible now, but we must start somewhere, with ourselves, with our family and friends, with our community and so on, and finally the WORLD will catch up.

And after all, isn´t that a more positive view of the future than what many others are representing? Isn´t peace better than war? It finally comes down to that simple question. :)




Thanks, so you know of my worry, I'm concerned that this goverment, The US, has ominiously constructed a war machine for the benefit of some larger picture of which we are not all aware of.

And of course I full heartedly agree with you, however reality seems at the moment it's not headed towards this utopia of the world we all dream of. "A world of peace and profit for all nations at an equal play ground". But when you have comprehention of the bigger picture, such as the people never start wars, only our goverments do, run by scinical individuals from both sides of the pond, we are all doomed by such scinicism of our so called elected leaders.

Keep reading articles in that cite, I find it very interesting in what our respective nations are doing, to hoax, fool, and lye to our respective citizens of the world.

It's all very tragic, really!.

Let me make myself clear here. I said yes, the draft is an equal opportunity process.

The US Government has long held the idea that women should not be exposed to combat. For the same time it was permissible for women to serve but not in the combat arms section. It was from the women themselves that the chance for combat and insertion into the combat ranks came from. Not from the men, who at the time thought that the chance of women falling into enemy hands and facing the chance of rape, was an unacceptable idea. It was the women in the service that brought this to court and forced this change. They are now able to be fighter pilots and enter into some forms of combat related service.

But if women would have equal rights and pay then equal risk is part of it. Many jobs and not just in military service receive extra pay for job hazards. To receive the pay one must be willing to expose themselves to the risk. This has nothing to do with war; it has to do with what compensation one would receive for doing a particular job. Just because you serve in the military does not guarantee that you will be exposed to combat.

Bebelina is quite clear in that she wants the chance for equality, she does not want to accept the fact that equality comes at a price as it always has. This too has nothing to do with the military other than to have equality you must pay the price. It is earned not given. The same as the right to freedom. Many people died to see that you did not lose that right. But that is the cost for there are those who are not happy with you being able to do as you please. They would take that right and enrich themselves at your cost. If you wish freedom and equality it must be bought. Not with money but with the willingness to fight for what you believe in. When reason will not work then there is no other option. You can not argue with someone holding a gun and having the willingness to use it. You must either knuckle under or ante up.

It boils down to how far you want equality to go, im male (i wont say it its a good or bad thing) and all through my life iv been taught, never hit women, always be polite and curtious towards them which i have.
The problem comes when some 15 stone lump of lard woman trys to start a fight with you, do i smack her in the mouth to make her leave me alone?
Do i give her the biggest kickin she ever taken in her life?
No.
Why becuse its like beatin up on a child, women deserve eqality in regard to public life (being able to vote get a job be free etc) but in the armed forces they are a distraction and cause problems.
I have taken punches in the face from women in the past and if truth be told even after the impact of the blow i never wanted to fight back, i dont hit women same as i wouldent hit a child.
Besides the best response is to laugh, if someone gives you there best shot and you laugh they get scared quickly and leave :).

From the beginning to the end. Same goes for freedom, we are all born free. These are foundational human rights, if fact not just human, these are birthrights for all life all over the world.

We don´t have to earn it, we should not have to fight for it and that should be so deeply implanted in our minds that it shouldn´t even be an issue.

Benji made a good point, you don´t hit children, and we are all children.
If we raise our children not to hit, they will not.
And we should view all our human fellows as our own children. To love and respect them, and treat them as equals. Let´s see the division of the world into countires as a division of a large house into rooms instead, where our family members live.

If your children are fighting over a toy, will you kill or hit the child that strikes the first blow? And would that make the other child feel more secure?
Two wrongs does not make a right. :)

Quote; Bebelina: " From the beginning to the end. Same goes for freedom, we are all born free."

This is far from truth, Bebelina, children in Cuba under Fidel Castro are not born free, neither are children under communist China born free, neither children in Afganistan under Taliban rule born free, neither the children that were born in the Formal Soviet Union born free.

Quot; 2: "These are foundational human rights, if fact not just human, these are birthrights for all life all over the world."

This is true, and honest, however the tyrants of society from past till present have not always observed this fundamental human birthright. When a tyrant, dictator, or a religious zealot takes over a country by force these are rights that are waved, and replaced by servitude of the "cause" or what have you of these tyrants.

Quote 3; "We don´t have to earn it, we should not have to fight for it and that should be so deeply implanted in our minds that it shouldn´t even be an issue. "

True, however when a nation lives under a dictatorship or by communists, or religious zealots, and the people rise against their opressors "this makes freedom an *earned* right" look at the historie of the US, with the fight against England, it was the lives of these individuals that paved the way to what we call a free nation.

So in encence when freedom can't be had by logical means i.e. a democracy by a republic, with checs and balances of elected leaders, and one lives under a "Taliban" and those who oppose are put to death, when enough people rize against such tyrany, this makes their "freedom an *earned* right"

Have you noticed in the last few weeks how quickly freedoms can be lost in a democracy?

Originally posted by Chagur
Have you noticed in the last few weeks how quickly freedoms can be lost in a democracy?

Remember WWII?, the country was under tight security back then too. Certain freedoms were lost, however when it was all over and done with it became normal again.

But I share in your concern as well, however isn't this the best nation to be in, just in case?. The US does has a militia, which has nothing to do with the government. However the government holds a monopoly on weapons, but the support of the citizens would be lost, if the government went after it's own citizens. Bebelina is right when she says "we're scared" ya!! scared of the government, and of what it may do. However I really don't feel nor fear that my freedoms at the moment are lost.

We've been loosing our rights in this nation by the day, first with the so called "drug war" now with this!. However I have "faith" in a non mystical manner of course that Americans will not sit idilely by and let the government completely take the Constitution and the Bill of Rights away from us.

Remember WWII?

Yes (was nine when it started). Tight security? Security, yes. Tight, no. But then, maybe it seemed that way because of my youth.

... if the government went after it's own citizens.

You most likely weren't around when Japanese Americans were interned, but you may have been when the Kent State students were fired upon or when members of MOVE were bombed in Philadelphia. In the first case the Federal government acted, in the second a State, and in the third, a city. It has happened, it will happen. Think Waco, think Ruby Ridge.

To get back to your question re. drafting females ...

IMHO All, males and females, should be eligible to be drafted.

For a country that supposedly prides itself on being a 'classless society' it is ridiculous that military service is not required of all, with no exemption except for extreme, and I mean extreme physical disability and advancement only through the ranks for those who decide to make it a career.

Make UMT, Universal Military Training, a citizen's obligation to their country and a prerequisite for higher education and the right to vote.

Correct me if I am wrong, but does not Isreal have a system by which all citizens must serve a minimum mandatory term in service? I also think there are some restrictions for those that do not comply.

The Isreali's experimented with using females in the armed forces but they found that the male soilders would treat them differently, for example they would leave men who were fallen behind but would always go back for women, no matter what the cost.
Also they would rather give up information then watch the females tortured and killed.
They have females in the milatry but they never send them into war zones, they act like the wrens in the navy, operating radio's and genral admin duty's they give them basic combat training but would never send them into a battle zone to fight.

I can only imagine the women in war during PMS... We will win... :D

Hell hath no fury....:)

Can I just say that in most of the world, men must do two year MINIMUM conscription in the military. Here men complain about having to spend five minutes filling in a form on line! Having travelled throughout Europe, I have seen first hand the benefits of male conscription and I hope in my lifetime it is reapplied in the USA.

Bebelina sees war as a "stupid male thing" wich females should not subject themselves to. While Bebelina has some valid point I always wondered why mothers (who in many cultures like it or not spend most time with the children, HENCE influencing their development in a big way) would not teach them more peacefull ways (you know, like the tibetan buddhists do).
????

Also there is a saying about girls liking dangerous men and many wars have been about some women, so how stupid "male" thing is war anyway???

Actually our wars have become stupid and large scale grotesque because of hig-tec and money. If we look at nature we see that territorial disputes for food or females are small scale and while there is a fight the loser usually not get killed but walks away with tail between the legs. It is our constant technological innovation that makes wars too large and not serving the species (by selecting some fit alpha male) but actually threatening the species as a whole with nuclear destruction.

I dont think its a good idea. It will make too many opposing opinions.

I think conscription here would be a good idea though.

beb i resent the implication that im more of a war monger than say STAR

Originally posted by Bebelina
You are sooo wrong!
Yes, women do want equality, and will get it too, but not at the price of descending to male stupidity by warfaring! Grow up boys, your toys are destroying the Earth and humanity!
Weapons and violence is NOT the peaceful solution, how can that not be obvious? Call it defense if you want to play chicken, but that´s not the right word, the right word is violence and fear. And once you have managed to get rid of your own fear, then the nations fear and then the humanitys fear will also dissapear. And then no weapons will be needed anymore. So you will just have to find new toys, that are not so destructive boys, because the game is over now. And it has been over for a long time, you have just not realized it yet. And this war is the final futile battle to make those of you that still wants to play the fear-game a last chance to get it. And if you don´t , you will die, by your own hand, mirrored in your enemy.
Yes, women do want equality, and will get it too, but not at the price of descending to male stupidity by warfaring! Grow up boys, your toys are destroying the Earth and humanity!
I think your missing the point, women are already soldiers and therefore (by your terms) are "destroying the Earth and humanity".
Just incase you dont believe me, a woman in desertstorm
"she maintains her post aboard a port security boat during Operation Desert Shield"
http://userpages.aug.com/captbarb/images2/cstgrd.gif

so you will just have to find new toys, that are not so destructive boys,
At present Women can be fighter pilots in front line combat, fighter pilots kill shit loads of innocents as well as military targets.

And this war is the final futile battle to make those of you that still wants to play the fear-game a last chance to get it.
No, its about Oil.

O.k, this convo is getting severely deflected from the original question.

I personally think they should be drafted. Women have pressed for equallity, they should therefore by that definition be entitled to front line combat. They want equality but pick and choose what they want to be equal at, its severley hypocritical if they are not drafted.

Originally posted by Bebelina
Are you crazy??? Of course they shouldn´t, that would make them as stupid as you men! And if the men were just a tiny little bit smarter they would refuse to join the army too! From violence comes ONLY more violence! And that is the TRUTH! So stop the insanity, please!

The US should eliminate its military to make a great example of peace for mankind, right? Good thinking, I'm so regretful I didn't think of the BRILLIANT idea myself...what's that about men being stupid? Then are all women serving in the military stupid? Idealism is just a useless hindrance when it's not backed up by a bit of sanity.

edit abusive and insulting language

Zero
The US should eliminate its military to make a great example of peace for mankind, right? Good thinking, I'm so regretful I didn't think of the BRILLIANT idea myself...what's that about men being stupid? Then are all women serving in the military stupid? Idealism is just a useless hindrance when it's not backed up by a bit of sanity

Very well put mate.

edit quote as stated above

Yes, the war is about oil, Bebelina. The world is *gasp* not divided into the nice, neat, good versus evil, fucking-Tolkein-clip world that you believe in.

What's more, the Prezzie and the Vice Prezzie currently make astronomical amounts of money each year. They're heavily involved in the oil industry, that's where they get their money. Hmm, I REALLY wonder about the reason behind this war.



edit personal atack

Originally posted by Captain_Crunch
Very well put mate.

During the writeup of the US Constitution, some politician brought up the issue of the US having only a 5000 military to make a statement of peace. George Washington shot it down: "Then let it also be written that no country attack us with more than a hundred men."

Beb, OPEN your US History book and stop daydreaming. If a screaming mad fanatic came by and torched your house and murdered your folks with suicide bomb, would you not want vengeance? Wouldn't you? If you said no you would be a liar. Ponder the question for a while.

Originally posted by Bebelina
Yes, women do want equality, and will get it too, but not at the price of descending to male stupidity by warfaring! Grow up boys, your toys are destroying the Earth and humanity!
Weapons and violence is NOT the peaceful solution, how can that not be obvious? Call it defense if you want to play chicken, but that´s not the right word, the right word is violence and fear. And once you have managed to get rid of your own fear, then the nations fear and then the humanitys fear will also dissapear. And then no weapons will be needed anymore. So you will just have to find new toys, that are not so destructive boys, because the game is over now. And it has been over for a long time, you have just not realized it yet. And this war is the final futile battle to make those of you that still wants to play the fear-game a last chance to get it. And if you don´t , you will die, by your own hand, mirrored in your enemy.

One of the best posts I’ve seen on sciforums. I’m glad I didn’t miss it.

If a screaming mad fanatic came by and torched your house and murdered your folks with suicide bomb, would you not want vengeance?

No, not vengeance. I’d want to ensure it never happened again to anybody. It takes an evolved person to understand that this can be said without lying.

Shoud Women Register For The Draft???



** I thought draft meant force to go? Anyways who will raise the children?

how many 18 year olds have children?

and i asume that fathers would be exesempt from the draft anyway

at least they should be

From violence comes ONLY more violence!
And the terrorists asked for it.

That’s sad coming from someone in the military. When the mother wails over her toddler ripped apart by a bomb, ask yourself if they asked for it. When Bush et al walk around with Cheshire Cat grins and pockets bursting with money, ask yourself what role you played in keeping the peace.

http://www.islamfortoday.com/images/Sudanese_Women_Soldiers.jpg
http://mayaguate.com/WomenSoldiersLarge.jpg

Originally posted by Asguard
[QUOTE]how many 18 year olds have children?

and i asume that fathers would be exesempt from the draft anyway

at least they should be



I'd rather go to prison, and when all the bombing is over I'll crawl out of the cracks like a cock roach. ;)

Ok, the Bebelina bashing was good, but not done. Denial is a really sad thing. So, you want equality, but not equal equality? Yes, war is usually made by men because men are in the government. Did you see the governor of Maryland (or whichever state that was)? She drove that office into shit.

Dont ask for equality if you cant handle it in all situations. If you cant admit that some diversity between men and women is there for a reason, go think for an hour.

Anyway, I am against the draft. If people dont consent to signing up by themselves, does the concept of the draft not show that this war is fucking retarded? Yes, tons of people are dying from persecutions. So, assasinate Hussein. Violent people lead only to more violence. Hussein will never become a peaceful person. The least amount of death is ideal.

Oh yeah, this draft will be alot less people, and they are selecting only people who meet strict requirements. So, no 18 year old moms will go to war. They learned their lesson from Vietnam. Even people with flat arches are being thrown out.

So, dont worry.

I don't care for the draft for any citizen, it only makes slaves of our population.

But if there's going to be a draft it wouldn't be a little one, it be a massive draft, government are already pyling up names of high school students that would be eligible for the draft within the next year, and every college student's name is on the same list of available personel.

With the picture changing and N.Korea becoming a threat, even more so than Saddam cause N.Korea does have weapons of mass destruction, and willing to use them. The US is up for some challenges, and millitary personel would be drafted by the thousands.

Hope it never comes to this.

I am with you 100% Godless. I too hope it never comes to this.

However, with our country´s refusal to have conscription for males, we are even less prepared now than WW2!

After all this tension is over, I think all US citizens will wish they could have turned the clock back and kept conscription for 18 to 21 males. like most of Europe does to good effect.

The sake of a draft, compulsory military service or whatever you call it is a bad idea just for the hell of it.

The only concievable way the draft comes back if we're stuck in two wars, or NK gets blown away and we have to occupy and rebuild it.

Originally posted by Benji
The Isreali's experimented with using females in the armed forces but they found that the male soilders would treat them differently, for example they would leave men who were fallen behind but would always go back for women, no matter what the cost.
Also they would rather give up information then watch the females tortured and killed.


This is exactly why women should not be allowed in ground combat.

Originally posted by Godless
Remember WWII?, the country was under tight security back then too. Certain freedoms were lost, however when it was all over and done with it became normal again.


YEAH RIGHT! "It all became normal again . . ." WHAT? Have you ever studied the McCarthy Era? The fifties, the "nightmare decade?"

Originally posted by Bebelina
From the beginning to the end. Same goes for freedom, we are all born free. These are foundational human rights, if fact not just human, these are birthrights for all life all over the world.

We don´t have to earn it, we should not have to fight for it and that should be so deeply implanted in our minds that it shouldn´t even be an issue.

Benji made a good point, you don´t hit children, and we are all children.
If we raise our children not to hit, they will not.
And we should view all our human fellows as our own children. To love and respect them, and treat them as equals. Let´s see the division of the world into countires as a division of a large house into rooms instead, where our family members live.

If your children are fighting over a toy, will you kill or hit the child that strikes the first blow? And would that make the other child feel more secure?
Two wrongs does not make a right. :)



Not one whit of the above was true. Bebelina, do you realize that not everyone on Earth is born with a pure and virtuous heart?

Take me for example: Given the opportunity, I would negate your freedom, enslave you and your family, and exploit you in multiple ways for the remainder of your natural life. Then I would laugh at you. :)

It's been a while since this topic took my e-mail space, I thought it was dead.

As for McCartheism yes I did studie that.

Back to normal as, the Japanese citizens returned back into society. Was it fair that they were inthere in the first place? no


If you had the opportunity you would do nothing of the sort thing you mentioned to Beb, your kind would have been destroyed by then. LOL

females should be allowed to serve but not on the front line or in any combat area, not now or ever. i am not a sexest i just beleve that a female should not be put at that sort of risk.i would not have had one in my squad.

** Hey boys.....who's going have your babies?

Originally posted by Godless

If you had the opportunity you would do nothing of the sort thing you mentioned to Beb, your kind would have been destroyed by then. LOL

What is that supposed to mean? "My kind" exist in every society on Earth. You can't expurgate the evil of mankind. To postulate that one might accomplish such a feat is incomparable naivete. Evil is inescapable, omnipresent, a pervasive element of humanity.

My Point:
If people like Bebelina believe they can freely subsist in some sort of euphoric, whimsical commune devoid of aggression or sedition, people like me will gladly take their freedom away from them.

I'd prefer that we emulate the Swiss.

"Under Article 18 of the Swiss Constitution, every male is responsible for military service. The period of service as a "citizen soldier" begins at age 20 and ends at age 42 (52 for officers). After initial training, a citizen soldier is required to serve a certain number of days before his service ends. For younger men, this can translate into up to 3 weeks in a year. The Swiss Army uses a system of staggered refresher training to ensure the readiness of the army. When a citizen soldier completes his training, he takes home his individual equipment, which includes a personal weapon with a basic load of ammunition. This draft system allows the Swiss Army to maintain a potential force of 400,000 with only 2,000 full-time commissioned and noncommissioned officers....

The Swiss Army has been composed mostly of reserves for a very long time. While many European nations were neutral at one time or another, only the Swiss Confederation has remained neutral for almost 200 years. Still, potential invaders throughout history have recognized that the Swiss Army is always ready and capable of defending its territory."
Captain Peter Chen

No foreign military bases.
No aircraft carrier battle groups.
No submarines with nuclear tipped missiles.
No "pre-emptive strike" policy.
No "gunboat" diplomacy.

Hmm...just realized that I'm wearing a pair wool Swiss Army surplus trousers with a Victorinox Swiss Army knife in my pocket.
:)

Michael

Originally posted by orthogonal

No aircraft carrier battle groups.
No submarines with nuclear tipped missiles.

Michael


Those are necessary though, Orthogonal. Without weapons of mass-destruction, like air-craft carriers and nuclear submarines, a country might as well have no army.

Hello Redoubtable,
Without weapons of mass-destruction, like air-craft carriers and nuclear submarines, a country might as well have no army.
Perhaps you should write to the Swiss government and alert them about their error in military planning. Their last war ended in the 17th century.

Best wishes,
Michael

Perhaps that's because no one wants to conquer the Swiss. However, I am relatively certain that there are many individuals who detest the USA and would avidly annex it if the opportunity to do so emerged.

What worked for the Swiss will not work for us.
The USA is not a "small" nation and cannot be protected with "small arms" like a citizen army. Devastating technological armarments are our only true defense.

im tired of the bullshit that has flown in here. i am 18 and will be in the U.S. navy as of july 16 this year. im tired of hearing that putting a female on the front lines is a distraction or that anyone should go back for the wounded or give up information because of torture. to be quite frank arent these flawes in our system of equality to begin with? shouldnt we train our solidiers to look at any person next to them as simply soldier? should this nation go to war (and likely start ww III) would you rather have females who [i]want[i] to be there on the front lines or men who dont? the problem is not in a womans capacity to do the job or in the equality of it, it is in the perception this society has so well embraced. boys are taught dont hit a girl, and to be nice and all the rest. bullshit. if im dumb enough to pick a fight with the football team i expect to have my ass kicked. i believe in equality on all levels, hence the perceptions, hte things we teach our children have to change. i realize this is off topic but i feel it needed to be posted. so here it is. (btw i am female if you didnt figure it out)

ok if females want to serve then fine but not in the front line, they risk being raped, among other things, i have seen combat and i have seen women in the force who have said they could not go to the front line for fear of this threat, and this threat alone, in my squad there was not one of us that would not have gone back for a fallen comrade,or even tried to rescue anyone who was captured, my men and i would have died for there country but we would never have aloud a female to fight along side of us. non of us are sexest we just got into some very bad scraps.

and if that threat doesnt bother a woman? personally if i were on the front lines of any war my main conscern would be getting killed, everything else is just gravy. would you not go because of the threat of torture? or any threat for that matter? i understand that is a possibility even if im not on the front lines. i personally believe that every soldier needs to be mentally prepared for any of the atrocities of war. and i dont believe that i am any less prepared to handle whatever is presented to me because im a woman. so why should women be denied the opportunity because they're women? and i think part of this goes back to the way our society is run, women are delicate things to protect, not someone to fight beside when the freedoms of all are concerneed. should i just go and sew fucking parachutes because im a woman and putting me at risk is against some out dated tradition?

Women should. Some women want to fight in combat, but some don't. Even a General Chairperson Guy said 'We do not have enough ground troops to beat Saddam'. Some women could stay behind and guard conquered cities and towns...

Originally posted by orthogonal
I'd prefer that we emulate the Swiss.

"Under Article 18 of the Swiss Constitution, every male is responsible for military service. The period of service as a "citizen soldier" begins at age 20 and ends at age 42 (52 for officers). After initial training, a citizen soldier is required to serve a certain number of days before his service ends. For younger men, this can translate into up to 3 weeks in a year. The Swiss Army uses a system of staggered refresher training to ensure the readiness of the army. When a citizen soldier completes his training, he takes home his individual equipment, which includes a personal weapon with a basic load of ammunition. This draft system allows the Swiss Army to maintain a potential force of 400,000 with only 2,000 full-time commissioned and noncommissioned officers....

The Swiss Army has been composed mostly of reserves for a very long time. While many European nations were neutral at one time or another, only the Swiss Confederation has remained neutral for almost 200 years. Still, potential invaders throughout history have recognized that the Swiss Army is always ready and capable of defending its territory."
Captain Peter Chen

No foreign military bases.
No aircraft carrier battle groups.
No submarines with nuclear tipped missiles.
No "pre-emptive strike" policy.
No "gunboat" diplomacy.

Hmm...just realized that I'm wearing a pair wool Swiss Army surplus trousers with a Victorinox Swiss Army knife in my pocket.
:)

Michael

Keep in mind that Switzerland is a small landlocked nation. That and they make damn fine clocks/watches.