Should Women Be Included In The Draft?

[SpareTime]

[quote name='Slappo' post='1686742' date='Oct 26 2008, 02:56 PM']teenagers with guns on a war field = scary.[/quote]

many 18 and 19 year olds join the military.

[Slappo]

[quote name='SpareTime' post='1686758' date='Oct 26 2008, 12:07 PM']many 18 and 19 year olds join the military.[/quote]

doesn't change the fact that it is scary. Especially as the maturity level of teenagers continues to drop. 75 years ago the average 18 year old was much more mature in my opinion.

[picchick]

[quote name='SpareTime' post='1686758' date='Oct 26 2008, 03:07 PM']many 18 and 19 year olds join the military.[/quote]

You mention a key point here....join....not drafted. It would be very scary if 18 year olds were drafted because I believe that it makes the selection process a little more lenient.

[CatherineM]

[quote name='SpareTime' post='1686758' date='Oct 26 2008, 02:07 PM']many 18 and 19 year olds join the military.[/quote]

My oldest went off to boot camp when he was 17.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='Sacred Music Man' post='1686446' date='Oct 26 2008, 01:14 AM']Yeah, and in the crusades, if a town did not surrender before the walls were broken down, everyone was fair game inside. Your point?[/quote]

My point is, did three saints appear to one side and tell them to fight, fight, fight? The French weren't doing very well on their own so God needed Joan to go help them kill the English more effectively? I mean the idea was for Joan to lick 'em good, wasn't it, not declare a truce or force them into a bloodless retreat?

[picchick]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1686847' date='Oct 26 2008, 06:15 PM']My point is, did three saints appear to one side and tell them to fight, fight, fight? The French weren't doing very well on their own so God needed Joan to go help them kill the English more effectively? I mean the idea was for Joan to lick 'em good, wasn't it, not declare a truce or force them into a bloodless retreat?[/quote]

She gave them every opportunity in the world to retreat. She gave them every possible reason to leave. She rode up to the wall of Orlean and asked them to leave. They called her a whore, cow-girl and other names. She did not like the fighting at all. She hated to see the blood being spilled. She was heard to say that several times. She however remained obedient to God and the voices that instructed her.

You seem to be making her out to be a blood thirsty person who used God as an excuse to kill people. The idea was not for St. Joan to "lick 'em good". The idea was to win France back for the Dauphin. Mind you she did some things that were against her voices decision. She fully admits that. She continued on to achieve the goal of retaining the crown for the Dauphin. She admitted that she was wrong in doing so and repented of such an action.

What was the next step, do you suppose, if the enemy refuses to move? Do you stand there and just threaten with swords? St. Joan did the best she can. She gave the English all the chances in the world. I am not sure what else you would have her do. Her voices told her to go into battle. Do you think that she was lying? Hallucinating?

[Saint Therese]

Depends on how cold it is.

[Socrates]

[quote name='Slappo' post='1686759' date='Oct 26 2008, 03:09 PM']doesn't change the fact that it is scary. Especially as the maturity level of teenagers continues to drop. 75 years ago the average 18 year old was much more mature in my opinion.[/quote]
The military grows you up fast.

[Socrates]

Leaving aside the question of whether or not there should be a draft (as that's a whole other debate in itself) . . .
If there is a draft, however, it should definitely NOT include women.

I'm aware that there are non-combat positions for which women are perfectly capable, and I'm aware that there are some women out there who could kick most guy's butts.
However, the truth is, that, as others I'm sure have pointed out, as a whole, men are much better suited for combat, and adding women to combat units creates unnecessary difficulties.

Truth is that wartime combat is a very brutal and nasty situation into which no woman should ever be forced. And, yes, I realize it's no picnic for men, either. Bur remember what happened to poor Jessica (sorry forget her name) when she was captured by the enemy, and repeatedly raped and brutalized? Sorry, but that's the ugly reality, and women should not be subjected to such things, just to fulfill some radical feminist goal of "empowerment."
To force our daughters to fight in war would be the height of barbarism, as well as undermine our military's effectiveness.
Like it or not, the primary purpose of the military is to [i]win wars[/i]. The military should not be a playground for liberal social ideals (feminism, "gay rights," etc.)

In every human civilization through history, it's been the men who've fought to protect the women. That's not sexism - it's the reality of human nature, which doesn't change because of feminists or other left-wing ideologues don't like it.
A female draft which would make our armed-forces half female would serve no practical purpose, and while it's bad enough having husbands/fathers go to war, the effect of forcing women to go to to war would be utterly catastrophic on civilian society.

We simultaneously defeated both Hitler and the Japs with an male-only draft, and I see no reason a male-only draft would not be sufficient in a future war.

[Maggyie]

[quote name='picchick' post='1686876' date='Oct 26 2008, 08:23 PM']She gave them every opportunity in the world to retreat. She gave them every possible reason to leave. She rode up to the wall of Orlean and asked them to leave. They called her a whore, cow-girl and other names. She did not like the fighting at all. She hated to see the blood being spilled. She was heard to say that several times. She however remained obedient to God and the voices that instructed her.

You seem to be making her out to be a blood thirsty person who used God as an excuse to kill people. The idea was not for St. Joan to "lick 'em good". The idea was to win France back for the Dauphin. Mind you she did some things that were against her voices decision. She fully admits that. She continued on to achieve the goal of retaining the crown for the Dauphin. She admitted that she was wrong in doing so and repented of such an action.

What was the next step, do you suppose, if the enemy refuses to move? Do you stand there and just threaten with swords? St. Joan did the best she can. She gave the English all the chances in the world. I am not sure what else you would have her do. Her voices told her to go into battle. Do you think that she was lying? Hallucinating?[/quote]

I don't mean to make St. Joan out to be a bloodthirsty person, I am sure she was doing God's will since the French did end up winning after all. If the idea was to win France back for the Dauphin, see that's what I'll never understand, who really cares if the Dauphin ruled or some other prince, English, French, or Chinese? Why kill to help him retain his crown? These thrones changed hands so many times and there was so much intermarriage and deals being cut. Mary Queen of Scots was once simultaneously Queen of France AND Queen of Scotland and later on almost became Queen of England, too. Uniting France and England under one government is a suggestion that has popped up on several occasions even in modern history. I think most issues of dynastic succession are morally neutral.

I am not a pacifist by any means but I just can't wrap my mind around Jesus telling Joan through the saints to attack and kill. It just doesn't seem like His style. Granted there are plenty of things about our faith that I take on that, faith, and without being able to make heads or tails of them. I do not know how much we are required to believe about St. Joan other than that she is now in Heaven with God. I don't think she was lying because I don't think God would let the Church make the mistake of elevating someone who lied about holy things.

As to whether she was hallucinating or not, I don't know. I do know that back in the day people who heard voices were considered either mystics or possessed by the Devil; schizophrenia was not an option. Then again plenty of perfectly sane people have probably heard the voice of God or His saints. Many people are willing to take Joan at her word that what she was hearing was real. Before making a decision I would want more of what the Church does today in similar cases, She calls in a doctor to examine the patient and eliminate any possibility of mental illness before declaring such things worthy of belief.

Again are we really required to believe that St. Joan was visited by three saints who egged her on to conquer the English? If we are then of course I will submit my intellect and will. However I don't think we are. You see I generally don't go in for supernatural things like apparitions of the Madonna or voices or mystical visions and that kind of thing. If the Church approves then more power to the people who like it, but I'm never very interested...

I will say that if I ever have children they will definitely get the whole story of St. Joan, with Sts. Margaret and Catherine and Michael. For the same reason that with the Nativity I would give them the stable and the cows lowing and the "cold winter's night that was so deep," even though He was probably born in a sort of cave, and for all we know at twelve noon in the middle of summer. Because that is the kind of thing that makes a child's heart respond... it is probably more child-like and therefore more pleasing to Jesus to believe in the voices of St. Joan...

Edited October 27, 2008 by Maggie

[picchick]

[quote name='Maggie' post='1687109' date='Oct 27 2008, 12:18 AM']I don't mean to make St. Joan out to be a bloodthirsty person, I am sure she was doing God's will since the French did end up winning after all. If the idea was to win France back for the Dauphin, see that's what I'll never understand, who really cares if the Dauphin ruled or some other prince, English, French, or Chinese? Why kill to help him retain his crown? These thrones changed hands so many times and there was so much intermarriage and deals being cut. Mary Queen of Scots was once simultaneously Queen of France AND Queen of Scotland and later on almost became Queen of England, too. Uniting France and England under one government is a suggestion that has popped up on several occasions even in modern history. I think most issues of dynastic succession are morally neutral.[/quote]
You are correct. I believe the goal of this whole situation was not the crown to the rightful person but the fact that France was not free and that the French were being persecuted. The people who cared about the Dauphin were the people at that time. They cared because it was there rightful leader. It is hard to grasp these things by looking back on the past. We need to try to immerse ourselve in the time that those people were living in. They had very little to believe in. They had their faith and they had their kings and queens. Mind you, many of them despised the aristocrats considering they were well off and most of the world was not. However, the Dauphin becoming King meant freedom and individulaism. These things were very precious to them. So they probably didn't care if it were the dauphin or other Frenchman. What mattered is that they were French and that their leader was French.

[quote]I am not a pacifist by any means but I just can't wrap my mind around Jesus telling Joan through the saints to attack and kill. It just doesn't seem like His style. Granted there are plenty of things about our faith that I take on that, faith, and without being able to make heads or tails of them. I do not know how much we are required to believe about St. Joan other than that she is now in Heaven with God. I don't think she was lying because I don't think God would let the Church make the mistake of elevating someone who lied about holy things.[/quote]
I am not sure what to tell you here. It doesn't line up with what is going on. However, the war was going on and it needed to end. There was a prophesy that was to be fulfilled that the maid was going to lead men into battle and France would win a great victory over the English. I am not one for prophesies as many of you know. However, God works in strange ways. Perhaps, He found a need to work through this prophesy.

[quote]As to whether she was hallucinating or not, I don't know. I do know that back in the day people who heard voices were considered either mystics or possessed by the Devil; schizophrenia was not an option. Then again plenty of perfectly sane people have probably heard the voice of God or His saints. Many people are willing to take Joan at her word that what she was hearing was real. Before making a decision I would want more of what the Church does today in similar cases, She calls in a doctor to examine the patient and eliminate any possibility of mental illness before declaring such things worthy of belief.[/quote]
She was examined extensively by the Church before she was sent into battle. She was found to be pure, holy, innocent, a virgin, not possessed and perfectly sane. Although they did not have schizophrenia back then, they still knew that people had mental illnesses. They had different meanings associated with it ie: possessions, madmen.

[quote]Again are we really required to believe that St. Joan was visited by three saints who gave her tips on how to conquer the English? If we are then of course I will submit my intellect and will. However I don't think we are. You see I generally don't go in for supernatural things like apparitions of the Madonna or voices or mystical visions and that kind of thing. If the Church approves then more power to the people who like it, but I'm never very interested...[/quote]
It is a part of her life. It is not legend. It happened. She had voices that told her what to do. She knew that there was a seige at Orlean before anyone else knew. How do you explain that? She knew nothing of battle, she knew nothing of strategizing yet she planned attacks and battles. That is fine if you do not want to be interested in it.

As you can see I really love my saint. I have tried to learn about her life to the fullest. I hope you do not think that I am attacking you or anything. I just love my saint.

Meg

[Maximilianus]

I'm against a draft in general, I wouldn't want to share a fighting hole with someone who wasn't there willingly. If a draft was instituted I really don't care if women were included too, just as long as they were placed into support occupations.

It is a fact that women already serve in combat, because of this women should get basic combat training because even the support element make enemy contact(see Jessica Lynch) but women as a whole can not perform to the same physical standards required for line troops so they should not be placed in line units(infantry,armor, artillery). Yes there are exceptions, but to eliminate the problems caused by integrating genders(fraternization, sexual harassment, etc) an all female combat unit would have to be created and that wouldn't work because finding enough female troops to fill these ranks is not pragmatic.

The reality is that men are better suited for war fighting than women. Simple as that. This doesn't mean that female Marines, soldiers, sailors and airmen are any less than their male counterparts, on the contrary their roles are just as important because the success of the grunt's mission depends on his support, many of who are women.


This is my expert military opinion and I'm sticking to it..okay, it's not really an expert opinion but I did serve in the USMC and do have an opinion.


Sancta Joannae....ora pro nobis.

[IcePrincessKRS]

[quote name='Socrates' post='1686999' date='Oct 26 2008, 10:53 PM']The military grows you up fast.[/quote]



Sometimes...

[Saint Therese]

So does prison.

[Winchester]

Of course not. Who wants to defeat the enemy but come home to a dirty house?