Where do you think the USA could improve?

[TotalInsanity4]

I think they did, yeah. IMO that's just stupid to begin with. I'm gonna get flak for saying this but I don't think women should be serving in the military. As awful as it sounds to say that they should be staying at home taking care of the family, it's the truth. A mother figure is important for the household, and as the people who keep the human race populated they should be protected, instead of sent on the line.

To start off - I don't agree with the draft in the first place. It's awful, and it violates the rights of people who don't agree with the war. I believe that there will always be enough people to draw from that are patriotic enough and care enough about an issue to enroll themselves into service if need be, and if not, it's clearly not a war worth fighting.

THAT SAID, while there is a draft and supposing ANYONE can be drafted, there needs to be an exception that says that only one adult per household may be drafted, be it the mother, father, adult children, or small organized community unit (say, four or so). That way, there will always be someone there to take care of the family/social unit

 

[MaverickWellington]

To start off - I don't agree with the draft in the first place. It's awful, and it violates the rights of people who don't agree with the war. I believe that there will always be enough people to draw from that are patriotic enough and care enough about an issue to enroll themselves into service if need be, and if not, it's clearly not a war worth fighting.

THAT SAID, while there is a draft and supposing ANYONE can be drafted, there needs to be an exception that says that only one adult per household may be drafted, be it the mother, father, adult children, or small organized community unit (say, four or so). That way, there will always be someone there to take care of the family/social unit

That doesn't fix the problem of broken homes and causing grief and distress when the high chance of losing them in war happens. It just minimizes it to one person.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Like I said this is an awful issue because there's absolutely no solution that solves the problem without creating ten more. I want the draft gone for good, but that comes with it's own issues.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

That doesn't fix the problem of broken homes and causing grief and distress when the high chance of losing them in war happens. It just minimizes it to one person.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Like I said this is an awful issue because there's absolutely no solution that solves the problem without creating ten more. I want the draft gone for good, but that comes with it's own issues.

No I totally agree with you overall, the draft is awful, but what I'm saying is that this way there IS someone to take care of people while the other is away, or God forbid killed in the line of duty. This way, however, the person who is fighting is the one who wants to most

 

[CallmeBerto]

Ignore my comment "70% of divorces are filed by women. Reason? just fell out of love." I can't find my sources on this.

As for the US military there are plenty of non combat roles a women can do. But yeah get them out of the front lines they are just a liability.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Ignore my comment "70% of divorces are filed by women. Reason? just fell out of love." I can't find my sources on this.

For a source to contradict that (not being petty, I swear, I'm trying to be informative):

When looked at separately, men and women were divided on what they saw as the reasons for their divorces. Women overwhelmingly said they made the decision to divorce because of abuse issues with a response rate of 48 percent. But 23 percent of men said the reasons they divorced were based on money. Another 22 percent of men cited sex as the reason for the divorce.

https://www.wevorce.com/blog/why-americans-divorce/

 

[HamBone41801]

please just stop saying words. neither of you are doing yourselves any favors.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

please just stop saying words. neither of you are doing yourselves and favors.

Sexism, amiright

 

[CallmeBerto]

please just stop saying words. neither of you are doing yourselves any favors.

We are trying to have an adult conversation here.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

We are trying to have an adult conversation here.

He has a point, by saying "women shouldn't be on the front lines because they're a liability", especially without a supporting claim, you're kind of tanking any good will you could have towards anyone except people who agree with you (which is kind of contradictory to a debate setting)

 

[CallmeBerto]

He has a point, by saying "women shouldn't be on the front lines because they're a liability", especially without a supporting claim, you're kind of tanking any good will you could have towards anyone except people who agree with you (which is kind of contradictory to a debate setting)

It's the truth though. The average women is MUCH weaker then the average man. Why would you add a women to a team of men who is just going to slow you down? On the other hand if you create an all women team you will need to spend extra money to get them to the same level (if possible) as an all male team. The third option is to not spend anymore on them as the average male team but at that point you are sending out to die.

idk what to tell him Mother Nature has internalized misogyny.

 

[Polopop123]

They need to set up the Citizens United Negating Technology For Life And People’s Safety

 

[HamBone41801]

We are trying to have an adult conversation here.

then please, continue to be sexist

It's the truth though. The average women is MUCH weaker then the average man. Why would you add a women to a team of men who is just going to slow you down? On the other hand if you create an all women team you will need to spend extra money to get them to the same level (if possible) as an all male team. The third option is to not spend anymore on them as the average male team but at that point you are sending out to die.

idk what to tell him Mother Nature has internalized misogyny.

You seem to under the impression that war is one big mixed-martial arts competition. We have guns now. I seriously doubt women have a harder time using guns than men.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

It's the truth though. The average women is MUCH weaker then the average man. Why would you add a women to a team of men who is just going to slow you down? On the other hand if you create an all women team you will need to spend extra money to get them to the same level (if possible) as an all male team. The third option is to not spend anymore on them as the average male team but at that point you are sending out to die.

idk what to tell him Mother Nature has internalized misogyny.

The average woman is also more agile, though. If we're talking purely about usefulness, I'd definitely rather have at least one person in my unit that can get from point a to point b as quickly as possible, given more obstacles

Plus the "average woman" also doesn't typically focus on deadlifting 200 pounds because social norms typically have them focusing on beauty, but with exercise many definitely are capable of it

 

[invaderyoyo]

Currently, it's set up so that the poor stay poor and the rich get richer. Sure, there are exceptions, but when you're working 60 hours a week just to stay alive it's almost impossible to break out of poverty.

Many people accept this because they believe they'll, one day, be on top, knowing their chances are small.

 

[MaverickWellington]

then please, continue to be sexist


You seem to under the impression that war is one big mixed-martial arts competition. We have guns now. I seriously doubt women have a harder time using guns than men.

It's not about guns, it's the psychology and the physical nature of it. Women are not built the same as men are physically on average, and their standards for hygine are also different. The psychological damage they'd be enduring would be effectively stronger than what the men have to handle. On top of that, given that women are biologically geared towards stronger emotions than men, they will be hit much, much fucking harder from shellshock, loss, and so on. This isn't some sexist shit like a lot of people want you to believe. This is something that's focusing on legitimate biological and psychological studies.

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2009/09/women-war.aspx
http://time.com/3927266/women-war/

Can women be soldiers? Of course. Will it be harder for them? Of course. To call this "sexist" is dishonest and to dismiss these worries and criticisms with "they can just use guns too!" just muddies the debate and doesn't do anyone any justice.

 

[CallmeBerto]

@HamBone41801 "weapons" are a force multiplier. A women with a gun is going to be less useful then a man with a gun (all things equal)

@TotalInsanity4 - I wouldn't. A man being physically strong is his "social norms" I rather have a strong man on my side then some "agile" women. What if you get shot and you need to relay on someone to drag you away? The males on your team are going to do that much better and faster then the average women.

 

[HamBone41801]

@HamBone41801 "weapons" are a force multiplier. A women with a gun is going to be less useful then a man with a gun (all things equal)

@TotalInsanity4 - I wouldn't. A man being physically strong is his "social norms" I rather have a strong man on my side then some "agile" women. What if you get shot and you need to relay on someone to drag you away? The males on your team are going to do that much better and faster then the average women.

No, guns are not a multiplier. A guns effectiveness does not increase based on what you can bench, it depends on if you received proper training. That is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

@HamBone41801 "weapons" are a force multiplier. A women with a gun is going to be less useful then a man with a gun (all things equal)

I fail to see how a firearm requires any prerequisites other than the physical strength of lifting it/overcoming recoil, and the psychological ability to pull the trigger. Having shot rifles for sport on multiple occasions before, I'd say that the cold-steel murder device (because really, that's what they are) doesn't care much about the gender if the person holding it

@TotalInsanity4 - I wouldn't. A man being physically strong is his "social norms" I rather have a strong man on my side then some "agile" women. What if you get shot and you need to relay on someone to drag you away? The males on your team are going to do that much better and faster then the average women.

There's no issue here as long as everyone who enlists is able to pass a health and strength check. I don't think there's anyone out there who are trying to argue that shouldn't be the case

 

[CallmeBerto]

No, guns are not a multiplier. A guns effectiveness does not increase based on what you can bench, it depends on if you received proper training. That is the dumbest fucking thing I've ever heard.

Let me clarify a bit. A man's and women's brains are DIFFERENT they react to things DIFFERENTLY. Example a women's brain can't handle stress as well as a man. When you are in a life to death situation a women is going to go into panic mode wayy before a man does.

 

[TotalInsanity4]

Let me clarify a bit. A man's and women's brains are DIFFERENT they react to things DIFFERENTLY. Example a women's brain can't handle stress as well as a man. When you are in a life to death situation a women is going to go into panic mode wayy before a man does.

That's what we call a stereotype